BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Head Shop >

Barbelith Bill of Rights...

  
  

Page: (1)2

 
 
Tom Coates
11:38 / 10.03.02
Inspired (trashily enough) by F.E.A.R. by Ian Brown, particulaly the lines "For each a role", "For everyman a religion", "Freeing excellence affects reality", "Fantastic expectations, amazing revelations", "Free expression as revolution.." etc. etc.

What would be your Barbelith Bill of Rights? What would be your statement of intent? What provisos (amendments) would you have to put on it in order to have it function properly....
 
 
Tom Coates
09:00 / 11.03.02
Unless of course everyone thinks I'm really lame and ignores me...
 
 
alas
09:00 / 11.03.02
the right to keep and bare arms. and to bare legs, buttocks, etc.

(is this thread rot already?)
 
 
Thjatsi
09:00 / 11.03.02
I'm not quite sure what you're specifically asking for.
 
 
bio k9
09:00 / 11.03.02
Quite obviously, everyone here should have the right to make jokes about and/or insult, the Jews, queers, stuck up fucking bitches, spicks, heebs, dancing cannibal negroes, and everyone else whenever they damn well please. Including those stupid fucking Christians and people that believe in Magick*. All as long as they're joking, of course.

Please note that these actions are only OK if the person is joking. Also note that other posters do not need to find the joke funny, nor should they try to explain why such jokes are inappropriate. After all, some people just have a different sense of humor. If you are offended by anything thats said on Barbelith, you should assume that you are just missing the joke and laugh along anyway. Any attempt to berate or chastise a poster for what you may think are stupid or offensive comments makes you a member of the political correctness gone mad mob and a big fat ninny. Any moderators or administrators that alter or delete posts are Nazi scumbags that will stop at nothing to destroy free speech and should be forced to eat broken glass and rubbing alcohol for breakfast.

*I mean, really! Magick? Who the fuck are you kidding? Grow up.

[Message edited to insult people that believe in Magick.]

[ 11-03-2002: Message edited by: Bio K9 ]
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
09:00 / 11.03.02
We keep hearing about this Political Correctness beast, but strangely no-one's never seen its footprints.

I second what Bio K9 said. How are we ever going to get the revolution underway if we get bogged down in elitist bullshit like tolerance? Not to mention the scandalous treatment meted out by the Nazi clique to innocent people who post porn links on the board? The internet is a forum for free speech! If it wasn't for these fine exponants of free speech, we'd never garner certain important facts. For example, I now know that TEEN SLUTS LOVE TO SUCK COCK!!! If it wasn't for porn links, how would I ever have found that out? I'd be walking around, utterly ignorant of the fact that TEEN SLUTS LOVE TO SUCK COCK!!! Let the elitist clique of feminazis and frigid bitches whine all they want. I'm sure you'll all agree that TEEN SLUTS LOVE TO SUCK COCK!!! is vital information, which should be distributed as widely as possible. Now that we know that TEEN SLUTS LOVE TO SUCK COCK, what can possibly stop the revolution? And anyone who says different is a free-speech-hating, censorship-getting-off-on, intellectual elitist fagbitch.

[ 11-03-2002: Message edited by: Mordant C@rnival ]
 
 
Shortfatdyke
09:00 / 11.03.02
i will respond properly to this thread when i can stop giggling at mordant carnival's post long enough to type (and think) coherently.....
 
 
Tom Coates
09:00 / 11.03.02
Jeez. THAT"S where I've been going wrong. All my sluts have been in their early twenties... Dammit. Ah well, you live - you learn...
 
 
Shortfatdyke
10:00 / 11.03.02
most importantly, i think we all have the right to be heard here. some of us have very few places where that happens, so i don't think its value should be underestimated.

this [being heard] has to be in the context of barbelith being a 'safe space'; abuse should not be tolerated, and is an entirely different thing to challenging people's opinions. anyone who looks at the threads here will see straight away what kind of forum this is. if a member persists in posting purely to deny others their right to be heard or giving other members the kind of harassment they usually get in the street, then that person should be told to leave. there is a diversity of opinions and beliefs here - and i would not want it any other way - and that is shown in the arguements and debates. i've had my eyes opened to new things and hopefully learnt to express myself better and more clearly.
 
