Grex Oldcoop Conference

Item 108: Jim, Jack, and I have a Question

Entered by jp2 on Thu Feb 5 19:31:36 2004:

Wait, I have a question.  If I entered an item while drunk, and wanted it
removed afterwards, would the staff remove the item?  Jep's "not in his right
mind" claim is a total fiction created so he is not required to justify his
actions (unless he were institutionalized for a mental disorder, at the time,
but I strongly suspect someone might have mentioned that by now), but
intoxication is equivalent to incapacitation.  How would the staff react? 
What if a recovering alcoholic wanted all their items from their alcoholic
phase purged?  After all, alcoholism is a disease.
46 responses total.

#1 of 46 by albaugh on Thu Feb 5 19:37:56 2004:

Please give these lame hypotheticals a rest.


#2 of 46 by jp2 on Thu Feb 5 19:46:00 2004:

This response has been erased.



#3 of 46 by gelinas on Thu Feb 5 20:46:40 2004:

Ask me on Tuesday.


#4 of 46 by jp2 on Thu Feb 5 21:09:15 2004:

This response has been erased.



#5 of 46 by cyklone on Thu Feb 5 22:06:51 2004:

While I do think jp is stretching with the analogy between intoxication
and mental incompetence, I hope that does not divert people from
considering what I have said elsewhere about a hypothetical item about
recovery from addiction.  Such an item would have tremendous potential in
terms of providing valuable insights for other addicts (or to friends and
family of addicts). I suggest that we should not permit censorship that
would remove such items simply because the original posting addict has
second thoughts about allowing the items to remain. The proper solution is
to allow the original addict to remove his/her own words and leave the
rest to provide whatever assistance other addicts, friends of addicts,
family of addicts, etc. might be able to glean for their own benefit. That
is all I am asking people to do with jep's items. 



#6 of 46 by gelinas on Thu Feb 5 22:14:19 2004:

The proper solution is to wait to see how the vote comes out, to find
out what it tells us about current thinking.


#7 of 46 by md on Thu Feb 5 23:16:50 2004:

My answer is: if Jamie entered a bunch of items and responses he later 
wanted removed because they were embarrassing to his older saner self, 
I would definitely vote not to remove the items.  In fact, just in case 
a majority might eventually vote to remove them, I would copy them and 
save them so I could quote my favorite passages in appropriate places.


#8 of 46 by cyklone on Thu Feb 5 23:32:32 2004:

If you are saying the proper solution is whatever the grex voters decide,
then I beg to differ. If they vote in favor of reinstatement, then yes,
they will have found the proper solution because it balances jep's rights
to control his own words with the rights of others to control theirs. It
will also balance jep's rights to deny access to certain information with
the rights of others to provide and/or access helpful information. 

The unfortunate fact that jep cannot deny access to 100% of the
information about him is merely a byproduct of his previous decision to
post publicly. He was warned and he continued. Therefore, any incidental
burden (a burden which jep has not really even demonstrated to date)
fairly falls on him and should not be borne by innocent posters and others
who may benefit from whatever words may remain. 

If grex votes in favor of jep's request, that will not be a proper
solution.  Instead it will simply prove grex does not believe in free and
uncensored speech. It will prove grex does not really care about providing
information to others in need, even after JEP HIMSELF said he wished such
information were available to him. It will prove grex has no compassion
for strangers or newbies, but only for favored insiders. As such, it will
not be a proper solution; it will merely prove grex has no core
principles that cannot be trumped by the desire to do personal favors for
favored persons.



#9 of 46 by md on Thu Feb 5 23:39:16 2004:

And that makes Grex different from you how?


#10 of 46 by gelinas on Thu Feb 5 23:41:26 2004:

You are ignoring that a "proper solution" may simply be a "proper solution
_for grex_."  That you disagree with the proper solution for grex is no
more relevant than that I disagree with the proper solution for grex.
However, *until* the decision is rendered, you cannot know whether you
disagree with it.

I think we really should wait to see how the vote comes out before indulging
in further polemic.


#11 of 46 by cyklone on Fri Feb 6 00:13:44 2004:

It looks like #7 snuck in when I was replying to #6. However, my answer to
#9 would be that I still try to remain consistent with my principles, even
when friends are involved. Maybe I'm just different that way. I remember a
gf asking me what was important to me in a woman and I said something like
"morals" or "character." She was quite surprised.



#12 of 46 by md on Fri Feb 6 00:14:45 2004:

Oh please.


#13 of 46 by cyklone on Fri Feb 6 00:24:37 2004:

As twinkie would say:

True story


#14 of 46 by md on Fri Feb 6 00:28:18 2004:

Great, now I have to parody *you* in Agora.


#15 of 46 by cyklone on Fri Feb 6 00:44:54 2004:

Cool!


#16 of 46 by jp2 on Fri Feb 6 04:06:02 2004:

This response has been erased.



#17 of 46 by krj on Fri Feb 6 04:47:07 2004:

It's good to know that removing a few pieces of years-old text 
are the same as killing millions of people.


#18 of 46 by jp2 on Fri Feb 6 10:55:48 2004:

This response has been erased.



