Why Freedom of Expression is Important

I can’t find the comment. I fear it was one of the victims of the censorship spree. (Another huge disadvantage of censorship is that the censored comments may be lost forever.)

1 Like

We will avoid that in the future. I’m sorry. It was a moderator error. We are new to this. In general if you are seeing erratic behavior, someone is concerned about something. It helps to understand why. Maybe you can help guide the moderators to a better strategy.

Im not sure either context makes much of a difference.

The ultimate answer for either - whether it be about:
A. Life from non-living matter, or
B. New information from Evolution,

Is that either is possible when God is involved.

Guy Coe:

It ought to be clear, by now, that your cry of “censorship” was met with an adequate explanation, has been rectified,

No, that isn’t clear at all. For instance, Josh writes:

Ideas will not be censored. Unkindness will be curtailed.

“Curtailed” certainly seems to imply “censored”. But what if the expression of certain ideas is seen as “unkind” by Josh or the moderators? Are unkind truths prohibited, and if so, how can that be reconciled with the promotion of free and open discussion, and the claim that ideas will not be censored? I haven’t seen any resolution of these issues.

...and that the only one entitled to the unquestioned right of remaining published here is our host, as we are all guests.

I agree. This is Josh’s blog, and he can do with it as he wishes. He can ban me on the spot if he wants, or he can publish a thread announcing that “KeithS is an asshole” if the fancy strikes him (not that I think he would do either of those things).

My point is that his decisions have consequences for which he needs to be prepared. For example, it’s clear that he’s having a hard time relaxing his grip in order to allow free and open discussion. That’s his prerogative, but it becomes harder to claim that PeacefulScience is about open discussion and bridge building if comments continue to be censored. He needs to choose: either promote genuinely free discussion, and be known for that; or exercise tighter control, and be known for that. And it’s a spectrum, of course, not a simple dichotomy.

There is a marketplace of blogs, just as there is a marketplace of ideas, and people will choose according to their preferences. If censorship continues, some commenters may be fine with it or even welcome it; others, like me, will be inclined to leave. It’s harder to “build bridges” when the people you’re trying to connect with are leaving. It’s a tradeoff, and Josh will have to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of his various options.

I’ve made my own preference rather obvious: no deletion of comments except in the case of bannable offenses, as at TSZ. I’ll await Josh’s decision.

Hi gbrooks9,

I got a kick out of your “Frantic Unitarian” self-description. Thanks for that. There were times during my deconversion in which I would have described my self as a “frantic and dwindling Christian.” :slight_smile:

Regarding your comment, I would agree that an omnipotent God, if he existed, could accomplish either of those things. But what we were trying to get at was the official LCMS view on the matter.

2 Likes

@keiths just treat people kindly and there won’t be a problem.

Though, I should warn you there may be an influx of minors soon, for an online book club. They will be in the Book Club category, and there will be different rules there. @Patrick, I’d appreciate if you could help explain why that is important.

That’s true well beyond the confines of this blog. :slight_smile:

1 Like

Josh didn’t delete your posts, as he explained. The moderators left in charge during his absence became understandably riled at the comments in which you seemed to question his integrity. He has instructed the moderators not to resort to deleting posts, either, now, and given alternatives, instead. This has been a learning experience for them. Thank you for providing it. Hopefully by now you’ve seen his comments on the other thread?

1 Like

I think you and @Charles_Miller are friends, but he might be confused by your behavior. I’m familiar with why atheists do these blasphemy protests, but most Christians are totally confused. Can you explain to them the point you are trying to make, and why you test limits this way? Perhaps some of us might understand you a bit better. Peace.

1 Like

Tests of character become a basis upon which we may form friendships across what might usually be considered insurmountable divides. It’s what every growing relationship needs, sooner or later.

2 Likes

That’s not helpful. “Kindly” by whose standards? Must we behave in ways that no one will consider unkind or objectionable, if that’s even possible? What if an important point or idea cannot be expressed without seeming unkind? Will such ideas be censored?

It isn’t as simple as merely insisting “just treat people kindly.”

In the LCMS thread, you mean? I’ve only been there briefly since he unlocked it, in order to search for that one (now apparently missing) comment. Thanks for the tip – I’ll go look at it now.

