Quoting Rico:

Quote:
Hi Paul,

So when do the Swallows come back? Very beautiful place 'SJC' + one of the original missions. Paradise!

You've missed my point! Negative votes & speeding ticket do not correct bad behavior. Most often only a very small number of people miss behave. The habitually bad posters, are obvious to the majority in the community, they stick out like a sore thumb. There behavior is so aberrant to the majority, they just stick out. I believe changing the bad behavior is far more powerful, than punishment. In order to change anything, one must know what needs changing. Hence a thread of shame, or bad behavior would be an eye opener for the miscreants.

Take Care Amigo
Rico

I see where you're going with this, and I tend to agree.  But, a little historical perspective might help some of the other users.  In the old days, there was a practice called "shunning" in many parts of the American culture.  Someone who transgressed badly enough was shunned by the village elders.  Nobody would talk to them, or respond to them in any way.  They were quite literally cut off from being a member of the group.  That was a severe punishment, and people went to great lengths to avoid it.  Shunning, or ostracizing, doesn't much work today, however.  Why?  Because people are not connected mentally and physically to a group like they once were.  The world has changed and people are anonymous for the most part, reduced to a set of numbers, an internet user name, etc.  The idea that they are part of a group, and that their reputation depends on that group's acceptance and forebearance just isn't a part of many people's psyche these days.  People who weren't raised in that sort of environment generally don't have the personal honor and integrity that compels them to worry about their reputation and how it is affected by their behavior.

Rifter, I don't agree with you there. Political correctness CAN be used as a weapon, but just because it can be doesn't mean it always is. The way I see it, if an argument needs to call someone a name or requires grossly exaggerated comparisons (say, comparing a snub to being like Hitler), then that argument is probably worthless. If the argument could stand up on it's own, it would. I'd rather see a REAL argument based on facts and logic. Sadly, cases where I've seen the PC card played in this forum are usually where the un-PC comment was made in place of a real argument, or to try and bolster a weak argument.

A time I would agree with you is when someone says, for example, that black people in England need more support in schools, but people shouted the comment down as being racist. Well, the stats say that black people are generally under-performing in English schools and that you will see a significant increase in results in this groups of students if the reasons can be diagnosed and managed through additional support. It's not saying that black people are thick, or that no black person is ever successful - these assertions would clearly be untrue. In fact, preventing this kind of work using the pc card is more likely to intensify racial problems than help resolve them.

Making a politically correct argument is a good way of showing that you HAVE an argument - making a politically incorrect argument is often an expression of one's own emotion or a means of trying to manipulate other peoples emotions to artificially increase the significance of a point.

Stuart

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Let's also keep in mind that sometimes even when someone is offended by someone's post, that post may still be a valid and legitimate post.  All too often, I see people (both as individuals and as organizations) using political correctness to stifle any legitimate criticism or a differing opinion.

Whether or not someone is offended is not the point.  (Of course they're likely to be offended -- nobody likes having their mistakes or prejudices or bigotry pointed out in public.)  The point should be whether or not the post in question MAKES a legitimate point, and if it does so then whether or not someone is offended is immaterial.

'Political Correctness' is just censorship in a different colored dress and should not be tolerated -- ever -- here, in the political arena, or anywhere else!

I have never advocated 'Political Correctness'. We get enough of that garbage in the UK!

Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
Pauls:

As has been noted by another user it is easy to offend someone looking to be offended. Therefore, while unlikely, it is certainly possible to offend somebody somewhere with any given post. As an example of this I will go back to my school days when I learned Japanese and learned that the meaning of a word is oft determined by inflection of your voice, use the incorrect inflection and you offend. Kind of like US slang, you are bad, or you are baaaad.

PC needs to thrown on history's garbage heap, it has led to almost the total loss of humor in the USA and that is just it's least damaging cost.

Skip

Skip,

There are two different cases that we need to deal with here;

Quote:
I just watched 'Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace' and think that it was the worst piece of junk that I ever saw.