#19 of 46 by md on Fri Feb 6 11:32:46 2004:

Grex is not a government, stupid, it's a privately owned bbs.  They 
don't even have a contract with you, written or implied.  The only 
thing anybody can try and catch them on is the "free speech on the 
Internet" thing, and even that is enforceable and revokable at their 
whim.  If I point to the "free speech on the Internet" statement and 
splutter that they've violated it, they can (and should if they're 
honest, in my opinion) simply shrug and ignore me.


#20 of 46 by cyklone on Fri Feb 6 11:50:23 2004:

<they should also delete that statement if the items are not restored>


#21 of 46 by jp2 on Fri Feb 6 13:52:36 2004:

This response has been erased.



#22 of 46 by gull on Fri Feb 6 16:00:00 2004:

Re resp:8: Paraphrased: "I'm smarter and more ideologically pure than
all of you, so if you vote against me you're all idiots."

Clearly, we should give up this whole voting thing and just make cyclone
Dictator of Grex.


#23 of 46 by md on Fri Feb 6 17:05:10 2004:

You could do worse.


#24 of 46 by jp2 on Fri Feb 6 17:12:58 2004:

This response has been erased.



#25 of 46 by md on Fri Feb 6 17:32:50 2004:

I was thinking of some of Grex's home-grown victims of estrogen 
poisoning, Right Man Syndrome, Right Wing Syndrome, Liberal Humanist 
Fabulosity, and other afflictions I find annoying.  You aren't even on 
the map.


#26 of 46 by jp2 on Fri Feb 6 18:39:20 2004:

This response has been erased.



#27 of 46 by cyklone on Fri Feb 6 19:46:53 2004:

Re #22: Whoa, cowboy! Aren't you the one who decried the name-calling and the
slide away from rationality and calm discussion? Howzabout a little
consistency then, OK? Please re-read #8 and tell me what portions of my
*reasoning* you disagree with.

PS: Thanks md!


#28 of 46 by albaugh on Fri Feb 6 22:03:52 2004:

P.S. Johnny has a question too!  :-)


#29 of 46 by naftee on Fri Feb 6 22:48:28 2004:

I thought you didn't care what polytarp/willcome posted.


#30 of 46 by tod on Sat Feb 7 01:18:49 2004:

This response has been erased.



#31 of 46 by naftee on Sat Feb 7 02:10:45 2004:

He needs his blue overalls; the uniform of the Party.


#32 of 46 by jaklumen on Sat Feb 7 02:34:16 2004:

resp:25 I love it!


#33 of 46 by anderyn on Sat Feb 7 03:38:43 2004:

And we got to Godwin's Law, too. I knew we would sometime soon.


#34 of 46 by naftee on Sat Feb 7 04:36:20 2004:

Actually we were there a while ago.


#35 of 46 by md on Sat Feb 7 17:14:23 2004:

I had to look up Godwin's Law.  Computer geek jargon, apparently.  
Please don't use any more computer geek jargon I have to look up.  
Thank you.


#36 of 46 by boltwitz on Sat Feb 7 17:15:41 2004:

You're welcome!


#37 of 46 by naftee on Sat Feb 7 17:23:38 2004:

HEY does that make cyklone a COMPUTER GEEK? IGORV SAID SO!


#38 of 46 by gull on Sat Feb 7 23:13:51 2004:

Re resp:27:  From resp:8: "If you are saying the proper solution is
whatever the grex voters decide, then I beg to differ. If they vote in
favor of reinstatement, then yes..."

In other words, your opinion is all that matters, not the opinion of the
voters.  You're saying that if the voters decide the way you don't
personally agree with, they're all wrong.

I stand by how I characterized your post in resp:22.


#39 of 46 by cyklone on Sat Feb 7 23:49:27 2004:

This response has been erased.



#40 of 46 by cyklone on Sat Feb 7 23:58:35 2004:

Close, but no cigar. You are challenging my conclusion, not my reasoning,
as requested in #27. Care to try again? And what about your claim that
name-calling is inappropriate? Having a hard time living up to your
standards? 



#41 of 46 by naftee on Sun Feb 8 04:31:19 2004:

re 38 In a trial, if DNA evidence comes in that aquits the prisoner, than
clearly all the jury were wrong, weren't they?


#42 of 46 by gull on Sun Feb 8 18:58:36 2004:

Re resp:40: Show where I called you a name.  You called jep a 'pussy'.  
I haven't stooped to that level.


#43 of 46 by cyklone on Sun Feb 8 20:02:44 2004:

Ummm, how about "Dictator of Grex"? 

PS: you are still ducking the substantive issue I asked you to address. 



#44 of 46 by naftee on Sun Feb 8 20:06:01 2004:

NOW YOU'RE CALLING HIM A DUCK.

CAN'T YOU ASSHOLES BE NICE FOR A CHANGE?


#45 of 46 by boltwitz on Sun Feb 8 20:06:37 2004:

YEAH< ASSHOLES~


#46 of 46 by jesuit on Wed May 17 02:14:49 2006:

TROGG IS DAVID BLAINE


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: