Suppressing Free Speech on APC?
 

Still lurking for rumors, and baffled by the lack of leaks on this normally fertile ground, considering the rumors that are floating in various venues. It's impressive how conforming everything is on these pages nowadays. I see you still have a few token dissenters, but for the most part all forums are really nice feedback loops for one set of ideas.

I guess it's not accidental.

One guy that I read for a little different take is Rube. He had a post that seemed to highlight the issues surrounding our contract pretty well, as well as a bit of information about a rep that wasn't flattering, but seemed to accurately quote a post by that rep.

What happened to it?

Too con-conforming?

Maybe Rube violated this rule:

"Any post that in the opinion of the site Administrators and Moderators poses a risk to the security of the site or members will be removed without notice."

In his case, a difference of opinion could be considered a security risk, and undermine not only this website, but the very fabric of society. I read the post and responded but had a very uneasy feeling. In fact, a few minutes after hitting "send", I swear I could have heard the silent approach of black helicopters if it had not been for the hypnosis I was under from the aliens who visited me last night at the command of GSZG.

Or something like that. Will I now be banned for "humor"?

I doubt it. Not with this post.:)

Did you think there was anything weird about that post, other than deviating from doctrine?

The gist of it was that a member in good standing wrote a long piece about why there won't be a TA, and the rep in question dismissed the member with an expletive. What I was interested in were a couple of pieces in the middle suggesting there was room for a deal to be reached, but it was being ignored. That struck me as more interesting.

There is always room for a deal to be reached. The question is, is it a deal worthy of reaching.

No, we don't ban people for either humor or lack of humor, but I will forward a recommendation to the Administrators. :D

If a post was deleted it violated the TOS and has nothing to with mindset, conformity, or do if a guy is pro or anti anything.

As Proof of this, during last summers TA voting period we were accused of being both pro-TA and anti-TA. FWIW both DAL APC Mods voted against the last TA.

I don't remember the post you are referring to so I can't be more specific than that.

Scoop

The expectation of free speech on a privately owned forum is an illusion.

I agree. That's the question.

The next question is: how do we know what's even available?
Then the next one is: don't we deserve to know where things stand?
Then: how do I tell my rep what to accept or not, when I don't know what's available?

Thanks Scoop,

What I saw didn't violate TOS. He did attempt to cover the expletive, but it still was obvious. Maybe that's the issue? In the past, I'd get the expletive removed, but the unrelated content of the post would be unaffected. That might work.

I thought the rest was worth a read. We were having a conversation at home, and I wanted to show what's rumored to be on the table.

If Rube is on here, could you please PM Scoop and I a copy?

I don't think that is quite so, unless you're saying that APC is advocating for certain people or policies at Delta?

I don't know who owns the site, but I imagine traffic is important. I bet you discussions stimulate traffic more than conformity does.

There is no such thing as free speech (1st Amendment Rights) on a privately owned forum.