Should we ignore rude posts.

[monobath]

I think the situation is clear: Andreas is the moderator and not the forum members.
I do belive free speech but the moderator can stop anybody, who is violating others.

Very true, when it comes to excluding anyone. This forum is Andreas' property.

And as to the question of whether or not anyone could or should ignore anyone else on the forum, each individual must decide for himself.

Ultimately, each forum member exercises his own judgement every time he reads or posts on this forum.

[etimh]

Don't you see? He's winning. This whole thread is the best evidence of that.

Ignore, dismiss, laugh at, or actively engage "rude" posts--each individual should decide for themselves. But I would definitely argue for NO authoritarian crackdowns or curtailing of free speech by the moderator.

Tim

[chachi]

I've heard that M'lord has recently aquired aluminum tubes for use in production of a nuclear program, this could only mean one thing!

YES, We should all take up arms and by opposing end HIM! :roll:

[CHAS]

Don't you see? He's winning. This whole thread is the best evidence of that.

Tim

You're right. I'm sure he's busting up over this. It's not like he is posting anything here to defend himself.

[steve hyde]

Ignore rude posts? I do.

I think the best way to keep a public forum productive is for people to ask themselves what the content of their post is going to do - like sharing potentially valuable information with others that is relevant to the art and science of filmshooting and/or making political arguments relevant to the art and science of filmshooting...

In a mostly ungoverend space - such as this one - people need to vote with their feet. "govern yourself". When someone makes a valuable contribution let them know that it is a useful contribution. When someone is trolling for social attention by spraying about all that is unpopular among members of this forum:

e.g. Monarchy
e.g. Pro 8mm.
e.g. Margi Thatcher
e.g. fill in the blank

The joke is on you if you take it seriously. That is why the last thing I said to Santo-lord is this: you like to entertain yourself at the expense of others on this board. If you give him the time of day, the joke is on you. If multiple posts continue to emerge on the topic of Santo's trolling here then the joke is on the whole board. Stated differently, this board becomes a joke and becomes less of a place where serious filmmakers and serious student filmmakers can share useful information.

Ignore it? yes, ignore it.

Steve

[tlatosmd]

I've heard that M'lord has recently aquired aluminum tubes for use in production of a nuclear program, this could only mean one thing!

YES, We should all take up arms and by opposing end HIM! :roll:

"But what has he ever done to us?!" - "Think of it this way, what has he ever done for us?"

[chachi]

tlatosmd, I was being sarcastic, perhaps i should have used German Roll eyes?? :roll:

[tlatosmd]

And I was humorously quoting Wag the dog, starring Robert DeNiro and Dustin Hoffman.

[chachi]

ThenIi guess you waged me too, cause that flew right over my head! 8O

[David M. Leugers]

by 2/3 majority it should be effective by the webmaster.

I believe in extended democracy,

and will resign any time at 2/3 majority Wink

... and there are those of you who think democracy ISN"T mob rule! 8)


David M. Leugers

[super8man]

As long as the 2/3rd vote doesn't go against the constitution of filmshooting.com then yes, that's ok...am I a fool to think the constitution protects the rights of the minority from the tyranny of the majority...afterall, the majority by definition can decide anything they desire...oh well, like one member always said about a certain film stock: Die post, die.