Text 6957, 78 rader
Skriven 2005-01-05 00:27:35 av Gary Braswell (1:123/789.0)
   Kommentar till text 6954 av John Hull (1:123/789.0)
Ärende: Proud Democrat
======================
John Hull -> Gary Braswell wrote:

 JH> Gary Braswell -> John Hull wrote:
 GB>> John Hull -> LEE LOFASO wrote:

 JH>>> Kiss my ass, Lee.

 GB>> Enough of this John.


 JH> This is a followup to my other reply to this message.

 JH> One of the rules of this echo has always been that if you make a claim
 JH> or an affirmation of something that isn't common knowledge then you are
 JH> required to post a cite for that claim if someone challenges your
 JH> statement.

 JH> Now, we've got Lee and a couple of other "gentlemen" posting absurdly
 JH> obvious lies about Bush and the GOP, and conservatives in general, and
 JH> doing so knowingly, and we've got others posting lies and simply
 JH> refusing to post cites when called on their lies.  They even dare to
 JH> tell us to prove that they're lying!

 JH> Now that you've got a solid feed, I expect to see something done about
 JH> this kind of nonsense, and I know most of the rest will agree with that.
 JH> Now is your chance to start proving that what Mr. Helm claims is not the
 JH> case.

This always goes on in the echo, always has. And its true there is a put up or
shut up rule. I also stated numerous times that overuse of this rule is out of
bounds.

The nature of a debate forum is just that. Certainly people are not going to
always agree. You guys seem to do a fine job in making these people who do as
you say look bad and show them for what they are.

When have you become so sensitive John that you cannot stand lies and/or
criticism of Bush and the GOP and want people silenced I assume?

This thing can cut both ways. I saw long and numerous posts about Clifton being
a murderer, etc. that did not prove true, should those who post that be
silenced as well?

I have moved on the put up or shut up rule before, usually when its been
applied to a poster here, such as with Stan when people have tried to make
claims against him, or others.

I will certainly enforce the rule on the merits of some posts, but not every
one on here as it will stifle debate and might even come back on you in some
rulings you do not care for. Everyone would then have to post a cite for every
claim and if they could not, or produced one that was controversial, what I
decide would not please most here and force people to be quiet. I would have to
do the same when it came to claims about liberals and the democratic party as
well if requested. There would be a lengthy list of what things were considered
lies and thus off topic.

I am not here to be the sole arbiter of the validity of every post and claim,
making rulings on each one as to what is truthful or not. What you seem to be
suggesting stifles debate and turns the echo into a quagmire.

John, you and most here are skillful and knowledgeable enough to prove someone
wrong or a liar and when they cannot show otherwise, show them for what they
are and embarrass them.

If you cannot stand to hear dissent against the president or the GOP, you are
in the wrong echo. And I don't think that is the case.

I want the echo to be open for the most part for debate and discussion and if
some idiot comes in making claims and lies, the people of this echo has shown
time and again they can take him/her to the cleaners without my help.

I will certainly enforce the PUOSU rule, but not on every post in the echo as I
am afraid it will come to.

And as for people who have been banned from the echo, I have nothing to prove.

--- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Win98; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.
 * Origin:  (1:123/789.0)