jm's random thots

[Grace]

Just my opinion, but I think this attempt to silence people's comments here on Mennonet is kind of controlling. Yes, I do get tired of ken's constant claims of knowledge on just about everything, often projected in a condescending manner and interjecting himself into everything. I get tired of Bootstrap's strong dislike to everything and anyone, pertaining to Trump.

However when it comes to their opportunity to post their thoughts, opinions, and graphs, I will defend their privilege to do that, just like everyone else. If people don't like what they post, DON'T read their posts !! And when they or anyone else, for that matter, posts something you disagree with, there is no need to respond every time. In other words, pick your battles, responses.

[justme]

Just my opinion, but I think this attempt to silence people's comments experiment here on Mennonet is kind of controlling.

you are entitled to your own opinion

just don't go ascribing motives to my experiment based on your own likes and dislikes.

if you want to call the experiment controlling? sure, i don't care, makes no difference to me.
1. it is one week, start and end date will be clearly defined if we decide to move forward
2. it is voluntary, all 4 or none
3. there is monetary payment involved

[Grace]

Nevermind.

[Szdfan]

I don't think this is about silencing people -- I think this is about what kind of community we want to be and a recognition that certain kinds of conversations have hurt the vitality of this community.

[Grace]

I don't think this is about silencing people -- I think this is about what kind of community we want to be and a recognition that certain kinds of conversations have hurt the vitality of this community.

I went back to the first page and read the justme's motivation for this trial. And I will say that he reasoning to conduct the trial is a good one.

[Bootstrap]

I don't think this is about silencing people -- I think this is about what kind of community we want to be and a recognition that certain kinds of conversations have hurt the vitality of this community.

In fact, I think it's about letting people speak.

If people are throwing mud at each other, it's hard to have a conversation. If we can't discuss topics because it quickly turns into a discussion about why one person doesn't like another, people give up and shut up.

Protecting hostile speech and insults means endangering much more valuable speech. You can't have a conversation in the same room as a fight. Which kind of speech do we want to foster?

[Josh]

Looks like all 3 of us are willing, and we haven’t heard a peep from Ken on this thread. Here is what Boot proposed:

Perhaps the 3 of us could agree to not respond to Ken's posts during that week?

jm can be the referee of the start and stop. Of course, Ken can respond to our posts. We will simply refrain from replying to his.

you do have it partially wrong.
you wouldn't be posting at all. nothing.

That wasn’t what Boot proposed, though. He proposed the 3 of us not responding to Ken’s posts for a week.

[Bootstrap]

you do have it partially wrong.
you wouldn't be posting at all. nothing.

That wasn’t what Boot proposed, though. He proposed the 3 of us not responding to Ken’s posts for a week.

If the three of us are not posting at all, then we won't be responding to Ken's posts, not even by liking them. And I bet Ken would post less during that time. If the rest of the forum decided they also don't want to respond to Ken's posts during the experiment, I bet his posts would be even fewer.

[Ken]

I'm just noticing this thread now. I haven't been here since Wednesday.

If you want to run your little experiment, I would suggest you create whatever threads you want titled or flagged "no BJKT" and I'll stay out of them. No one needs to pay me $70. Then you will have a real-time comparison. Although there are others here who post things that are over-the-top hyperbolic, partisan, and hostile.

[MaxPC]

Well now, JM: that did not take long, did it not.