1 Like

A true conversation can only take place where there’s a modicum of mutual respect. Kindness, as a test, is agreeably subjective, but is simple enough as a SELF-IMPOSED standard. That’s the gist of what he’s asking. I think seeing the other post will help. Especially once you scroll to the end.

Now regarding the @moderators. I agree that there was some newbie sloppiness here, and that is just because they are new to it. I’ll make a few observations, that I think might have made this progress a little smoother.

  1. If in doubt what to do, make the topic unlisted, and wait for me. Unlisited topics can trivially be made listed again. It is easy to undo this. Also, @keiths, if this happens, understand it is reversible. If you do not understand what is going on, just ask the moderators. Whatever is going on, you may not see the whole picture. It may not even be about you. You will still have access to the posts, and be able to engage as you see fit.

  2. Do NOT edit content of other people posts except in extreme circumstances. Except for helping people with quoting bugs, etc., I can only recall editing the content of comment just a few times, when there was potentially dangerous comments made by someone. Do not edit comments and leave moderator notes in a person’s comments, except in extreme situations.

  3. Do NOT delete substantive posts. Usually, just FLAG the post if there is a problem, which makes it systematic to have other moderators look at things too, and to undo changes if they are made.

  4. Use soft power often, but hard power rarely. In general, do not even use moderator powers. Explain our values, and why violating works against the interest of the party perceived to be misbehaving.

We have a great deal of shared values. We are building a community here, not merely a message board of strangers. I’m glad you can join us @keiths, and I hope that begins to answer your questions.

Cheers!

Well said. It may not be easy to do, but I think it’s necessary to make the attempt, and I applaud moderators who have the often thankless volunteer job of trying to make it happen (disclaimer: I mod on another unrelated site :slight_smile: ). I’ve seen more than one atheist-oriented forum that I wouldn’t bother participating on for this reason, unfortunately. When you choose to participate on a moderated site, you inevitably give up some freedom of speech. This is made clear in the FAQ here. Of course when moderation goes too far, discussion can suffer. But the opposite can also be true. Kindness is a great way of putting this quality. When it is lacking, discussion can also suffer. From what I’ve seen here I’m confident the people running things will strike that balance effectively.

1 Like

We need a way to identify minors as minors (under 18 years of age). And every adults should know that talking to and with minors is very different than talking among adults. Special rules need to in place. Realize that minors may be coming here for help with a myriad of issues that belief and faith might be making worse. They may be under enormous self-identity issues. They may have no else to talk to. Or worse, they may be embarking on their first evangelical mission. But realize that we are NOT their counselors, teachers, parents, nor their friends. This may sound cruel because our first reaction will be to help these children even the real angry ones or next Billy Graham preacher. Kindness yes, facts based science yes, ideology no. Please lets do no harm to any child. I for one would love to profess the greatness of atheism over Christianity, but I won’t. We can all wait until there 18 to engage with them as adults. We can help them most by engaging each other respectfully and let them watch the exchange and let them throw darts at us. Let them develop their own critical thinking skills. We need to be lab rats in a cage for them.

2 Likes

And it SHOULD. If he is working for the University that wouldn’t allow interracial dating until the 1980’s, he should self examine his integrity. Bob Jones University is now at the fore front of discrimination against legally married same sex couples. Where are OUR values? What do WE allow regarding participating anonymously while working for such as unsavory institution?

Again, what are OUR values, ethics and morals? What if the pastor is from a denomination that is unkind to homosexuals, are we suppose to say “that’s okay, what are your views on Adam and Eve”? Do we have OUR priorities straight?

This is the easiest. a scientist at a secular institution should do his/her job under the rules of science - MN and keep his personal views private. The internet is last place to talk about personal private views if you want to keep them private.

Everyone,

I received a private message from Joshua that basically broke the camel’s back, and persuaded me that this blog is not the place for me, at least not with Josh in charge. As an undeserved favor to Josh, I’ll leave it at that.

I’ve enjoyed meeting you. Feel free to stop by The Skeptical Zone, where discussion is free and open and comments are never deleted.

So long and good luck,
KeithS

2 Likes

I think you have reached a sound conclusion.

All the best, KeithS.

Keith,
Please email me at PatrickTNJ@verizon.net I would like to continue our dialog privately.
Thanks,
Patrick

1 Like