[Un]official poll: Should Politics be strictly banned on PRIME? Yes or No

[nsxotic911]

Look, the bottom line is this. This has nothing to do with politics. Nothing to do with censoring. Nothing to do forum rules.

This entire issue is all about a sense of entitlement. Nsxotic911 feels entitled to have some sort of set of rights. And since he feels entitled to these rights, he feels entitled to make demands that the site should be run in a manner more befitting to his needs and requirements. However, I am baffled as to why he feels entitled to any of this or as to where the idea of these “rights” come even from. He is not a part owner or creator of this site. He has not donated any money to this site. This is not a public service. It is not funded by tax dollars. He doesn’t do any site maintenance or server upgrades/work. As far as I can tell he uses this site for his own benefit; just as I would argue the rest of us do.

It’s time for a reality check and understand that this site is a service to us. It was created and developed out of the generosity of a person who thought to share his idea and talents for the benefit of others, and the volunteers that help keep this party train rolling. We are the beneficiaries of other people generosity in time and money, and as such, we have no rights. If anything, we are indebted to this site for the services and entertainment it has provided us. How rude would it be if someone cooked you dinner for free and you had the gall to complain about how it didn’t have enough of a particular spices for your palette. It’s one thing if you politely inject a suggestion as to a personal preference, to which you cannot be offended if it isn’t heeded. It’s another thing if you demand about something you are not satisfied with and openly complain about in the face of the person providing it to you, whether it be a dinner or a website. It’s time to lose the sense of entitlement and realize our place on this site. If the owner/operator of this site chose to close it down or turn it into a Dodge SRT forum overnight, who are we to say anything about it? It’s their choice and if we don’t like it we are more than welcome to leave at any time.

I'm not trying to offend nsxotic911 nor single him out, but I think it just need to be said and reminded that we are all guests here, not majority share holders or managing partners, and we should all understand that we are not entitled to anything while we are here.

1.) I have donated. It was just returned. I'm happy to support the site as much as I can and am allowed to do.
2.) I'm just taking a poll and finding out that nearly 7:1 want there to be an open discussion on politics. It's feedback to the site owner, not a demand. If the site owners decides against it, that's certaintly their call. The ratio is suggestive that there isn't an open discussion, as evidenced with the lack of posts, and those that have in the last few months, been taken down.
3.) It's hard to offend me, so no worries.

 

[RSO 34]

As a Moderator of this forum, I try to read the posts with an eye toward analyzing whether they "contribute" anything of "merit" to the overall site within the guidelines established by the Administrator which clearly disfavor political discussions. The rules are the rules and when you own and finance the site your rules are preeminent.

It is not an easy task to determine which threads/posts need to be moderated but I can say to the OP that he may like to think he is posting objective, thought provoking topics but it is clear from his language that he expresses his "agenda" within an otherwise potentially "appropriate" thread.

Indeed, I am compelled to review the posts herein, and not just the OP, and am fairly confident that at a minimum I will be editing out certain statements/comments that identify an "agenda" rather than ask for a general opinion.

 

[Vega$ NSX]

3.) It's hard to offend me, so no worries.

Really? Does that mean it's open season to try? Lol! J/K :tongue: :biggrin: It's clear that you have much thicker skin than others in this forum and like I said, before, if you were moderator, I'd be supporting your more open policies and telling people to grow thicker skin. But, as it is sits, we have a more politically sensitive group and in order to show support (in addition to money) we need to back up the decisions of those moderators.

 

[Vega$ NSX]

As a Moderator of this forum, I try to read the posts with an eye toward analyzing whether they "contribute" anything of "merit" to the overall site within the guidelines established by the Administrator which clearly disfavor political discussions. The rules are the rules and when you own and finance the site your rules are preeminent.

It is not an easy task to determine which threads/posts need to be moderated but I can say to the OP that he may like to think he is posting objective, thought provoking topics but it is clear from his language that he expresses his "agenda" within an otherwise potentially "appropriate" thread.

Indeed, I am compelled to review the posts herein, and not just the OP, and am fairly confident that at a minimum I will be editing out certain statements/comments that identify an "agenda" rather than ask for a general opinion.

Hey he's a lawyer. I trust him to make fair and balanced decisions. :biggrin:

But more importantly, the more controversy, the more we get him involved... and have you seen the rates of lawyers these days!?!?! And they round up to the nearest hour!!! :tongue::biggrin:

 

[nsxotic911]

Really? Does that mean it's open season to try? Lol! J/K :tongue: :biggrin: It's clear that you have much thicker skin than others in this forum and like I said, before, if you were moderator, I'd be supporting your more open policies and telling people to grow thicker skin. But, as it is sits, we have a more politically sensitive group and in order to show support (in addition to money) we need to back up the decisions of those moderators.

It's not as sensitive as you might think. The ratio is still 27:5. Those that are really offended are more likely to click 'No.'

As a Moderator of this forum, I try to read the posts with an eye toward analyzing whether they "contribute" anything of "merit" to the overall site within the guidelines established by the Administrator which clearly disfavor political discussions. The rules are the rules and when you own and finance the site your rules are preeminent.

It is not an easy task to determine which threads/posts need to be moderated but I can say to the OP that he may like to think he is posting objective, thought provoking topics but it is clear from his language that he expresses his "agenda" within an otherwise potentially "appropriate" thread.

Indeed, I am compelled to review the posts herein, and not just the OP, and am fairly confident that at a minimum I will be editing out certain statements/comments that identify an "agenda" rather than ask for a general
opinion.

I have an agenda, I make no shame in it.

To edit posts that are not 'objective' for what is essentially 'public record" (this is visible on the public Internet) is astounding, and Orwellian on so many levels. You can delete my posts for whatever reason that you, but please don't make a single iota change to the language. I think there isn't a single freedom-respecting persons that would want otherwise.

Who is John Galt again?

 

[RSO 34]

I have an agenda, I make no shame in it.

And I have a job to do.

Thread closed.