And I've played a lot of chess on chess.com (not got much better yet...haha) and had private chats with friends. Still not sure why any of that matters (?)
Free Speech on chess.com
Sort:
RonaldJosephCote wrote:
You're right.....I found your other thread about Free Speech....that went far.
Lol...yeah...I don't think that was it. haha. But whether I posted on it or not is irrelevant (see cheetos post in off-topic and I think another one). Still interested in why you seem to be taking this conversation so personally (?) I've tried to be matter-of-fact and focused on the topic. And yet, you are calling me a troll and kid ... ?
RonaldJosephCote wrote:
I guess the mistake is on both our parts.....I apologize. You thought it was perfectly OK to start a controvercial thread....... and I thought I was talking to someone older.
I'm 55, have 4 kids, 2 grandchildren and one on the way, 2 college degrees (since you questioned it). And one of my great regrets in life is that I didn't join the military. If I HAD served in the military, the constitution and first amendment would be that much more important to me. But, all of that is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. But since you commented on it, thought I would give you the info.
K
80Hdbb - 'filthy casual' - now that made me laugh 
Jan 22, 2020
0
#47
I still don't get what he's ranting on about... Their site, their rules.
So much for the 'being relevant and kind' by a few posters on this thread...
Hedgehog1963 wrote:
I still don't get what he's ranting on about... Their site, their rules.
Of course you are correct. The owners can do anything they want - they've invested their own money and hard work to build it. It's theirs. I get it.
But why have an 'off topic' forum and then exclude certain topics?
Jan 22, 2020
0
#50
SquirrelGravy wrote:
Hedgehog1963 wrote:
I still don't get what he's ranting on about... Their site, their rules.
Of course you are correct. The owners can do anything they want - they've invested their own money and hard work to build it. It's theirs. I get it.
But why have an 'off topic' forum and then exclude certain topics?
Because @erik doesn't want those subjects discussed. There are a number of topics about it and he has previously posted the why behind the decision.
I can almost guarantee that decision won't be rescinded.
I'll do a search and check out his thoughts. Thanks
Jan 22, 2020
0
#52
"Certain topics" can be discussed in other settings. You will not be banned from joining any of the groups and expressing your opinions. For some settings it is not appropriate. (the obvious shouting fire in a movie house.) The OP obviously has a hard time understanding the concept of free speech, what it is and when it's appropriate.
Does the OP also believe that public accusations of cheating, pro and con debate is included in "free speech" and represents censorship of your right to discuss such matters?
OP - Why is it necessary to allow political discussion in a public chess forum? If politics is your thing, go to a political chat room.
It's a REALITY (especially true here where trolling and intentionally creating negative discourse is the norm) that politics and religion ALWAYS degenerates into chaos/insults and bad behavior when topics become interjected with such. Most topics are created for discussion on THAT topic. Interjecting politics and religion into other topics is NEVER beneficial - the thread will quickly deteriorate.
It's not about "free speech" is it? But more about the misguided belief that members should be free to discuss "whatever and whenever" they want, including politics in a thread about bunny rabbits.
It's usually an age thing. Put a few more years on and people begin to realize the working of any community, where if harmony is to carry on, guidelines and some restrictions become necessary. Such Freedoms are never infinite, to be applied as any single individual insists.
To be fair to Staff, it's quite noticeable the decrease in "useless and negative" threads of late. Threads of Chess and Hitler, Chess and suicide have disappeared. In fact, start a thread on Chess and suicide and it's zapped from the start, with a link to suicide help and prevention.
It's really all very simple. Stay on topic. TOA makes this request. It's no different than any other site with Forums. A topic is created - contribute to the discussion with relevancy. Interjecting politics and religion is only relevant when the topic is as such. Groups exist where they are discussed - members are encouraged to go there if it's their thing.
Jan 22, 2020
0
#53
Does the OP also believe making public accusation of cheating falls under "free speech"?
MustangMate wrote:
Does the OP also believe making public accusation of cheating falls under "free speech"?
What are you referring to?
Mustang - I appreciate your thoughtful comments. Even though there are the veiled insults interspersed in it (not understanding free speech, when I get a few more years, etc.) I'll address some of your observations below...
You_play_well wrote:
Baby, this thread is
I support your right to that opinion and to express it.
MustangMate wrote:
"Certain topics" can be discussed in other settings. You will not be banned from joining any of the groups and expressing your opinions. For some settings it is not appropriate. (the obvious shouting fire in a movie house.) The OP obviously has a hard time understanding the concept of free speech, what it is and when it's appropriate.
