General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel

Hi Jazz,I have just posted a message in adminforum asking for some clarification on Coffee House topics.I am of the opinion that the Coffee House wasn't designed to be a place where people open threads that have been refused elsewhere, but I haven't been here much lately so I could be wrong, anyway I have at least brought your concerns to the attention of all the other mods. Hopefully, I will have some clarification soon and let you know as soon as I can.I am also of the opinion that a Coffee House should be a place to relax and have a nice friendly chat, but it seems that recently there have been quite a few tense discussions there.AdminBrian.

Thanks very much Percy. You of all people have an interest in keeping this place reputable. I appreciate it more than I think you can know.

---

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

quote:

---

I am also of the opinion that a Coffee House should be a place to relax and have a nice friendly chat, but it seems that recently there have been quite a few tense discussions there.

---

It does seem that there might be a need for a Current Events/Politics/Social Issues forum. [i]Edited to change "thread" to "forum".This message has been edited by Chiroptera, 20-Jul-2005 05:58 PM

Hi Percy:I'm writing in response to this comment of yours:"Second, your thread is coming across to others as a bit over the top. Please tone it down or the thread will get closed."Percy, if those comments are coming across as over the top, then that is not a reflection of the comments, but on the strong anti-American, anyi-iraq war bias of most posters here. As you will have noted I quoted reputable Muslims. If their opinions are not over the top, then, since theirs are largely in agreement with mine, neither are mine. Moreover, the opinions I express also reflect those of many very reputable non Muslim scholars, such as daniel pipes, a harvard historian, and Bernard Lewis, perhaps the most quoted islamic scholar of all. If the views of a harvard historian and bernard Lewis are considered too over the top for this site, surely that reflects more on the site than me. Which, of course, is not to say that people must agree with me, or irshad Manji, or Ijad, or Pipes or Lewis. But it is to say that there is something wrong when their views are not acceptable here.Relatedly, I have stated several times that the islamists consider democracy evil, and I explained why. I have been challenged to prove that. Thus, i quoted from one prime Islamist group's charter. Surely that is not wrong.Finally, the views expressed by the majority here would, probably, be considered over the top on sites with a conservative bias. Typically, though, they do not censor leftist views.Steve----------------------------------------------------Please do not reply to this post. If you have questions/issues about moderation, please take them to General discussion of moderation procedures: The Sequel.-- Percy
EvC Forum Director

You were censored because you defied topic promotion procedures. Now you claim that you are being maltreated?This place has rules.If you don't like it here, leave.

---

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

Crashfrog suggested that he should have posted it on the Coffee House forum, and agreed that its rejection was biased as to content. Meaning Steve is new here and doesn't know all the rules. I also didn't know that posting in the Coffee House didn't need to go through formal channels. If the Coffee House is free for posting without formally proposing a topic, then what's the problem?This message has been edited by Faith, 07-20-2005 02:37 PM

Also I would like to add that the belligerence directed at Steve is totally indefensible. He's one of the most eventempered and well informed people to show up here. He simply has conservative views that rub the leftists here the wrong way. Well, either true debate is welcome here or it isn't. It sure seems sometimes that it isn't.

I was referring to that action was being taken because others are finding my "opinions over the top."That you would then say: "If you don't like it here, leave," is an excellent example of the intolerance of the left. At conservative sites, leftists are welcome to post whatever they will, no matter how much the site and its majority posters disagree. That is tolerance; that is respect for free speech and the fundamentals of liberal demcoracy. To shut down those with whom you disagree is intolerance; it is disrespect for liberal democracy's fundamentals. It is an effort to control what is said and heard.Of course, one could express truly egregious hate. That I was not doing. In fact, i quoted well-respected, passionately democratic Muslims. That is, actually, quite an irony. The majority of Muslims who desire an isalmic democratic revolution tend to support the views of conservatives. For example, most of them support the war in iraq. One famous Isalmic author, Stephen Schwartz, has written many articles on this. In his book, The Two Faces of Islam, he writes at length about the ideological civil war within Islam, the one between the Islamism (Wahabbism) and tolerant, pluralistic Islam. So has Daniel pipes, whose famous dictum is: "Extremist Islam is the enemy' moderate Islam is the solution." I quoted mansoor Ijad, demanding that moderate Western Muslims confront the Islamists they've allowed to assume power, and that they bear responsibility for that. I quoted from hamas's Charter, backing up a contention i've been challenged to verify, that Isalmism considers democracy evil and that Isalmists intend for the world to be ruled according to koranic Law..as the global constitution. Yet, all these people, and the refrence to hamas's own words, are considered over the top. That doesn not condemn me, but the pervasive leftist slant, and the intolernace of teh left of views which challenge its own.needless to say, if my opinions - and by extension all those well-reputed Muslims and non Muslim islamic scholars - are to be censored, then, of course, i would leave. There'd be no point to staying.

That's a good suggestion.

Hi CanadianSteve,I think the best approach would be for you to work toward getting your topic proposal approved over at Does Islam Need a Reformation?.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

THe problem is the he proposed the exact same topic via the topic proposal and it was explicitly rejected. Therefore his submission to the coffee house was a circumvention of the process.

---

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

I don't want to get in to it with you about this topic. We already had our spat back in the day about Islam. Leave it at that.In my opinion the topic was blatantly racist. If it is the decision of the adminstration of this forum that they would like to allow hate speech discussions on this forum then that is their perogative. Since I know that hate speech discussion are a form of nonsense discussion I figured I would try to point that out to the admins to get this disgusting filth off of a forum I have enjoyed for some time now.You can take that any way you want to Faith. I really don't care.

---

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

In your opinion you have a well reasoned argument. In my opinion you have hate filled garbage based on pure selective reasoning and evidence.We will let the Admins decide from here what is allowed. Regardless my opinion stands.I really do hope you leave. You can take whatever sense of martyrdom you like on your way out the door. As far as I am concerned there is no room for nonsense discussions on this board and hate speech is one of them.

---

Organizations worth supporting:
Electronic Frontier Foundation | Defending your rights in the digital world (Protect Privacy and Security)
Home | American Civil Liberties Union (Protect Civil Rights)
AAUP (Protect Higher Learning)

Please tie any replies into the topic of this thread, moderation procedures. --AdminIt's ironic that you see things this way, given that I, unlike most conservatives, support anti-hate speech laws, such as those we have in canada.My various sources are these, not in any particular order:Pipes, Lewis, Manji, Schwartz, Ijar, Pharaes, Taheri, Spencer, various Islamist intellectuals, and a few others whose names elude me. Needless to say, they are not all in agreement with one another (I've read some brilliant debates between some). While i support all of them, I do not altogether. Aside from the Islamists themselves, what they all share in common is abject denunciation of the islamists, who are the real haters along with their passive supporters. If in revealing who they are, and the source of their hate, that constitutes hate as you see it, then, I would suggest, you are conflating uncomfortable truths with hate. In a nutshell, blaming the messenger.This message has been edited by Admin, 07-21-2005 08:28 AM

Please tie any replies into the topic of this thread, moderation procedures. --AdminI might have added to that last comment:many Muslims are debating the idea of a Reformation. So difficult is this, I've read a few prominent Muslims personally go back and forth on it. Obviously, this is based on whether they see that the Koran really is a call to imperialist war against the non islamic world, or even if a Reformation is necessary simply to prevent that possibility.This message has been edited by Admin, 07-21-2005 08:29 AM