![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Returning to the theme of the liberal notion of debate, here's one more case study.
Recently![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
insomnia, who was working for LJ in the past and moderates community ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-community.gif)
sfbayarea, posted some political comments expressing his disagreement with the fact that Mormon church participates in California's political process, specifically Proposition 8 (gay marriage) and promoting a petition published on the site with the URL "mormonsstoleourrights.com" (yes, that's "Mormons stole our rights").
I tried to talk to him and express the opinion that religious people have the right to influence politics in the same way as other people do, and the fact that some organization is called "church" should not automatically mean its members are disqualified from having political opinions or publicizing them. Nothing outrageous, right? That led to me being promptly banned from the community by the moderator, after the second comment - without any warning, explanation or reason given.
Note that there were no insults traded, heated discussion or anything like that - some polite exchange of ideas, and then just in the middle of discussion, trying to answer his comment, I discover I am banned. Classy, right?
I guess that's one more example of how such people understand the notion of discussion - "my way or the highway". The mere fact that somebody dares to disagree with them is absolutely intolerable for them.
The funny addition is that the same person is obviously very proud of his open-mindedness and rationality (see his user profile). That apparently does not include being open to any disagreement or rational discussion, if only he can help it.
Recently
insomnia, who was working for LJ in the past and moderates community sfbayarea, posted some political comments expressing his disagreement with the fact that Mormon church participates in California's political process, specifically Proposition 8 (gay marriage) and promoting a petition published on the site with the URL "mormonsstoleourrights.com" (yes, that's "Mormons stole our rights").I tried to talk to him and express the opinion that religious people have the right to influence politics in the same way as other people do, and the fact that some organization is called "church" should not automatically mean its members are disqualified from having political opinions or publicizing them. Nothing outrageous, right? That led to me being promptly banned from the community by the moderator, after the second comment - without any warning, explanation or reason given.
Note that there were no insults traded, heated discussion or anything like that - some polite exchange of ideas, and then just in the middle of discussion, trying to answer his comment, I discover I am banned. Classy, right?
I guess that's one more example of how such people understand the notion of discussion - "my way or the highway". The mere fact that somebody dares to disagree with them is absolutely intolerable for them.
The funny addition is that the same person is obviously very proud of his open-mindedness and rationality (see his user profile). That apparently does not include being open to any disagreement or rational discussion, if only he can help it.
Tags:
no subject
What a tool.
no subject
But that's the first time I see that moderator of big community starts banning people in mid-talk without any warning, explanation or reason given - just because they dared to say something contrary to his political views.
Pathetic...