State of the Discussion

The posts in play...

Teri Peters
The Other Victims of the Opioid Crisis
A Camp By Any Other Name Would Smell as Foul
Clare Briggs
There’s A Trivia Buff In Every Office
(No Comments Yet)

The comments...

AvatarNorth in reply to fillyjonk

My dear lady, comments like that are half the reason people come here and read stuff.

+ I've been suffering for 5 years. Each year worse than the last. My dose is capped at the 90mme and this prevents me from switching [. . .]
+ I think the problem also is that individuals who choose not to follow the stated rules/social contract/whatever are sometimes much more difficult to deal with [. . .]

FWIW, you have to register and agree to a ToS to post on the forums. I think anyone can see patterns/projects.

AvatarChip Daniels in reply to George Turner

Gotta say, I'm diggin' this woke, Cornel West/ Black Lives Matter turn your comments have taken.

AvatarChip Daniels in reply to dragonfrog
+ Right, which is why I expanded it to "lets imagine"; My point being, that the boundaries of speech aren't obvious and easy to find. As much schadenfreude [. . .]
AvatarDoctor Jay
+ I suspect that the site might have done a bit better by identifying the problem behavior as behavior (doxxing and harassment) and banning individuals it [. . .]
AvatarJay L Gischer in reply to fillyjonk
+ I really love this comment. It serves to remind me that online communities MUST be moderated in some way, or things will get out [. . .]
AvatarGeorge Turner in reply to veronica d
+ It depends how much of a role the government played in creating the conditions for inner-city crime to thrive. In some cases, it was [. . .]

So, will there soon be a sort of "Gab but for knitting"? I'm sure it will be delightful.

AvatarGeorge Turner in reply to DensityDuck
+ Very true. Regarding my above observation, perhaps a lawyer here can comment on whether the Supreme Court wouldn't fully weigh whether someone else's rights [. . .]
Avatardragonfrog in reply to Chip Daniels
+ That's not at all like what's happening here. They're not banning "registered Republicans" or "registered Democrats". This is more like banning T-shirts that read "registered Republican" or [. . .]
AvatarPinky in reply to DensityDuck
+ I find it frustrating the way our own OT deletes certain comments. There's a Stepford quality to it. This appears to be a [. . .]
Avatardragonfrog in reply to George Turner
+ That's... not at all what it sounds like is happening at Ravelry. They're not demanding to know how each person voted so they can know whether [. . .]
Avatardragonfrog in reply to DensityDuck
+ That's the problem though - you can set up rules like you describe that are inherently subjective and rules-lawyer-able, so people can play stupid dog [. . .]
Avatarveronica d in reply to Morat20
+ Of course you're both right. Crime rates are lower than they were, but they're still too high, particularly homicide rates. That said, there is a stark [. . .]
AvatarChip Daniels in reply to DensityDuck
+ To be Excruciatingly Fair, though, lets imagine Amazon or Google banned anyone who was a registered Democrat, or Republican. As was one of the issues raised [. . .]
AvatarMorat20 in reply to Mike Dwyer
+ Inner city crime rates? You mean the ones that are half the rate they were in the 90s? is pretty clear on the matter (Figures [. . .]
AvatarDensityDuck in reply to Chip Daniels
+ I don't have a problem with websites banning things; all the things, or even a certain flavor of things. I mean, I actually prefer Ravelry's action [. . .]
AvatarDensityDuck in reply to George Turner
+ I don't think it's especially tricky if the users whose commentary is now banned had to register. If that's the case then it's simple [. . .]
AvatarChip Daniels
+ The precise legal answer to this question is, as always, "It's complicated", with a corollary of "It depends". The boundaries of free speech and property have [. . .]

I think that we're going to find that Freedom of Speech had "ease of use" as a hidden feature.

+ Elsewhere there was some discussion about the various laws and rules in different nations 'round the world, and would they have to conform to them. [. . .]
AvatarGeorge Turner in reply to Em Carpenter
+ I could see that as a tricky decision if rights are regarded as slicing up a pie, so that making one slice bigger necessarily makes [. . .]
AvatarGeorge Turner in reply to Saul Degraw
+ I think its the aftermath of the 1968 student movement, where all things had to be political to raise people's consciousness and bring about a [. . .]
AvatarGeorge Turner in reply to fillyjonk
+ That was nicely stated. I read an interesting book on eating written by a woman who'd gone through just about every phase and fad. You [. . .]
+ I wasn't arguing about "rights". Of course people have the right to oppose Apartheid (only racists would argue that they don't). I was asking if we've reached [. . .]
+ I suppose the question then comes "where is Ravelry?" Is Ravelry where its servers are? Is Ravelry where it's readers are? If we have discovered that The [. . .]
+ There is nothing in that to apologize for. Your comment about the small team that runs it getting tired of playing wackamole is exactly the [. . .]
AvatarEm Carpenter in reply to Jaybird
+ Setting aside jurisdictional questions, I'm going to opine that no, it doesn't. Pruneyard was specific to California's own constitution, not the US Constitution. Ravelry, not [. . .]
AvatarSaul Degraw in reply to Jaybird

I think BDS has a right to do what they are doing. Why did you think otherwise?

Dude. That was an *AWESOME* comment.

So, like BDS but for Republicans?

AvatarPinky in reply to fillyjonk
+ That was a good comment. I wouldn't have minded if it were longer. I know that the job of moderator is thankless, but [. . .]
AvatarDensityDuck in reply to fillyjonk
+ The thing is, you can do "we're banning all shit-starting emotionally-charged posting because shit-starting emotional arguments are not what this site is here for", and [. . .]
AvatarMike Dwyer in reply to Chip Daniels
+ Chip, Inner city crime has been a problem that Democrats have ignored for decades. You all have been in a tizzy about this detainment issue for [. . .]
AvatarSaul Degraw
+ I support this decision. An rpg site made a similar one. The truth is we are well beyond simple R and D disagreement those days [. . .]

oh crap, that was really long. I'm sorry. Take it down if you want.

AvatarGeorge Turner in reply to Jaybird
+ Pretty much every issue is more important than the southern border, at least according to Democrats. "a fake crisis at the border." - Nancy Pelosi "a crisis [. . .]
+ Warning: this is very personal and probably not very illuminating. I'm on Ravelry. I consider myself....well, kinda purple. I don't fit in any political camp right [. . .]

It's simple: you bar all political conversation, because that would strike anyone but the most self-righteous as fair.

+ No we get to see every Trumpist dumbass on Twitter[*] arguing that section 230 applies because Ravelry is a monopoly. * But I repeat myself. [. . .]

Not just Fiber Art but High-Fiber Art: .

+ Who knew what when is a question that will probably never be resolved completely. Certainly the Americans who liberated them were completely unprepared for [. . .]

I guess this attitude makes sense. I mean, it's not like they refused to bake a cake for someone.

Hey, lawyer types! I have a question about whether this case applies.

Does it?

AvatarChip Daniels in reply to Mike Dwyer

So we should also address crime in addition to the camps.

I'm on board.