KM8's Journal

[shadowdeath]

Yeah I agree with you.

but notice how celebrities get it off easy sometimes....

[Cetasaurus]

Wait, which part do you agree with?

[daryl1730]

I'm assuming he agrees with every part, though most specifically your main point of how context should be taken into account.

Also, I think choosing not to censor would usually be considered the more liberal option. I think one should be careful about applying double standards, though. If they're to be used at all, the criteria for lesser punishment should be specifically and objectively defined before anything happens. With regards to the censorship, though, I think it should be realized that freedom of speech has a lower priority than some other rights and laws, like one's freedom from constant harassment, or someone's right to not be deceived in a way that leads to material loss (False advertising), etc. Once all of those are taken into account, I think it's perfectly possible to make an entirely objective but still very fair system of laws regarding this topic.

For the project, maybe you could make the text into images with transparent backgrounds? Like this?

[Cetasaurus]

Aug 29, 2010 16:37:13 GMT -5 @daryl1730 said:

With regards to the censorship, though, I think it should be realized that freedom of speech has a lower priority than some other rights and laws...

Alright that's a good point. Like I said, I still feel opposed to censorship in all forms, but I'm not anymore... exactly. I don't quite know where I stand in this debate anymore - It's not fair to allow all things to be spoken freely, and like you said, this should have a lower priority than other laws. But at the same time I don't agree with censorship. The complicated thing is, what should be censored and what shouldn't be? You mention "I think one should be careful about applying double standards, though. If they're to be used at all, the criteria for lesser punishment should be specifically and objectively defined before anything happens." How can one predetermine what can't be said publicly? How can "rules" of censorship be made? I think if it's even possible it would be hard and cause controversy anyways.


And "Also, I think choosing not to censor would usually be considered the more liberal option." Really? I guess I don't know the political spectrum very well, but I always thought people who stuck firmly to the constitution were conservative? I know that's not the sole definition of conservative people but still...

I'm so confused. x.x

Oh also, that "Back" image is a good idea, how did you do that?

[daryl1730]

I think you misunderstood me a bit. The way to decide what can and can't be said seems pretty simple to say. First, allow everything. Then, deny things you universally do not want, such as false advertising and unjust harassment. Allow everything else. If you're not too certain, you can specifically allow certain things, like political speech. By no means did I mean to say that you should say stuff like "No one is allowed to deny the holocaust" (Like Germany actually does have a law against). What I meant by objective double standards was the same thing you meant when you said you'd let members of your forum who are in good standing off easy. Things like being tougher on repeat offenders, being lenient on first time offenders, etc. A lot of things could contribute to whether or not the punishment is more or less severe: Past offenses, motive, how much harm was done, how much lasting harm was done, whether or not the law is serious (Murder) or not (Littering), etc...

Both Conservatives and Liberals can stick to the constitution to the letter, and still come out with wildly different policies. It's all a matter of interpretation. The definition of Liberal and Conservative depends on what you're talking about, but in a social context, the more liberal option is usually the one that lets the people do more things, while the more conservative one is the one that allows fewer things. In this case saying no to censorship would let you say things, so it's more a liberal thing. Remember - Just because someone's conservative or liberal doesn't mean they're exclusively that. 100% liberalism would be pure anarchy, and 100% conservatism would be a pure dictatorship over the lives of the citizens. In that sense, we're all moderates.

I made the image in Google Docs (docs.google.com). There are other programs that let you make transparent images, like Photoshop and the GIMP and Paint.NET and likely a bunch of others. Of those, Photoshop is the only one that costs money.

[Cetasaurus]

Yeah everything you just explained makes a ton more sense now. Thanks for making that kind of stuff clearer for me. 8) And I guess your proposed method for censorship, a sort of elimination process it seems, would work out fine until it came to defining the "certain things" like harassment or false advertising. False advertising would be easy enough, but how does one define exactly what harassment is? Or inappropriate public content, as another example?

Oh! Thank you so much, that will be extremely useful.

[daryl1730]

I guess one could break harassment up into easier defined things: Defamation, compulsively contacting someone after they've clearly expressed to you they wish for you to stop (Assuming they aren't in your debt or something), etc.. And as for inappropriate content, like "fuck" from TV, I don't think that should be censored to begin with. Decency is a subjective quality, and one person's vulgar is another's beautiful. If you don't want your children watching it, change the channel.

Good luck

[Cetasaurus]

Haha I think I like your reasoning behind this. Also, I just realized why I had that misconception on the political spectrum. In 7th grade my teacher said conservatives would allow people to bear arms 'cause it's in the constitution, while liberals might restrict the right based on the people. Yeah, pretty conflicting with your definition. Maybe I mixed the two up or something. xP

And thanks, I'll need it. x.x

[Cetasaurus]

August 30
The first day of school went alright, but seems forgotten after much bigger news. Long story short.... well actually, in this case it'd be more like: As the result of a long story, a friend is coming to stay with me for a while. There was some problems at his place, and now we're having him over indefinitely. He might join Tales of Mystery, I have no idea. He has OCD (diagnosed by me, who has no medical background) and he hates typos so he would probably fit in with you people and your perfect grammar if it's alright with everyone ... And that is the most recent update on my life.

[killerinstinct]

XD Nice to see we're labeled as grammar nazis... But anyways! I hope your friend is doing alright, it doesn't sound good.

[daryl1730]

If it helps him out, I'm willing to volunteer myself as forum grammar dictator. Anyone holding this position would have the authority to enforce absolutely any punishment they see fit on any member for absolutely any grammatical error made.

Oh, the sacrifices I make.

[Cetasaurus]

Aug 31, 2010 4:50:54 GMT -5 killerinstinct said:

XD Nice to see we're labeled as grammar nazis...

It's a compliment. Stop the devolution of human coherency!
And thanks, I hope he's doing alright too...

[Golden Emblem]

Aug 31, 2010 16:47:56 GMT -5 @daryl1730 said:

If it helps him out, I'm willing to volunteer myself as forum grammar dictator. Anyone holding this position would have the authority to enforce absolutely any punishment they see fit on any member for absolutely any grammatical error made.

Oh, the sacrifices I make.

Hell no.

[Cetasaurus]

(Quote function won't load - my Internet access got all bad suddenly...)
But in response to Golden Emblem's comment on Daryl's idea:

XD I think it would be fun.

[shadowdeath]

SD used to be the grammar guy.

[Golden Emblem]

Aug 31, 2010 19:34:11 GMT -5 Cetasaurus said:

(Quote function won't load - my Internet access got all bad suddenly...)
But in response to Golden Emblem's comment on Daryl's idea:

XD I think it would be fun.

It wouldn't, trust me on this.

[Cetasaurus]

Aw. 8(

September 1st
Physical therapy again today. Basically I haven't gotten any better since last time.
Not much else is new. Trying to get back into the routine of school. My friend has bonded with our family dog.

[killerinstinct]

Sept 1, 2010 11:54:06 GMT -5 shadowdeath said:

SD used to be the grammar guy.

More like the grammar bitch.

[shadowdeath]

SD used to be the grammar bitch

[killerinstinct]

Daryl is sort of his apprentice.

[daryl1730]

I'm leaving again

[killerinstinct]

Aww, don't let this upset you. I mean you're the next grammar nazi, it's not that bad...

[Cetasaurus]

Aw don't leave. 8(

[Cetasaurus]

5 September 2010

Alright. We got a long weekend; no school on Monday... which is tomorrow. After that my class is leaving for 3 days starting this Wednesday. It's a backpacking trip which will be fun if my ankle doesn't give out. I already missed one of these trips 'cause of this blasted injury. }

Oh also... my friend tried to join but apparently an admin still has to approve his account or something, but what I really want to know is, why does he demand I "watch out for Daryl, he's a stalker rapist" Um... Is he actually basing this on something? I get the feeling he's joking, but he wouldn't just say that I don't think... He won't tell me what he means. 8(

So yeah. Daryl is a stalker rapist?

[daryl1730]

You've hurt my feelings. Who is this friend, and how do they know me?

[Cetasaurus]

Aw I'm sorry. 8( I don't think you're like a stalker rapist.
My friend who came to stay with us (my family) like a week ago or something. I have no idea how he knows about you.

[shadowdeath]

daryl = stalker rapist

[killerinstinct]

Account approved. And Daryl can have stalker-like behavior, but he never really did anything bad.

[Cetasaurus]

Haha I wouldn't think so. You seem pretty cool, Daryl.

[daryl1730]

Sept 6, 2010 0:04:41 GMT -5 @daryl1730 said:

Who is this friend, and how do they know me?