[quote="jt512"]
Again, that's pretty much what I said. You mentioned accrual. When we contribute efforts to the site, value to the owners of the site accrues. Fairness suggests that those who are responsible for increasing the value of the site share proportionately in the value accrued. I think what it comes down to is an inherent conflict between this website being a privately held for-profit business, and it being run on the surface as a grassroots cooperative effort among climbers. I think the site should either be a not-for-profit entity or a cooperative. That wouldn't bar anybody from drawing a salary for programming, receiving commisions on advertising, or receiving interest on capital they've invested. But the idea of future profits going to a select few individuals, when the value has accrued from the efforts of hundreds seems really unfair.

While the title wasn't offensive, some were concerned that a filter at somebody's work might prevent them from viewing the site. It was a fair concern.

Could we just have a setting on a per user basis?

You could have three settings...

a) Anything goes...this setting wouldn't censor anything at all

b) Word filter....this could be the default setting where it changes "words deemed offensive" to something silly

c) Nothing goes....this setting would be for the user that wants a white washed view of the world. The mormons and christians could nominate threads, routes, users, etc that are deemed "not good for society" and those items would never even show up on your screen. Kinda like a killfile run by the church.

With this system the control would be with the user who would decide what is good for him to see (at home or work) and what isn't. Instead of some ego driven puritanical moderator.

Bryan

I offered up that if we let it stand, we would 100% see an escalation of this "type" of title. Sure enough, Flamer posted a thread called Unprotected Sex in a Red Rock Bath and it pretty much confirmed exactly what was said the fear was in the 1st place.

I see this issue as Give an inch, Take a mile and drkodos and flamer played the roles to facilitate it. If let stand, what would be your next title Dr (I probably should be afraid to ask)?

Of our user base, what is the % of them which complain about our rules and practices Dr? You seemed to think that if less than 50% complains than it should be fine. Well lets apply that to the [TOS] and your stance. Get moving because you have a lot of e-sigs to gather.

We, the undersigned, feel that creativity and expression on the forums is being stifled by excessive moderation. We demand a system that gives users control over what they choose to read, rather than trying to control what others may choose to write.

Signed:

[*:9fbe61a8da]squish

Now I started the 1st post about the title in the Mod and Admin Forum. I asked if this is something we wanted to see on the front page.

Is free thought THAT dangerous?

DMT

Pity and pathos are the only feelings I attach to these myopic loosers that not only bring climbing down to their level, must also chip away at other people's creativity.

YOU???? Why in gawds name do YOU care????

It is to people such as this guy, and many here. They really want us to all walk lock-step.

It is clear there is not much of a life outside these boards for these types.

Pity and pathos are the only feelings I attach to these myopic loosers that not only bring climbing down to their level, must also chip away at other people's creativity.

....I would like to know why you have to make it your business to censor the words of others. What is it that's in you, personally, that makes you want to control people like this?

Is free thought THAT dangerous?

DMT

look who's talking :lol: :?

Why try to hide in some small font? Why are you scared to be wrong in a larger font?

You know not of what you speak so quietly of.

If you are going to speak so softly, then I suggest you carry a larger stick.

You think you know my life? Guess again, girl.

And the next guess will probably be as banal as your first.

The answer is obvious :roll:

If rough hadn't started it someone else would have..myself included

c) i was your tool two days ago - today's not your day, sorry.

awwww...you didn't hear it...sorry
i used smaller font size for the only reason...that it wasn't a part of the conversation here...hijacking that is

That's exactly what i'm talking about...YOU don't know anything of anyone else's life either... :wink:

to quote you: It is clear there is not much of a life outside these boards for these types.

Well again it is clear for me that there is not much of a life outside of these boards for you

I'm just using your own words...


Heard that..or do i have to use LARGER font size? :roll:

I have never in my life stuck my nose on someone else's business and told them how they must communicate. Nor would I choose to censor, or try to find ways to do so.

From reading this thread, I would have to disagree with you. Actually, you seem to be the man yelling fire in the crowed movie theather in this case.