main
side
curve
  1. In Memory of LAJ_FETT: Please share your remembrances and condolences HERE

Going Icon-less and changing sigs to support the Mods...

Discussion in 'Communications' started by kreleia, Feb 27, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. darth_paul

    darth_paul Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 24, 2000
    ohpelia, there is a big distinction between the Ohio case and this case. In the Ohio case, it had become a matter of state law that campaign literature had to include the distributor's address. The Supreme Court very rightly saw that this was not a reasonable, constitutional law and overturned it. This is a vastly different case, because this is a privately-owned message board. No laws apply, only a company policy that like it or not the company is fully entitled to make.

    You don't have free speech in the workplace anyway.

    -Paul
     
  2. SHB-JR

    SHB-JR Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Aug 18, 2000
    Hmm, what a mess...

    BTW I've never had an icon, even in my original login back in 99', feels weird with so many people icon less too. Used to be my silent protest about stuff.
    How am I supposed to assurt my individuality now!?! ;)

    SHB JR

    Supporting the principle of a place we can *all* feel comfortable in
     
  3. Ton_G

    Ton_G Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Aug 15, 2002
    Wow...17 pages.

    This growing.
     
  4. Iwishiwasajedi

    Iwishiwasajedi Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Mar 24, 2002
    I've been without mine since friday night, but I fogot to post here. I am also sigless, but maybe I should fill a line with something.
     
  5. Kohrath

    Kohrath Jedi Youngling star 2

    Registered:
    Jan 1, 2004
    Mine is removed to..
    Support the mods, not Philip Wise
     
  6. beezel26

    beezel26 Jedi Master star 7

    Registered:
    May 11, 2003
    Since their was no icon to support the mods I believe this one does the whole situation justice.
     
  7. R2D35

    R2D35 Jedi Padawan star 4

    Registered:
    Nov 20, 2002
    As my sig says it all... I support the mods and their right to privacy... They do not need to give personal info if they don't want to .... Especially if it is not secure...
     
  8. GIMER

    GIMER Manager Emeritus star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA

    Registered:
    Nov 15, 2000
    I'm in.
     
  9. poor yorick

    poor yorick Ex-Mod star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Jun 25, 2002
    darth_paul wrote: No laws apply, only a company policy that like it or not the company is fully entitled to make.

    Constitutional law applies on private property too, which is why, for instance, landlords can't discriminate against tenants on the basis of race. First Amendment freedoms can only be limited if there is a compelling state interest to do so. There just isn't any such interest here.




     
  10. bowieslefteye

    bowieslefteye Jedi Master star 4

    Registered:
    Feb 11, 2003
    i changed my sig..see.

    ~~M_J supports the mods.
     
  11. Eeth-my-Koth

    Eeth-my-Koth Jedi Grand Master star 9

    Registered:
    May 25, 2001
    Sapient was the best moderator in the forums, and a cunning poster. And he was a good friend. Which reminds me...

    This place will suck donkey nads without him.
     
  12. Lord_NoONE

    Lord_NoONE Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Dec 17, 2001
    While I find his choice of words, well, interesting. I agree with Eeth-my-Koth! Without DS this place will be < pooh
     
  13. Darth-Floyd

    Darth-Floyd Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Apr 5, 2003
    Maybe Sape ain´t Moderating anymore, but that don´t stop him from posting, more than 100 post for today (so far) ;)
     
  14. darth_paul

    darth_paul Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Apr 24, 2000
    Constitutional law applies on private property too, which is why, for instance, landlords can't discriminate against tenants on the basis of race. First Amendment freedoms can only be limited if there is a compelling state interest to do so. There just isn't any such interest here.
    Are you sure? I am fairly confident that the inability of business owners to discriminate on the basis of race is more a child of the (very unconstitutional) Civil Rights Act of 1960 than of the Constitution itself.

    Remember, business owners can impose limits or regulations on employee speech, as well as mandate dress codes. Furthermore, you are very entitled to kick somebody off your private property if he are exercising his right to free speech and you don't approve of the message. And I'm fairly sure that the owners of private property are legally able to limit their guests' second amendment rights, though I'm not completely positive on that one.

    At any rate, I am very sure that Philip Wise is well within his legal rights (so long as none of the moderators are 13 or under, in which case they were not legally permitted to register a forum account anyway). I just strongly disagree with his decision and his handling of the situation.

    -Paul
     
  15. ObiJuanJabroni

    ObiJuanJabroni Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Oct 7, 2002
    COunt me in!!!!!!! On another note. How much does WIse want for this site?? I will chip in!
     
  16. jacemathem

    jacemathem Jedi Master star 5

    Registered:
    Oct 3, 2003
    I agree with beezel, this is the most appropriate icon right now.
    <--
     
  17. poor yorick

    poor yorick Ex-Mod star 6 VIP - Former Mod/RSA VIP - Game Host

    Registered:
    Jun 25, 2002
    darth_paul wrote:

    Are you sure? I am fairly confident that the inability of business owners to discriminate on the basis of race is more a child of the (very unconstitutional) Civil Rights Act of 1960 than of the Constitution itself.

    You might be thinking of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which was based on the commerce clause in the Constitution. This was indeed a bass-ackwards way of going about it. Whether or not it was actually unconstitutional depends on who you think gets to define constitutionality. So far, the Supreme Court has been okay with it.

    Remember, business owners can impose limits or regulations on employee speech, as well as mandate dress codes.

    Well . . . Constitutional rights are a delicate balance between "freedom to" and "freedom from." Business owners wouldn't get very far if they weren't guaranteed a "freedom from" having to retain obnoxious, badly-dressed employees. Business is pretty important to our country, so in some cases that "freedom from" trumps the individual's "freedom to" wear and say whatever he wants.

    Also, different activities enjoy different levels of protection. The "right" to wear cutoffs and flip-flops to work isn't given as much weight as the right to wear a yarmulke or burka to work, for instance.

    The deal is that you have to show a compelling state interest before you limit someone's Constitutional rights. In other words, the limit has to do more good than harm. We're not allowed to post porn on the JC because our society says that porn is bad for minors. The "freedom to" post porn isn't considered as important as kids' "freedom from" an X-rated environment. (For what it's worth, you could probably make a decent case that the 3-thread-a-day rule is unconstitutional, since the "freedom to" express one's thoughts is given more weight in our society than the "freedom from" having to read 10 threads a day about some guy's pocket lint, but be that as it may. I'm leaving that fight for someone else.)

    Anyway . . . the rights to privacy and expression, which find a common point in the right to anonymous speech, are a pretty big deal. You'd need to find a significant reason before you'd be justified in limiting them. "Somebody might post something bad sometime, and then I couldn't call them on the phone to yell at them" doesn't really cut it as a compelling interest.
     
  18. Deebz

    Deebz Jedi Youngling

    Registered:
    Feb 1, 2004
    I'm down with this icon and sig! Power to the mods!
     
  19. DarthVegas

    DarthVegas Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 18, 2000
    I'm using classic Obi-Wan for Darth Sapient. I hope that's appropriate enough. Great mod lost.
     
  20. Dark_Lighter

    Dark_Lighter Jedi Youngling star 3

    Registered:
    Jul 2, 2003
    This may fall under the catagory of stupid question... but have they described in any way how they are going to keep acess to the personal information they want from the mods restricted? I mean, unless is as well gaurded as some of the govermental records, a hacker could easily get a hold of it. Then you've got hackers, posing as mods, causing worse problems.

    Or am I missing something?
     
  21. DarthVegas

    DarthVegas Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Oct 18, 2000
    Well,

    This place is just depressing now.

    I mean, it's like martial law has been instituted to TFN ever since the 3SA went private.

    I'll be at Phatooine.net for awhile.
     
  22. royalguard96

    royalguard96 Jedi Knight star 5

    Registered:
    Aug 13, 2001
    I mean, it's like martial law has been instituted to TFN

    You are more right than you know.
     
  23. Deus_Almighty

    Deus_Almighty Jedi Youngling star 1

    Registered:
    Feb 2, 2004
    Wow, I must be psychic or have ESPn or something. :)

    I made this post on 2/24/2003 in ref to the private forum thing and the state of TFN.

    "Hmmm....

    Episode III=birth of Draconian Empire
    Episode IIISA=?????????????? "



    in this thread
    http://boards.theforce.net/message.asp?topic=15015054&start=15021534
     
  24. Darth_Oracle

    Darth_Oracle Jedi Grand Master star 4

    Registered:
    Dec 6, 2000
    I'm in, obviously, but it makes little sense to remove one's icon if no one sees your post...
     
  25. Fire_Ice_Death

    Fire_Ice_Death Force Ghost star 7

    Registered:
    Feb 15, 2001
    MOD SUPPORT LINE: 1-800-385-7445


    Support the mods! If you don't get the joke uhh...TS? ;)
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.