Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
It's disappointing that from time to time we have a small minority of readers who want to impose their view of what should and should not be seen on the REHP board on the rest of us. It's not enough that the Ignored Fools and Ignored Thread features allows them to personally censor what appears on their browser in a multitude of ways, they want to impose their choice of content on others.So far I'm proud to say that the REHP community has stood steadfast against the intrusion of censorship. And many of those who have sought to limit the content displayed on the REHP in one way or another have moved on to other pastures. That's as it should be.If you don't like the news on FOX, there's CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc. Switching channels will likely be more productive than trying to recreate the FOX network in your image. <grin>intercst
From a piece on Internet trolls @ http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm#WAFSWhat About Censorship?When trolls find that their efforts are being successfully resisted, they often complain that their right to free speech is being infringed. Let us examine that claim.While most people on the Internet are ardent defenders of free speech, it is not an absolute right; there are practical limitations. For example, you may not scream out "Fire!" in a crowded theatre, and you may not make jokes about bombs while waiting to board an airplane. We accept these limitations because we recognize that they serve a greater good.Another useful example is the control of the radio frequency spectrum. You might wish to set up a powerful radio station to broadcast your ideas, but you cannot do so without applying for a license. Again, this is a practical limitation: if everybody broadcasted without restriction, the repercussions would be annoying at best and life-threatening at worst.The radio example is helpful for another reason: with countless people having a legitimate need to use radio communications, it is important to ensure that nobody is 'monopolizing the channel'. There are only so many clear channels available in each frequency band and these must be shared.When a troll attacks a message board, he generally posts a lot of messages. Even if his messages are not particularly inflammatory, they can be so numerous that they drown out the regular conversations (this is known as 'flooding'). Needless to say, no one person's opinions can be allowed to monopolize a channel.The ultimate response to the 'free speech' argument is this: while we may have the right to say more or less whatever we want, we do not have the right to say it wherever we want. You may feel strongly about the fact that your neighbour has not mowed his lawn for two months, but you do not have the right to berate him in his own living room. Similarly, if a webmaster tells a troll that he is not welcome, the troll has no "right" to remain. This is particularly true on the numerous free communications services offered on the net. (On pay systems, the troll might be justified in asking for a refund.)Why Do They Do It?Affirmation.Regular net users know how delightful it is when somebody responds to something they have written. It is a meeting of the minds, which is an intellectual thrill, but it is also an acknowledgement of one's value -- and that can be a very satisfying emotional reward.Trolls crave attention, and they care not whether it is positive or negative. They see the Internet as a mirror in which they can gaze in narcissistic rapture.If you want a deeper analysis than that, perhaps a psychologist can shed some additional light on the matter.
CatherineCoy posts,When a troll attacks a message board, he generally posts a lot of messages. Even if his messages are not particularly inflammatory, they can be so numerous that they drown out the regular conversations (this is known as 'flooding'). Needless to say, no one person's opinions can be allowed to monopolize a channel.Hmmmmmm.....(Thinking Subliminally)......... <grin>intercst
The fool Censorship policy explained!http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=18349178€z
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |