quote:

Originally posted by Hudson:

quote:

Originally posted by Sam U. of ILW.COM:
I received the following PM:
I was thinking for some time to make it possible for thread starters to be able to control their own thread by having the ability to remove unwanted disruptive posts. In fact, I think this should solve the problem of moderating the board to some degree, as board participants would take care of the problematic posts on their own (limited only to their own threads).

My response:
This is truly an innovative idea, one I had not before thought of. I am forwarding this to our tech guru for consideration. However, based on his past feedback for me, I expect to hear from him that this cannot be done now, but is being put in the wishlist for the upgrade coming later this year. Will keep everyone updated.

Another PM point:
I hope you don't share any private information such as IP addresses and don't disclose them to third parties. I would like to receive your confirmation on this, whenever you have the time to respond. I'd like to say that you are doing a good job with moderating the board by just being present and responsive to the community. Keep it up, and thank you Sam.

My response:
IP addresses etc are investigated by me only when necessary to enforce the board's rules. They are never disclosed to third parties (we would cooperate with a warrant or law enforcement request if appropriate, OTOH if we believe the cause unfounded, we may ask for a court to compel us before cooperating). And thanks for the kind words for me!

Sam,
This is a bad idea. Who is to say which board members are disruptive and which ones are not. Will it be based on political idealogy or will it be based on popularity contests? Doing so will cause the forum to be divided into two camps: for or against, pro and ani, left and right, etc. it will come down to lack of discussion, lack of exchange of ideas, and lack of public discourse. Eventually, you will be held responsible and you will not please anyone. I urge you not to consider this. It is neither innovative nor progressive.

You rejected my post for additional rules to be added when posting. This too should also be rejected for the same reason you gave me. It you msut, add additional posting rules of what is considered a disruptive post and what is not considered a disruptive post beyond the foul language aspect. Perhaps part of foul language shold also include condescending remarks or narcissistic political images of Presidential candidates or the President. I do not believe this is part of the political speech idea that our forefathers intended to have.

Hudson: I assume you are referring to my first point, not the second one concerning IP addresses. If so, thanks for your response. I appreciate your point of view. At this point, all we are doing is checking the technical feasibility. That's a long way off from doing anything. One fundamental point that this brings up is the difference between a blog and a discussion board. Most of the complainants appear to want blog-like features for the discussion board. As you know, ILW.COM does host three blogs (and we hope to add more in the coming years). However, this forum is a discussion board, not a blog. There is a kind of democracy here that is missing in blogs. Some folks dont like that, and that's okay. The activity on the board shows that enough people like the discussion board format for ILW.COM to continue to support it. - Sam.

This is an answer to questions raised in this thread: http://discuss.ilw.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=691603441&f=902603441&m=69910971441

quote:

Originally posted by juwil43:
so glad you niggas are proud to be here, from slavery cause obama and his ***** wife arent.america deosnt want a black muslim nigga to be president.go mccain for president. curse all you want you all are beneath me.hahahhahahhahahahhahahhahah ****ers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Is this racist? - Yes
Is this hate speech? - See below
Is this a violation of our rules? - No

The #1 complaint we have had historically on this board has been speech offensive to the complainant. The offense taken has usually been that the speech was racist. Often, the speech in question was labelled "hate speech". Please take a look at the Wikipedia entry on hate speech:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech
especially the parts "Arguments for laws controlling or prohibiting hate speech", "Arguments against legal restrictions" and "Differing concepts of what is offensive".
I am well aware that this discussion board is the private property of ILW.COM, and that we can make up our own mind about what is and is not permissible here. However, I think that reading the aforementioned three parts is helpful in understanding the issues involved.

As I have said many times, racist speech is not forbidden on this board. Currently, the two big complainants (on opposing sides, naturally) have each accused the other of racist speech in numerous content violations reported to me.

Shoud racist speech be forbidden in another question entirely. There would be two hurdles to cross before we could impose a rule forbidding racist speech. (1) the minor one would be to have in place volunteer moderation for this board, something I am working towards (2) the major one would be the points mentioned in parts of the wikipedia article, viz., (a) defining what is offensive, while dealing with differing concepts of what is offensive (b) fairness in dealing with groups - see the example about hip-hop artists vs. white supremacists in the Wikipedia article.

My guess is this ruling will open up a whole new can of worms.

For what it's worth, the use of racial slurs is much more offensive than foul language any day of the week.

So let's review, racism is tolerated in this forum. What?

Well, that could very well imply that all of us who signed up here thinking this was just about immigration law are now suddenly, and without our consent, associated with a place that seems to endorse racism.

I read the terms of use myself carefully before signing up, and there was no indication that this place supported, endorsed or tolerated despicable conduct such as racism. But apparently it does, what surprise, a disappointment to all of us who thought this was a serious place to talk about serious matters.

Time for all of us to rethink our membership.

Replying to a question posted on this thread: http://discuss.ilw.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=691603441&f=902603441&m=34510191441

quote:

Originally posted by Michaelthegreat:
1. What is ILW's budget?
2. How many employees does ILW have?
3. What is ILW's source of income?
4. What is you salary and webmasters salary?
5. What is your and webmasters loacation?
6. What is your immigration background?
7. Is ILW affilliated with the Church of Scientology?

ILW.COM is located in mid-town Manhattan. We are a team of 6 people. About 90% of our revenue comes from immigration lawyers. We offer books, seminars, workshops, and advertising to immigration lawyers. You can also see the info on our About Us page at: http://discuss.ilw.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=691603441&f=902603441&m=34510191441 Trust this helps.

quote:

Originally posted by Houston:
So let's review, racism is tolerated in this forum. What?

