Posted by Lou Pilder on August 15, 2006, at 8:48:12
In reply to Re: Lou's views » Lou Pilder, posted by Dr. Bob on August 15, 2006, at 3:56:14
DR. Hsiung,
You wrote,[...about rules in general...not limited..]
Your rule of 3 for those requesting that you write a determination as to if a statement is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum says that I can not email you my request if the request concerns what a member posted and that member is in the catagory of having on the record over the years 3 other posts that involve other requests for a determination from me as to if something that was posted by the poster is acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of the forum, and you determined, that in your thinking, those 3 were acceptable. This, then , rules out my emailing or posting my request to you the url involved for those members, does it not?
This means that if there is a post by one of those members that could have the potnetial to arrouse antisemitic feelings,or accuse Jews of killing Christ or defame me, that I will be expelled from the forum if I email you asking that you look at the post and tell me what your thinking is about it, right? The post also can not be posted by anyone to request that you make a determination about the acceptability of it.
Then does this not close those doors to me to ask you to look at the post to make a determination about it?
When I ask you to make a determination, I have a proper foundation to do so, do I not? (prima facie)
You see, when I requet for your determination it is because at first looking at the statement in question there is something that can be seen that needs to be clarified as to if it is acceptable or not and I am asking for you to write your determination of that, because I do not know what your thinking is. The fact that your thinking is whatever it may be, I do not think that I, or anyone else, should be sanctioned for not knowing what your thinking is and asking you to reveal such. That is why I make the request.
If there is a proper foundation for the request, that alone is suffitiant in any U.S. jurisdiction to request a determination for acceptability.
So on it's face, a statement could be thought by one to be unacceptable and a request for a determination is not uncivil in any U.S. jurisdiction. In fact, it is very supportive, for in all U.S. jurisdictions, the laws or rules welcome debate. There is due-process afforded to all. Your not allowing me to ask you on the basis that your thinking was that 3 other statements from the same person you determined were acceptable, does not address the new request because it would be junping to a conclusion, would it not, to conclude ahead of time that the statement was in your thinking acceptable? I do not feel comfortable with your writing that your past decisions affect future results. If there is on its face a potential for a statement to arrouse antisemitic feelings, then what your thinking is does not change that, but just allows the statement or not. The potential for others to see what I see is still there, and if I can see it, so could others. The fact that you see it differently, does not mean that others can not see it as it is and is not your rule to not post what could lead {others} to feel accused or put down, not what could lead you to feel accused or put down, am I correct?
The posting of quotes that have been used for 2000 years by antisemites to justify their murder of Jewish children are either acceptable or not in relation to the guidlines of your forum. If I ask you your thinking as to if those statemnts are accptable or not, if your answer is that they are acceptable, does not your saying that they are acceptable only say that they are acceptable to you, not to me or others?
But there is my great fear that others here could think that if you say that those statements are acceptable by you, by the nature that you are unwilling to reply at all as to if they are acceptable or not, that the potential for others to think that those statemnt ar civil and supportive causes me great pain.
There are a great number of posts on the forum left unaddressed by you that I think has the potential to foster defamation toward Jews and me as a Jew on the forum and I am asking that you retract your rule that prohibits me from emailing you those so that you sanction each and every one of those as I send them to you so that those statements that foster the hate of 2000 years toward the Jews do not get your endorsement by the nature that others could think that because they are left unsanctioned.
Lou Pilder
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:676011
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/admin/20060802/msgs/676625.html