I'd like to see Seymour & Co. BAN all Gay bashing threads...

[big_black]

I think Mr. Flag is forgetting this is a corporate-run website and they have an image to uphold.

[Rich_T]

I think bashing Gays is about as hip as bashing black people...which means it is very UN-HIP in my book. And I'd like to see SD & Co. officially ban all gay bashing threads the way they ban political threads. Lew

I wholeheartedly agree. Got alot of respect for you Lew, I like the way you think.

[Skarekrough]

Actually, that's not the question at all.

The question is: should I be prevented from saying what I like because you don't like what I say?

Honestly, it's an endless source of disgust to me that young people today do not even know what the Bill of Rights is, let alone its importance.

...and conveniently you seem to forget the reciprocal to this is that those that say stupid things get shouted down.

Funny though...you seem to be experiencing this first hand.

You're not being oppressed....you've just said something stupid. Try to not confuse the two.

[JohnnyGuitar]

Making fun of people because they are different is ugly...

[JohnnyGuitar]

It's not the topics, it's the people repeatedly involved.

+10000000000

[big_black]

Ha - you got me. I'm a bonesmuggler in hiding.

It's not gay if you're top.

[blackflag]

...and conveniently you seem to forget the reciprocal to this is that those that say stupid things get shouted down.

Funny though...you seem to be experiencing this first hand.

You're not being oppressed....you've just said something stupid. Try to not confuse the two.

On the contrary, I completely agree with you.

Discussion leads to enlightenment. By all means...debate the issue. Explain how I'm wrong. Ridicule me. Say something intelligent. (Or "shout me down" if you can't think of anything intelligent.) Worse come to worst, just blurt out that I'm a jackass.

But do not censor. That's the last refuge of people too ignorant to respond intelligently.

[garublador]

I can only guess. And my guess would be that some people think it's wrong to be gay and that bashing gay people is OK. Same way some people used to think it was OK to own slaves and up until fairly recently, to bash and discriminate against black people.

I do actually understand that part. It was more of my way of saying that I think the policies on this board are backwards in the form of a retorical question.

The strange thing is this is the only website run by a company and it's the only one that has banned any broad topic and the one with the higest tolerance for discriminatory remarks. Anytime someone says anything about changing that they're accused of being, "Overly PC." I would think that it would be the other way around. I'd expect that acting like a jerk would be tolerated less on a forum like this.

[Jimbo Jr.]

On the contrary, I completely agree with you.

Discussion leads to enlightenment. By all means...debate the issue. Explain how I'm wrong. Ridicule me. Say something intelligent. (Or "shout me down" if you can't think of anything intelligent.) Worse come to worst, just blurt out that I'm a jackass.

But do not censor. That's the last refuge of people too ignorant to respond intelligently.

You're being a hypocrite then by saying we should censor gay actions in public. I guess you just haven't responded intelligently.

[tone4days]

should I be prevented from saying what I like because you don't like what I say?

actually, in a strict construction of your question .. yes, absolutely ... without a doubt ...happens every day and is perfectly legal

... young people today do not even know what the Bill of Rights is ...

and apparently neither do you ... the bill of rights only establishs the rules of the road for government and those that would accept government funding ... not private speech or the speech of a business entity

[garublador]

You're being a hypocrite then by saying we should censor gay actions in public.

He's being a hypocrite about a lot of things. He wants everyone to respect his right to say whatever he wants, but doesn't respect our opinions that a privately run message board should be able to censor whatever they want. He's also bad mouthing people for calling him names when he uses the same tactic in most of his posts, but I suppose pointing that out would make us freedom hating Nazi cannibals, right?

[Wattage]

Banning "bashing" is different than banning "the discussion of" if I am correct in my assumption or understanding of English.

[Jimbo Jr.]

actually, in a strict construction of your question .. yes, absolutely ... without a doubt ...happens every day and is perfectly legal

Good point man, over history and even today many conservative people in power have taken out many people who say things they don't like. Dr. Martin Luther King, Scott Ritter, Mumia etc......(just to name a few)
I can't see how, (from where his discriminative views are coming from), black flag has any credibility to make that argument.

[JohnnyGuitar]

I don't think that you should ban discussions. There were political topics here that went well.
Things that are too emotional for most people and are sure to start a fire, or things that are meant to bash or attack someone or something should be banned.

[Rich_T]

Banning "bashing" is different than banning "the discussion of" if I am correct in my assumption or understanding of English.

Exactly. Thats the point right there. This isn't an infringement on freedom of speech just as long as you aren't anti-gay. Becuase the things that would be banned from discussion are things that shouldn't be said anyway.

[Simon_F]

Forum Rules

Registration to this forum is free! We do insist that you abide by the rules and policies detailed below. If you agree to the terms, please check the 'I agree' checkbox and press the 'Register' button below. If you would like to cancel the registration, click here to return to the forums index.

Although the administrators and moderators of Seymour Duncan User Group Forums will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Seymour Duncan User Group Forums, nor Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd. (developers of vBulletin) will be held responsible for the content of any message.

By agreeing to these rules, you warrant that you will not post any messages that are obscene, vulgar, sexually-oriented, hateful, threatening, or otherwise violative of any laws.

The owners of Seymour Duncan User Group Forums reserve the right to remove, edit, move or close any thread for any reason.

The admins here are volunteers who simply don't have the time to read every post. Sometimes we miss stuff, and we rely on you guys to report posts you feel violate the forum rules. The lines aren't always easy to draw, but we do our best to be fair and consistent.

Posts that attack people on the basis of their sexual orientation are at least hateful and threatening, and in some locations probably violative of the law. Such posts contravene the rules of the forum.

[Jimbo Jr.]

the things that would be banned from discussion are things that shouldn't be said anyway.

Correct! The only issue at stake here is acceptableness.

(is that even a word?)

[Kyleplaysguitaryay]

I OneGazzilion percent agree with Kyuss above me. Also on that point, what the heck is the point in a random chat section on a forum if the only things we can discuss revolve around maby football and posibly the latest and greatest brand of cheese. (not that im complaining, i <3 cheese)

[Luís]

Look up your favourite troll's account and click all posts. Select one that really showcases his idiocy you can always just find a post that offends YOU (not someone else or someone with whoom you have no contact). Look at his avatar and information, look a bit down. There. Do you see a small triangle? Click it.

Not attacking anyone with this but I bet if more people would use that function we'd have less crap (both from people posting it and from people feeling offended by it). Then again I'd love if some topics would be left to proceed and just the offending posts deleted, if you know what I mean.

[Lewguitar]

Banning "bashing" is different than banning "the discussion of" if I am correct in my assumption or understanding of English.

I would agree with that.

However, here on the Duncan Forum we are not allowed to discuss the job President Bush is doing and are not allowed to discuss the US invasion of Iraq here...and I both agree and disagree with that position.

I can see why we're not allowed to discuss those subjects: discussions about those particular subjects usually degenerate into bashing of each other....and ultimately divide this little community we have here on the Duncan Forum.

Lew