 
The Planet of Sound
10:50 / 11.03.02
Focusing Everyone's Attention on Revolution.
 
 
ciarconn
11:49 / 11.03.02
Hey, I have only entered Magick and Hea shop(-chop). So myu perspecive might be limited.

I would expect to have the right of expressing myself freely; to be respected, and then I would expect the OBLIGATIONS of hearing/reading the free expressions of the others, and respecting them.

Rights imply obligations
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
12:00 / 11.03.02
Maybe that's a better way to do this - what are the obligations of a poster here?
 
 
Morlock - groupie for hire
16:08 / 11.03.02
Anyone found not paying attention or Listening will be kicked 'round the board. Everything else gets dealt with case by case, 'cos sweeping generalisations sink ships.
 
 
Tuna Ghost: Pratt knot hero
16:09 / 11.03.02
The only one I can think of is "don't deliberately be an ass".

Rights? Hmmmm...maybe "everyone gets a voice, even if said voice is whiny and offensive. And it's perfectly fine to let said voice know that he/she is whiny or offensive".
 
 
bio k9
19:00 / 11.03.02
OK then. How do we, as a board, decide when someone crosses from offensive to something else without resorting to "I know it when I see it"? Should we even bother?

After TK-1 there was a lot of talk about creating some sort of guidelines for posters so no one could say "I didn't know my asshole behavior wasn't allowed," but has anyone other than TK-1 ever needed such rules? Hell, even he didn't need them, he just wanted to play the victim so he could stick around longer.

I think it would be a better use of everyones time to worry about Revolution, what ever the hell that means.
 
 
Tom Coates
19:09 / 11.03.02
I'd rather think of it in very positive terms...

Like for example...

1) Everyone should have the right to speak their mind.
2) Everyone should have the right to have their opinions taken seriously and respected.
3) Everyone should have the right to exist on the baord without experiencing harrassment or vindictive abuse - with harrassment or vindictive abuse being defined by the feelings of the injured party if it is in agreement with the largest part of the board.
4) Everyone should have the right to post to a board free of commercial spam, empty posts, trolling or an excess of off-topic discussion.

We then say that people who infringe other peoples rights 2, 3 or 4 above must consider that they may forfeit their right to #1
 
 
bio k9
19:30 / 11.03.02
1) Everyone should have the right to speak their mind.

Agreed. But what if their mind is full of racist, sexist, homophobic bullshit? And do we get to tell the "psychics" that their "warnings" are no longer wanted?

2) Everyone should have the right to have their opinions taken seriously and respected.

Ok. But what if their opinions are just plain STUPID?

3) Everyone should have the right to exist on the board without experiencing harrassment or vindictive abuse - with harrassment or vindictive abuse being defined by the feelings of the injured party if it is in agreement with the largest part of the board.

Fair enough but I almost left when Cholister jumped down my throat because I asked her friend why she would scratch someones paint job. Everyone seemed to agree I was an insensitive ass, except perhaps Haus who mentioned something about it in another thread. I think the only reason I didn't quit Barbelith is A) I left the thread and B) TK-1 started up with his shit and everyone forgot about my question.

4) Everyone should have the right to post to a board free of commercial spam, empty posts, trolling or an excess of off-topic discussion.

Free of empty posts and off-topic discussion? Guess I'm out of here. Ganesh too. And Haus. Who will put their penis is your ear when we're gone?

[edited to add: I hurt my back yeaterday and despite the Tylenol 3 with Codine and caffene I got from a friend, my back still hurts. Ignore my crankyness.]]
 
 
We're The Great Old Ones Now
05:49 / 12.03.02
quote:How do we, as a board, decide when someone crosses from offensive to something else without resorting to "I know it when I see it"? Should we even bother with a definition?We do it case by case and we think about it carefully. We're small enough for that to work.

Doing anything else is really just erecting a screen for our legislative nakedness. We make rules so we can point at them and go 'the rules say', when actually it's us. If we don't make firm rules, we have to accept the consequences (escpecially the ones to our anarchic self-perceptions) of any actions we take. And we take them as individuals, not as an amorphous mass.

(Consider: the old tradition of having one gun in a firing squad loaded with blanks, so that every soldier can imagine it wasn't he who killed the condemned...I'd require the judge and jury to do the deed, myself.)

As for 'I know it when I see it'...actually, I have far fewer objections to that than to a set of rules which cannot possibly be flexible enough to embrace the complexities of protean barbelith.
 
 
BioDynamo
08:38 / 12.03.02
Constituive power on Barbelith:

First, there is/will be use of force/power. Then, the constitution will be built to accomodate this use of power.

Tom, sure you realize that you asking this question is purely formal. Yes, it's nice of you to ask. However, you have no reason to adapt the constitution you wish to create to our (the multitudes') wishes. Of course, if we do not agree with your proposal/actions, we will certainly perform mass Exodus, leaving your site devoid of productive capability.

But if we look at the constitutient process going on, you have:

a) closed the borders to newcomers as a means of self-defence against unwanted material, affecting the freedom to post of those without a current Suit negatively.

b) closed off/kicked out unwanted individuals.

The constitution that is created will by necessity legitimate these actions. Write it accordingly.

Note: this is not a value statement, I'm just trying to describe what happens in communities/societies in which power is exercised. I'm happy to see the Knodge gone. I'm also happy to be privileged in that I'm able to post this.

So: thank you, Tom, for running the show here. If I wasn't happy with it, I wouldn't be here.

As for how constitutions in de-facto dictatorships (no separation into a web of counterpowers, Tom having absolute final say) look, well, I don't know. Let's have fun finding out?

Oops. You are talking about a Bill of Rights. No constitution. Silly me... right?
 
 
Sax
08:38 / 12.03.02
Verily, we are the People's Front of Judea; too busy holding policy meetings to actually stage a real revolution.

Barbelith is like TV - if you don't like it you can just switch over. Although it is a society of sorts, it isn't Society with a big S that most of us are "trapped in" and seek "freedom from".

I agree that constitutions, charters and sets of rules might be a little bit constricting for a freewheeling and constantly-evolving community such as Barbelith. Does a Bill of Rights act in the same way, or give people the parameters to act and speak confidently? It's a completely moveable feast, as far as I can see; I might make a "joke" about, say, homosexuality to someone that I might not make to another poster because I'm fairly sure it would be taken "in context" with the first poster and "out of context" with the second.

It's a case of "I know it when I see it..." again, I'm afraid. For me, certainly, at least.
 
 
Morlock - groupie for hire
10:20 / 12.03.02
BioD, you may wish to remember that most of the actions you mention were discussed before and after the fact. So though it's true that Tom holds final say simply because he controls the technology, it's not like he hasn't tried to share the power.

Any formal declaration of individual rights should be as much a definition of the limits to which these rights can be enforced, as anything else.
Tom's version is pretty good in that respect. We can at least use it as a defensible fall-back position in case of Knodge-a-likes.
 
 
bitchiekittie
14:09 / 12.03.02
wow, barbelith, what a crazy place. a place question whatever youd like! ...as long as you dont question something that I personally dont understand why anyone would bother to question it

call me nutty, but I was under the impression that questioning a subject was a good way to learn about it? or is that honor exclusively the domain of ...someone else?

Im not trying to start a fight, just pointing out that there are huge fucking differences between most of us. whats important to you might mean jackshit to me - its still disrespectful for me to go into your thread and tell you so, unless it specifically pertains to the subject. arguing within the context of the subject matter is one thing, pointing out how stupid something is for the sheer pleasure of derision is quite another

edited to add that Im not talking about a specific post here in this thread, but rather something that Ive noticed people do quite frequently
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
14:18 / 12.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Bio K9:
[QBAgreed. But what if their mind is full of racist, sexist, homophobic bullshit? And do we get to tell the "psychics" that their "warnings" are no longer wanted?

Ok. But what if their opinions are just plain STUPID? [/QB]

It's still a right against censorship. It's fair enough if someone posts an opinion that others may find offensive. It's a different matter if someone carries out abuse of another based on that opinion. There is a distinction that people here have been known to ignore. That in itself is something that should not be tolerated.

Also I'd like to enter a proposition that questions regarding a subject should not automatically be taken with negative connotations and statements should be treated in the same manner when presented with a significant ambiguity.

I know that these are handy debating tools and I've often seen them used to take a higher ground on a subject. However within the course of a debate are the opportunities for education. These opportunities are not properly exercised and thus frequently missed with negative assumption practices which lead to defence and shitstorms.

I will freely admit my complete ignorance on a vast majority of the subjects that are discussed here. I honestly cannot think of one subject where I know even half of what anyone else here knows and sometimes I try to learn. Some of the time I can wait for parts to be covered by others but on other occasions it proves clear that asking questions is the only way to cover a particular issue.

I know that it's been said many times that there is no obligation to educate but in contrast to that there have been many times that it is stated that ignorance is no defence. In a personal sense I feel that there is an obligation to educate. It develops us as people and as a society. Taking the opportunity to enter an intellectual smackdown is counterproductive.

I know that what I have said here is at a best foolish but I have no better way to say it.
 
 
bitchiekittie
14:55 / 12.03.02
something else that needs to be practiced (this is one that Ive been *very* guilty of, and am trying to work on now) is that stapping-back-and-taking-a-deep-breath time. its often small misunderstandings which end up being big fights, and I think most of us (yes, even ultra-snippy me) are capable of getting along better, having more contructive arguments, if we all gave ourselves that extra moment or two

and I think we all deserve that courtesy
 
 
bio k9
15:23 / 12.03.02
Oh, shut up.

Bitch.
 
 
bitchiekittie
15:30 / 12.03.02
was going to post "your mama", but instead stepped back. took a breath

decided that maybe you have a good point, and I should, indeed, just shut up. and I am, in fact, a bitch (it says it right there, it cant be wrong, can it?). could think of nothing to say to concur without seeming to take the piss so decided that silence was the best way in which to agree

decided that perhaps bio was crying out for attention, and that my ignoring his plea would only serve to exacerbate the problem.

realized that I know so little about bio, that perhaps he has all the attention he needs and is only greedy for more, and to feed him would bring disastrous results. like bloating. no response then

then I realized I was wrong:

your mama
 
 
bio k9
15:35 / 12.03.02
It's fair enough if someone posts an opinion that others may find offensive. It's a different matter if someone carries out abuse of another based on that opinion. There is a distinction that people here have been known to ignore. That in itself is something that should not be tolerated.

Well, that was sort of my point. If someone holds the opinion, based on their personal experiance, that "all women are bitches" should we respect that opinion or is the act of voicing that opinion an abuse of others in itself? And who gets to decide?

I may not have been clear in my earlier posts but I agree with Nick, these sort of things should be handled on an individual basis.

And I was only joking, bitchiekittie.
 
 
bio k9
15:36 / 12.03.02
huggles?
 
 
bitchiekittie
15:40 / 12.03.02
I was joking as well, I simply couldnt resist.

sorry for the thread rot
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
15:48 / 12.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Bio K9:
should we respect that opinion or is the act of voicing that opinion an abuse of others in itself? And who gets to decide?

A good point. I would be more inclined to say that respecting the opinion isn't required if you object to it. However in the whole discussion/debate arena it is important to respect the person voicing the opinion provided that they voice it as part of discussion/debate and not as an act of abuse. In this I see two detractors from contructive debate. The first would be an act of agression or abuse (see trolling threads) as opposed to opinion and justification. I know that agression is poor word use but it best encompasses what I envision as part of the trolling process and can't think of a more suitable alternative. The second detractor is an absence of respect for your opponent or opposition within the discussion. Without respect there is a fallability of estimation.

There is division between opinion and expression but there is also division between person and opinion. Such divisions should be observed if you seek to alter the view of another through education.
 
 
bio k9
15:53 / 12.03.02
sorry for the thread rot

I'm not sure how rotten it is exactly. I think it may actually illustrate a point. Point being, the context and the people doing the talking and listining are just as important, if not moreso, than whats actually being said. Hense, what is deemed offensive must be handled on an individual basis.
 
 
bitchiekittie
16:02 / 12.03.02
also illustrates how very badly things can potentially get from a little joke or miscommunication - I could have gotten very hurt by your response, you could have gotten very angry from mine. it could have turned into something very ugly, with no initial negative intent. which doesnt make either response inappropriate or wrong. so how can we diffuse communication problems before they become problems? its impossible to thoroughly negate the habit of making assumptions - without vocal tone or body language there is no other way to read intent.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
16:05 / 12.03.02
quote:Originally posted by Tom Coates:
[QB]1) Everyone should have the right to speak their mind.
2) Everyone should have the right to have their opinions taken seriously and respected.
3) Everyone should have the right to exist on the board without experiencing harrassment or vindictive abuse - with harrassment or vindictive abuse being defined by the feelings of the injured party if it is in agreement with the largest part of the board.
4) Everyone should have the right to post to a board free of commercial spam, empty posts, trolling or an excess of off-topic discussion.

We then say that people who infringe other peoples rights 2, 3 or 4 above must consider that they may forfeit their right to #1

I would then suggest a link to an article which would contain clarifications and addenda for the bill of rights that Tom's outlined above.

Here is my take on what such an article might say.
------------------------------------------------------
These rights confer responsibilities. This is a pro-tolerance environment, so if "speaking your mind" means repeatedly expressing bigoted and offensive veiws, refusing to respect any opinion that you don't happen to share, or harrassing other posters, then you are infringing the rights of other people on the board and it is strongly advised that you go and post somewhere else.


"But I was only joking!"

Be aware that what you think of as acceptable may not be acceptable to others. If you genuinely don't understand why a post is being construed as offensive, then ask what is wrong. If you feel that a comment has been taken the wrong way, then offer a clarification. (Tip: a little courtesy will go a long way here.)


Adult material

Be aware that some people may find certain images offensive. If you link to a site that contains adult material, for example, then it's best to include a warning with the link. This is particularly important in the case of pornographic material- not only does it provoke a strong reaction but it might cost someone their job if they happen to veiw it at work. For this reason, it's not a good idea to post images of this kind directly onto the board.


"Trolling"

Trolling is a term borrowed from the angling world. It means drawing a baited line through the water and waiting for a nibble. On this board, as elsewhere on the net,it's used to refer to an individual who makes contentious posts in purely in order to get attention. This is not acceptable behavior.


Spam

Please don't post the same thread in several forums. It's not neccessary, it wastes bandwidth, and annoys other board users. If you're not sure where something should go, then consult the moderators or post your thread in the Conversation. It can be moved later on.

Commercial spam is unacceptable.


Technical Hitches

From time to time the board experiences technical difficulties. These can include problems with veiwing or posting, or certain threads disappearing. In extreme circumstances a fiction suit (your alias or nick) can become corrupted. A common response to this is to assume that you've been deliberately locked out of a thread or out of the board. This is unlikely to be the case and the situation will usually be resolved within a day or so.

Do not react to problems like this by sending hatemail to the moderators and/or the administrator. This is rude, foolish and unneccessary.


In closing

Bear in mind that Barbelith is a non-profit site which means that you are not a consumer.

You are not purchasing goods or services; you do not employ the moderators or the administrator. here- you're a part of the action. If you're dissatified with the content, start the kind of thread you'd like to read. Make suggestions. Contribute. Participate.


Okay, now you're probably starting to feel a little put-upon. Don't panic. There are far more things you can do on Barbelith than things that you can't. Now get out there and show us what you've got!
-----------------------------------------------------

I'm sure some people will have criticisms to make on the above piece, and I would like to make it quite clear that their sisters are all hanging round King's Cross station in their underwear.
 
 
pointless and uncalled for
16:09 / 12.03.02
Sounds fairly good so far.

I'd like an ammendment that states that if a person enquires as to the nature of the offense then it should not be responded to with invective and lambasting.
 
 
Less searchable M0rd4nt
16:11 / 12.03.02
quote:Originally posted by H:
I'd like an ammendment that states that if a person enquires as to the nature of the offense then it should not be responded to with invective and lambasting.

Yeah, but only if their enquiry is genuine and not a big "WHAT THE FUCK IS YOUR PROBLEM YOU BUNCH OF (insert slur here)S" rant.
 
  

Page: (1)2

 
  
Add Your Reply