i doth protest

Posted almost 5 years ago

Artist:
- PLAY
Kid Rock

this shit with banning someone,however loathsome,from the community has me quite perturbedi shall not post or comment anywhere for one week starting now

Comments (33)

Follow

Anna says Pimpy, this is my humble opinion, as posted on Jess' blog. If there was someone here who made posts like â€œall homosexuals should be burned aliveâ€, â€œChristians alsoâ€, â€œyour mother is a whoreâ€ and so on, wouldnâ€™t MOG headquarters delete their account, after trying to talk sense into them? Yes. So, we agree that this protection of MOG users exists (the ability of a website to protect its users is *not* censorship) and should exist. But in this case, some of you donâ€™t agree.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

atman says Hm. I'm with ya pimp. But, did he get kicked off or did he leave?

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

SatisfiedMind614 says This is a website...a community...there are hundreds of these type places on the web...I couldn't agree with Anna more, its not censorship...you toss that 'C' word around way too freely...put your self in MOG's place...if you ran a website for profit that is dependent upon having users for you to make money, and a one person is causing multiple people to leave...that is just bad business. MOG is a for profit company you know, not a nation. Censorship doesn't even come into the equation.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

extraordinarypoems says Keith, I support the ban because although people have a right to their opinions (vicious or not), they do not have the right to abuse other people. And I particularly support THIS ban because the Mog team asked the person to temper his remarks --- not to change his personality or convert to anything, but simply to be reasonable enough not to engage in vitriolic attacks. There is no way I'd let one person ruin the learning environment in my classroom, for instance, and make everybody else miserable, just for the sake of that person's "rights." But, hey --- I also support your right to protest, and I'll miss your posts this week. There have been times, as I'm sure you know, that I have found something you've written offensive and troubling, and I've just had to move on from that post. And, probably, people have found something I've said to be offensive and troubling. But most of the time, you and I contribute something good and useful to the community. At least I think we do. And that's why they let us stick around.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Iren says they did it for the children... (that's the members of the PMRC, with Tipper on the end with the big hair btw). I have to say that I feel this was more like asking a disruptive house guest to move on, and being forced to eject them......

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

AnonymousAmy says what anna and blair said there's a big difference between buying music with a parental advisory, and being forced to listen to someone's complete ignorance in the mogosphere. I have a choice not to buy an album that is offensive. I don't have a choice for that mogger's posts not to show up in the sphere. Being controversial is cool. Being a dick for no reason is not cool.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

ebuzzmiller says pimp - normally i'd agree with you, but if what Anna is saying is correct, i'm really happy that somebody stepped in to put a stop to it. I play Xbox live a lot, and I am constantly appalled at how much racist, homophobic, ignorant bullshit is spewed out of people's mouth's on a regular basis. There are a tremendous amount of idiots on this planet, and when you discover a website (MOG) with a bunch of people who are intelligent and communicative about their passions (and tolerant of other people's passions), it is truly a special thing. If someone wants to keep pissing in the garden, despite everyone asking them to please stop, then eventually, they should be *made* to leave. There are plenty of other outlets for such people, thank God MOG has decided not to be one of them.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

SatisfiedMind614 says ebuzz...so sadly true what you said about xbox live...i play quite a bit too...but its so bad that i won't let my nephews play with the headset on, there are is so much appaling ignorance being spewed there...

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

extraordinarypoems says AAmy, and anybody else who's reading this thread, I'm on a language/feminist/whatever kick today, so just stop reading now if you don't want to hear a crazy English teacher going on about indelicacies ---- but since I've objected (on a different post) to Kristiana's derogatory use of the word "pussy," now I should be fair to both genders and point out that the derogatory use of the word "dick" is just as troubling. Is a dick a bad thing, a shameful, dirty, ugly, or otherwise offensive, in itself? Not to me. Let me rush to say that I have been guilty of using "dick" this way, even recently, so this is a wake-up call to me, as well. I recall a certain joke I used to tell about how a man should wear a condom on his head if .... oh, well, let's leave that in the past. I think for the sake of language and for the sake of good relationships between men and women, and for mutual respect, etc., we should stop referring to each other by our sexual parts, in a derogatory way. What in the world are we doing to each other?

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

extraordinarypoems says Whoops! The beginning of my post above didn't come through, for some reason. I actually wrote, "Amy (and anyone who is reading this thread,) ignore the following if you don't want to hear a feminist English teacher go on about indelicacies of language, etc. So, sorry my qualification didn't appear, and I apologize for being weird. But I'm still right. :>)

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

nicki says Oh, geez, what the hell did I miss...?

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Anna says Ebuzz, I said "if", it was only an example :) I was trying to point out that website protection of its users exists, and it would be wrong to label it censorship, because in this case we don't agree with it. Also, I'd like to say that I am being puzzled by the people who insist on mentioning the block feature, which only prevents someone from commenting on your MOG. Even if that feature would also make us not see someone else's posts, why is MOG, or anyone else obliged to use it and look the other way, when the person whose account was deleted didn't look the other way when someone annoyed him? If he has a right to not ignore what bugged him, then MOGgers have the right to not ignore what is bugging them. It goes both ways. Not to mention that we all know how we reacted when users blocked him. Just a thought.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

AnonymousAmy says what would i do without someone to put me in my place? :) so i'll change the "dick" in my comment to "complete and total fucking moron" that better?

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Rawkkiddoh says I have seen people forget the whole "for every action there is a consequence" rule of everyday life. Our society is built around rules, ones we are expected to uphold in everyday life. Do we have freedom? I think we do, yet there are certain rules to the freedoms we enjoy every day. I feel a lot of people are looking at the consequence more so than the actions of Fedge and this is where I feel we are missing the point. I happen to see this type of mind set everyday when I am teaching. Kid does something wrong, and then he is punished for it. Parent comes in to the school blaming the teacher for the whole incident rather than saying, yeah little Johnny screwed up, it wont happen again. Fedge chose to act how he wanted, and it didnâ€™t fit in with what the people here at MOG wanted. He was asked to change, given a second chance if you will, and still nothing. . I do feel if you are going to consistently talk negatively about people, be prepared for the repercussions. Evidently, Fedge did not think MOG would do anything, and I am glad to see he was wrong.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Dale says If that's what you need to do, do it, but don't call it censorship. MOG HQ is NOT a government organization, shutting down a voice so it has no outlet. They are a business providing a service to its users, and they have the right, as stated in the sign-up agreement, to remove anyone that cannot abide by those terms. And don't give me the "freedom of speech" line either; freedom never meant license to spew bile. That what libel and slander laws are for; do you think those laws curtail freedom of speech? Saying this is censorship is like saying that I can wildly swing my arms around in a crowded room, and it's your fault if my fist connects with your face.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

AnonymousAmy says lol Dale. i got a chuckle out of that last part.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Dale says Please Amy, feel free to quote me.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

steve simon says i love this discussion kids, it is very healthy for a community to talk through things like this.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

ivylander says I think Iren nailed it.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

brand X says The Merriam-Webster Dictionary defines censorship as "to suppress or delete as objectionable." MOG censored Fedge, it is as simple as that. I'm certainly not going to argue that this was not MOG's right, and I'm certainly not going to say that Fedge's rights were violated by MOG. Fedge has, under the US constitution, the right to freedom of speech, being banned from MOG does not remove that right in the slightest. So can we please, for the sake of being remotely constructive, stop acting as if the term "censorship" necessarily implies a revocation of rights guaranteed by the First Amendment? It is, in fact, possible to be censored by a non-governmental organization, and most non-governmental organizations have the right to practice censorship. Freedom of speech hardly enters in to the equation. Pretty please?

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Jonus63 says When you sign up to be a part of this community and most any on the internet you have to agree to their terms of service. These terms of service are to protect the company along with the users so the site doesn't turn into a platform for hate or the like. If you want a site where you can say anything no matter how disrespectful, racist or what not than make your own. Until then I am glad that Mog is willing to remove those who are here for other purposes than what this site was created for. There is definitely freedom of speech on Mog or I wouldn't bother to use it.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

ookpik says I keep seeing people say that communities are based on rules and punishment, and I have to pipe up and say that I try to build communities based on respect and responsibility. We're probably talking about similar things, but I think the wording is important. Different actions follow from each perspective. For me, the key to community is not that troublemakers need to be disciplined or eliminated, it is that we all need to be able to protect ourselves from abuse. Personally I would rather see better tools for protection built into MOG than see anybody forced to leave (either getting kicked out, or leaving to avoid offensive speech). It's too bad that right now, the only way to protect people from Fedge's offensive comments was to kick him out. I really look forward to some proper "block user" technology, so that people can be responsible for their own level of protection. I really, *really* look forward to the day when we all have super-ninja moderation skills and can neutralize trolls with words alone.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

sugarbaby says There is limited free speech on MOG, which the same as no free speech to many people. Limiting free speech so that people can't yell fire in a crowded movie theater or when children are concerned is one thing. Banning people from participating in a conversation because of how they choose to word an argument is imposing limitations on free speech. And MOG has the right to do it. Just like any private club or organization, MOG can choose to control the behavior of its' members. The site owners have made a judgement as to what types of conversations and words are permissable and which are cause for being banned. They have clearly disallowed name-calling and confrontation. Even heated debates may be cause for getting a demerit if someone complains. I would also say that you should be careful about posting anything about another member on your MOG page. Is that a bad thing? If you don't have any controversial opinions or say anything provocative, then you won't be bothered. Then again, I am sure there isn't going to be an increase in controversial opinions or provocative statements in the MOG-O-SPHERE anytime soon...

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

AnonymousAmy says controversial opinions are one thing, and downright trying to hurt people is another. MOG definitely does not have a problem with controversial opinions, nor have i seen them say anything to people who swear or get aggressive. But when you ask them to ignore someone who is making their jobs a lot harder, that's asking a lot.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Hmmm says I have to say, I'm with anna and Blair. I'm to lazy to formulate my own opinion, and theirs is close enough to mine.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

chucky says I said it before and I'll say it again - mog hq was damned if they did and damned if they didn't. My guess is that they were probably facing losing many members verses losing one member and took the course of action best for mog. I feel for them, it's not a decision I would have wanted to make. I'm not going to rag on them for doing it. Just like I wouldn't have ragged on them if they hadn't.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Hmmm says Amen. Hey, this is easy...

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Sturgell says You can't really please eveyone and taste is something that is so hard to define. I don't let things like this get me down, atanyrate. Most of the people that get kicked/banned are really asking for it, that's my opnion. I've never really felt the need to use "blue" material. I think mostly, it's because I do my raunch at home.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

El Monko and Son says Rock on, Chaka Khan.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

Wozniak says I don't look at MOG for 2 weeks and what happens? I must MOG more. I'm a MOG-luck charm.

Permalink posted 02/21/2007
Follow

mermonkey says I'd rather MOG not be in the business of content regulation. I know nothing about this particular case, but deciding what speech "crosses the line" is always subjective. It would be much healthier to build a community where good ideas are rewarded and bad ideas wither. Muzzling/silencing/censoring/banning certain types of speech doesn't remove ignorance, it just forces it into more private spaces. Isn't it better to tackle bad ideas, ignorance, and mis-information in the light of day? And yes, technology can help us reward good behavior. What if you could critique a user's post as good/bad/offensive/etc? What if you could optionally filter out posts and users who received particular ratings from others in the community? What if your trusted MOGs ratings of other users were given extra weight? Etc, etc. It just seems like there are better win-win solutions than banning. Besides, if someone really wants to come and disrupt MOG and be offensive, in the current system, what's to stop them from resurfacing again and again with different IDs?

Permalink posted 02/22/2007
Follow

Jess Horrible says Hey KC, you are and will be missed. Hope to see you back here soon. There's been a very good discussion on my page as well, for those of you who haven't seen it: http://mog.com/Jess_Horrible/blog_post/46667

Permalink posted 02/22/2007
Follow

sugarbaby says mermonkey, I couldn't agree more. I don't understand why people are so afraid of words that make them mad. If someone is an ass, letting him be an ass in public will let everyone know what he is about, not to trust his opinions, and if he is so egregiously detestable, the community will organically reject him. I have a problem with other people making decisions for me about what is offensive and what isn't. Perhaps I have developed a thick-skin from living in NYC my whole life, but what people here consider "crossing the line" isn't even a blip on my radar screen. I am capable of using my own brain to consider and filter out things that are offensive.... and it is hard for me to understand why some people are so willing to concede control over what they see and hear.

Permalink posted 02/22/2007