Well, that could very well imply that all of us who signed up here thinking this was just about immigration law are now suddenly, and without our consent, associated with a place that seems to endorse racism.

I read the terms of use myself carefully before signing up, and there was no indication that this place supported, endorsed or tolerated despicable conduct such as racism. But apparently it does, what surprise, a disappointment to all of us who thought this was a serious place to talk about serious matters.

Time for all of us to rethink our membership.

This is a discussion board about immigration related matters. Discussion on immigration law is encouraged, as we are the premier immigration law website. We neither support or endorse racism.

As to whether racist speech on the discussion board is tolerated, please bear in mind that the vast majority of the complainants on this board over the last many years have consistently accused their opponents of being racist. As I said before:

quote:

Shoud racist speech be forbidden is another question entirely. There would be two hurdles to cross before we could impose a rule forbidding racist speech. (1) the minor one would be to have in place volunteer moderation for this board, something I am working towards (2) the major one would be the points mentioned in parts of the wikipedia article, viz., (a) defining what is offensive, while dealing with differing concepts of what is offensive (b) fairness in dealing with groups - see the example about hip-hop artists vs. white supremacists in the Wikipedia article.

Yes, this is a serious board on a serious topic. However, one cannot force seriousness down the throats of the members. I am working toward the day when there is volunteer moderation of this board, thus at least opening up the possibility of deleting racist speech, presuming anyone here can come up with a definition. Speaking of which, I encourage everyone to discuss what ought to be the proper definition of racist speech. As you can see from the wikipedia entry which I linked to above http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech there have consistently been problems in such a definition due to the differing concepts of what is offensive.

Just in case anyone here had any doubt about it - my personal opinion of Juwil43's post is that it is terrible, and I would not shake Juwil43's hand. He is a horrible racist (in my opinion) and I could not stand having such a person even among my acquaintances. I would in my personal life not have anything to do with such a person.

However, I have to enforce our rules as they are written. Our rules are posted right here: http://discuss.ilw.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/902603441/m/78310062631 If anyone wants to suggest any amendment to the rules, please go right ahead.

Also bear in mind that (quoting a play I once heard) "the trouble with being on the side of the right is that one has the most questionable allies".

Houston, I would urge you to stay on. Take a look at the board as a whole, and the community as a whole. Do not let your opinion be swayed by one errant post or one troubled poster.

quote:

If anyone wants to suggest any amendment to the rules, please go right ahead.

I would suggest adding a clause that forbids hate speech of any kind, including racial slurs.

You said that the post was "racist" and also said that it was not "a violation of the rules".

How can you say this place is not endorsing racism when racism itself appears to be "tolerated" by the rules you've set?

If you use the "N" word in front of a judge you'll be found in contempt of Court. Profane language is not required to properly convey a message, therefore restrictions on profanity are not a violation of the First Amendment.

Respect for others is a necessity if this is to become truly a serious place to discuss serious matters, and you, as moderator, should force users to engage respectfully in the debate with the proper degree of courtesy towards others. Isn't that what your very own terms of use seem to suggest?

There's nothing wrong in enforcing courtesy and respect during the debate, that's what every Court in this nation does, clearly not a violation of the Bill of Rights.

quote:

Originally posted by Houston:
... Time for all of us to rethink our membership.

The same idea, my friend, was playing on my mind before bed last night.

quote:

quote:
Originally posted by Houston:
... Time for all of us to rethink our membership.


The same idea, my friend, was playing on my mind before bed last night.

Hear hear!



When are we starting ILW boycott?

quote:

Originally posted by Sam U. of ILW.COM:
Replying to a question posted on this thread: http://discuss.ilw.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=691603441&f=902603441&m=34510191441

quote:

Originally posted by Michaelthegreat:
1. What is ILW's budget?
2. How many employees does ILW have?
3. What is ILW's source of income?
4. What is you salary and webmasters salary?
5. What is your and webmasters loacation?
6. What is your immigration background?
7. Is ILW affilliated with the Church of Scientology?

ILW.COM is located in mid-town Manhattan. We are a team of 6 people. About 90% of our revenue comes from immigration lawyers. We offer books, seminars, workshops, and advertising to immigration lawyers. You can also see the info on our About Us page at: http://discuss.ilw.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=691603441&f=902603441&m=34510191441 Trust this helps.

You did not answer my question about your salary. It takes 6 people to run this fiasco? I live on Long Island; can I come visit?????

With a quote like yours Michael, I think they will need to take a Protective order against you.

Sam...poor taste or not, do you enjoy reading that quote over and over again? I guess you do.

Hi RoughN,

I have read some of your posts here and have seen how you've helped lots of people with questions about immigration...

Yes Sprint he enjoys reading it as it appears..Sam you make me sick!!!

Maybe I can get a job working for them. How cool would that be? Hey Sam, can I send you my resume?? What about the visit? I will bring coffee and ****ins.

M U F F I N S is a dirty word?????????

LOL at the M word lol

I think Sam is probably trying to obtain that restraining order as we speak

Sam, I hope as soon as we get these present issues with Beverly behind us you can then proceed to implement some clear and succinct rules comparable to other sites. You're spending time dealing with all this feedback and in the future when you have concise rules it will then take a lot of the work load off of you as a moderator because it will be so very simplified. It will be simpler than what it is now. It's not that difficult to find what other sites use as definitions for terminolgy. Let yourself be the judge and people will be cautious of what they say because you will be the determing factor since you own this board. I can't see