Response - when would you say free speech is appropriate? Not appropriate? (outside of the obvious - shouting 'fire' in a crowded theater.
Does the OP also believe that public accusations of cheating, pro and con debate is included in "free speech" and represents censorship of your right to discuss such matters?
Response - I have not thought about that. The ban in the 'off-topic' forum is regarding religion and politics, so that is what I was focused on.
OP - Why is it necessary to allow political discussion in a public chess forum? If politics is your thing, go to a political chat room.
Response - Why is it necessary to have an off-topic forum at all then? Why does anyone want to discuss evolution (a huge thread) on a chess site? The answer is that in our recreational pursuits and the related community, we enjoy discussing other topics of importance.
It's a REALITY (especially true here where trolling and intentionally creating negative discourse is the norm) that politics and religion ALWAYS degenerates into chaos/insults and bad behavior when topics become interjected with such.
Response - you are right. And those bad behaviors should be called out instead of just avoiding the topics.
Most topics are created for discussion on THAT topic. Interjecting politics and religion into other topics is NEVER beneficial - the thread will quickly deteriorate.
Response - agreed. Hijacking topics is not appropriate. But that does not mean a religious or political thread in the off-topic forum is problematic.
It's not about "free speech" is it? But more about the misguided belief that members should be free to discuss "whatever and whenever" they want, including politics in a thread about bunny rabbits.
Response - no, that is not what it is about. Threads about 'bunny rabbits' should not be hijacked. But a specific thread about a political / religious topic in the off-topic forum would be appropriate. And the definition of free speech (not misguided) is exactly that a person should have the right of free expression in any public forum. (and again, I understand that chess.com is not a public forum...however, the off-topic forum is proposed to serve that function)
It's usually an age thing. Put a few more years on and people begin to realize the working of any community, where if harmony is to carry on, guidelines and some restrictions become necessary. Such Freedoms are never infinite, to be applied as any single individual insists.
To be fair to Staff, it's quite noticeable the decrease in "useless and negative" threads of late. Threads of Chess and Hitler, Chess and suicide have disappeared. In fact, start a thread on Chess and suicide and it's zapped from the start, with a link to suicide help and prevention.
Response: It is commendable that those terrible, hateful, and destructive threads have been removed.
It's really all very simple. Stay on topic. TOA makes this request. It's no different than any other site with Forums. A topic is created - contribute to the discussion with relevancy. Interjecting politics and religion is only relevant when the topic is as such. Groups exist where they are discussed - members are encouraged to go there if it's their thing.
Response - I think you presume that my original post is suggesting that religion / politics be interjected in every thread. That is not what I suggest; but instead that political/religious threads can be started in the off-topic forum and are helpful and beneficial as topics of discussion. (and once again, I completely understand these topics can be discussed in clubs...I've commented on this several times above.)
Jan 22, 2020
0
#59
" Arguing is not bad; it is constructive. Free speech is not free unless allowed in the public forum" - OP
I will simply remind the OP of his opening premise, one that is disagreed with. My comment about him not "understanding" what the implications of free speech remains. It is not an insult but was taken as such because he has a differing version than most.
Imagination quickly reveals if an open topic as politics is allowed, the result will not be pretty. Civilized discussion is not possible at this site. No good will come from it - knowing this what is the point?
Most all of the quotes in the 1st post are a result of political and religious censorship where the freedom to discuss such matters was restricted. The quotes were from political or religious icons. Point being, those topics were under discussion to begin with, in a setting of government or church. The quotes are not relevant/applicable to this setting, where it is agreed that these topics need taking place elsewhere, in the agreed upon setting. Hence, the comment that "what Jefferson said does not matter" is understood - it does not matter in this setting, as it's not pertinent. Has nothing do with it's intrinsic value when applied to the setting it was addressing, which in context had great meaning.
Jan 22, 2020
0
#60
Permit politics and religion? We know for certain the Forum will be flooded by both, with the intent of creating a negative atmosphere. Civilized discussion? LOL
So I ask again - what is the point? To uphold your version of what "free speech" represents? If interested in discussing these issues, go to where everyone agrees these topics are under discussion. There, hopefully free expression and opinion prevails.
You said you joined the Evangelist group just yesterday..... Which means for a yr and a half you joined NO groups. ......and NOW you wanna talk to us about free speech. All you're doing is yelling "fire" in a crowded elevator.
I've posted about this before. Not sure why the timing is an issue (?)