This might offend someone, but should not get a bad vote.

Quote:
I just watched 'Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace' and think that [name of user removed] who posted that they liked it is a f*cking idiot that should be banned from using DVDprofiler and I hope they and all of their family die in pain.

This on the other hand most of us should agree is over the line and should get a bad vote.

In one case I post my feelings about something, which is OK. But in the other I attack someone else, which is not.

So far it looks like the user base has taken this as a wake-up-call and have stayed away from the second type of post. As a result I have given eleven good votes and no bad votes.

pdf

(fixed typo the -> their)

Quoting Rifter:

Quote:
Quoting Rico:

Quote:
Hi Paul,

So when do the Swallows come back? Very beautiful place 'SJC' + one of the original missions. Paradise!

You've missed my point! Negative votes & speeding ticket do not correct bad behavior. Most often only a very small number of people miss behave. The habitually bad posters, are obvious to the majority in the community, they stick out like a sore thumb. There behavior is so aberrant to the majority, they just stick out. I believe changing the bad behavior is far more powerful, than punishment. In order to change anything, one must know what needs changing. Hence a thread of shame, or bad behavior would be an eye opener for the miscreants.

Take Care Amigo
Rico

I see where you're going with this, and I tend to agree.  But, a little historical perspective might help some of the other users.  In the old days, there was a practice called "shunning" in many parts of the American culture.  Someone who transgressed badly enough was shunned by the village elders.  Nobody would talk to them, or respond to them in any way.  They were quite literally cut off from being a member of the group.  That was a severe punishment, and people went to great lengths to avoid it.  Shunning, or ostracizing, doesn't much work today, however.  Why?  Because people are not connected mentally and physically to a group like they once were.  The world has changed and people are anonymous for the most part, reduced to a set of numbers, an internet user name, etc.  The idea that they are part of a group, and that their reputation depends on that group's acceptance and forebearance just isn't a part of many people's psyche these days.  People who weren't raised in that sort of environment generally don't have the personal honor and integrity that compels them to worry about their reputation and how it is affected by their behavior.

This clearly is a very big part of the problems that have shown themselves on the forum. What Ken has given us is a way to 'shun' users that just won't buy a clue. I for one see this system as a tool to let us start over and get back to profiling DVDs, which after all is what these forums are about.

pdf

Paul:

I am saying very clearly that it is all too easy to offend nearly ANYBODY. I am also saying that except for the most egregious of comments which I have see few if any, I will NOT attempt to presume to sit in judgement of ANYONE> I see comments all the time in my world of politics that I would not utter, not disimilar to the example you provided and I would call that user on it publicly...nothing more. I will not EVER engage in ANY form of censorship nor will I be a party to it, thank you very much. It is far too easy to abuse. There are any number of things which I would look at in addition based on the behavior of some users that I have seen, but I will keep those to myself.

Skip

Quoting pdf256:

Quote:
Quoting skipnet50:

Quote:
I agree on the basis of the foul language, Paul. But beyond that I doubt it.

Skip

Skip,

I hope I am missing something here!

Are you really saying that if I post:

Quote:
I hope they and all of their family die in pain.

That is OK as long as I stay away from foul language?

pdf

No, I think he meant (and that's the only plausible meaning) that even your first example would certainly get "bad marks" because people that feel offended often do not care about the consequences of their action.
And I believe Skip's right with this, and I don't go with him very often.

I hope you didn't want to misunderstand Skip just for the sake of the discussion, or even worse for being able to feel offended.

Quote:
Quoting goblinsdoitall:
Quoting Mark Harrison:
To me censorship implies free speach.
?????????
Can someone please help me with this?
I'm German and up to now always thought censorship implies the DENIAL of free speach?
Could I have been so horribly wrong?

I'm German and confused as well! Maybe this is a very special phrase we do not understand 

Edit:
Maybe it means that censorship is the native enemy of free speach? Anyway, I'm not the expert to understand every niceties of phrases in the English speaking community. But I would never imply bad attitudes to Mark Harrison