Posted by caraher on March 9, 2006, at 8:01:56
In reply to Re: blocked for 2 weeks » teejay, posted by Dr. Bob on March 8, 2006, at 21:00:31
> > In my opinion, it would be helpful if your civility rules were adapted so they didnt include people who are outside the babble community.
>
> The issue isn't really Bush himself, it's people here who support him.I understand and fully expected this explanation. But anyone who might be triggered by goofy Canary Islands wordplay or exposure to the existence of criticism of a government *posted to the politics board* has no business reading a board devoted to politics! And can easily avoid the distress by not doing so.
If someone were posting criticisms of the US president on Social or some other board I'd be 100% behind these PBC/PBS warnings. Those who might be sensitive about criticism (or worse) of people or causes they believe in might be blindsided if such posts appeared elsewhere. But this is *Politics*! I don't believe for a moment that "civility" and politics are incompatable; but no ordinary person's understanding of "civility" extends so far as barring light-hearted humor or fact-based criticism of political leaders in a forum where the topic is understood by all who enter to be *POLITICS*.
By the way - and I'm not being flippant - I feel very disturbed emotionally by the fact that the minority of Americans that polls say approve of President Bush's performance is as large as it is. Yet the very last thing I'd find reasonable would be to be "protected" from feeling put down or oppressed by pro-Bush posts on a *POLITICS* board, even given that it exists under the overall umbrella of a site with "civility" rules to protect people from emotional triggers. Yet it seems that evenhanded application of the civility rules, as defined by the way they seem to be applied to protect Bush supporters, might demand this.
Here's a hypothetical (and bear in mind, I'm *NOT* equating anyone to a Saddam or his party, but simply exploring what the limits to discourse are). If this were a pre-2003 and Babble had a large number or Iraqi participants would a post saying Saddam had gassed his own citizens draw a PBS/PBS out of concern for Baathists on Babble? How about a statement that there was corruption in his government? How about a statement that the war on Kuwait was a mistake? Or a statement that Hussein should destroy any WMDs and submit to unfettered UN inspections to certify the dismantling of such weapons programs?
While I know that follow-ups are supposed to be redirected to Admin, I cannot help but see this as a political issue as well as a Babble administrative issue.
poster:caraher
thread:617262
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/poli/20060304/msgs/617856.html