[Mulderator]

As most of you know, I left CivDeb going on six months ago now. I have no desire to come back as the forum has denigrated significantly since then and will only get worse with the coming Presidential elections.

However, it seems to me that most of you that are left leaning support freedom of speech and expression (at least you claim to) , yet there does not seem to be much freedom to express an opinion here anymore that is not left of center. Ironically, what I was accused of (i.e., intimidating and attacking people with a view from the left) has become the norm, except it is against those with views either in the center or from the right.

Rather than listening to me (I realize most of you will not) I ask you to consider these following two posts from what I perceive to be very respected and highly intelligent members. The first is a reply to from ComputerFix to a post where he was called derogatory name merely because he was attempting to profer another side of an opinion. Here is ComputerFix's response:

http://forums.techguy.org/showthread...54#post1527754

Originally posted by ComputerFix:
Huh?

You are the first to call me liberal leaning person since my early days with Mulder and the Padilla thread.

But then, that's my point. I am now a "Bush zombie" (no offence taken, well, some, but I know what ya mean. )

Socially, I am left. In other aspects, not so much.

I stuck around because I thought you noticed a different change of opinion, but I guess not. Actually, my feverent support of Bush has dropped considerably. Six months ago, he had my vote and support, hands down. Today, he does not. I thought you may have picked up on the sub-text in some of what I write.

A bit ago, DN made a comment that resonated with me. He said he was a contrarian (or being one at that point in time, don't remember wich). That is how I now feel around here. I stand by what I said. This is a Bush bash forum now. I laughed when LAN went on his "anti Kerry" campaign. I saw a bigger point behind it. Really got some people going. Well, now they know how it feels. At this point, the only way for there to ever be discussion about anything is to be contrary, and there is hardly anyone left here who will post against an "admin critique" post. That's too bad, because thru opposing views can come some learning.

Look at the above example. If I had just come in here and nodded my head like a lemming, following the crowd, flyeater would still never have known that there were previous indications of 9/11 like plots, discovered before Bush. Do I expect the guy to take a 180 on his position? Of course not, but maybe now he will see that this problem didn't begin with Bush, he is just the one standing now that the music has fianlly stopped.

I explore everything as far as I can, and labor to see all sides. Doesn't always happen. Jack, for example, went to great efforts to show me the whole Saddam-9/11 implied connection from the admin. I still don't see it as strong as he does (which isn't to say as I didn't see it), but that's on me at this point. I will, however, toot my own horn that I sat there and read thru everything he dug up, despite my disagreement, to tried and see it his way.

What I see here now is the same thing you may recall me saying about my critical thinking professor. Your only thinking critically if you disagree with something Bush has (or hasn't) done. Guess what, the guy isn't golden, but he isn't the devil re-incarnated either. Our last President's response to someone trying to blow up the WTC was some cruise missles into the desert. This President released the hounds, as he damn well should have. So should have the last one, but didn't. (I leave the name out, though obvious, because this is not a Dem v Rep comparison, this is a "what should have been done" comparison. One did, one didn't. Each evaluated on their own)

So if I am not quick enough to curse the admin as some are, that doesn't make me a zombie, it makes me someone who won't take Clarks word just because it is anti-Bush. How many in here tried to look up and verify anything he said? Now, if Bush came out and made a statement, there would be a dozen editorials written and c&p'd as to if it is believable and/or verifiable. I too, see hypocracy.

(I am not saying Clark is lying, btw, just asking, rhetorically, if anyone bothered to find out)

The tone of this board has gone so far anti-Bush that I feel completely overwhelmed. No matter what is written, if it is anti-Bush it is defended blindly, and if it isn't, there will be at least five people ready to pounce on you.

Here is one from Gbrumb:

http://forums.techguy.org/showthread...91#post1534691

Originally posted by gbrumb:
I only point out the negative content of your posts when you post that "My country is going to hell in a hand basket" crap or the "US economy is going to collapse under the weight of its debt etc etc" bullshirt. I swear I wish I had the anti-depressant concession here I'd retire in six months. AlbertB nice that you had a smiley at the end of that statement. I wouldn't want to crowd your space.

I recently remarked to a co-worker how negative many of the posts have gotten here. Her response was that if the people had a life they wouldn't be posting here constantly they'd be out living it. Don't know that I agree with that but sure does give one food for thought.

I also note that LAN has become a target of ridicule on a regular basis, despite the fact that he is one of the most level headed, easy going people I've ever known. The man never insults anyone, he simply tries to present another side. For the life of me, I do not understand why he continues to post here.

Now there are some of you will say that the tone here was set by me and you're just following my example. That's what was said when I left, but it is now a half year later and it is worse--there is far less balance here than there used to be. Most of the people that were middle of the road or right have left and those that do come here, come sporadically. If it were not for LAN, there would be very few opinions from the right at all (ComputerFix comes from the middle as does Gbrumb and occasionally, ChrisA will post from the right).

Gbrumb and ComputerFix are typically some of the very few people that actually make well reasoned posts with facts and information instead of rhetoric--something I always tried to do as well. Those are the people I learned most from (and a few others that no longer post) and what made this place interesting and intellectually stimulating--one could learn something new. It seems they are on the cusp and ready to leave.

As I said, I am not coming back here, but it is distressing to see this forum, which used to be very intellectually stimiluating (and I speak of before CivDeb when we just debated in Random) turn into what it is now. I put a lot of effort into starting it primarily for the debate aspects. I left, at least in part because I took the criticism from those on the left that I made it an unpleasant place to be seriously. It seems to be it has lost balance, which is not surprising. And perhaps my being here made it unpleasant, at least in part, because many of you were forced to consider facts you really don't want to know?

If you people want a place simply to bash those with a different viewpoint, you've got it. If you really want a place to learn and be intellectually stimulated, this is not that place anymore and you have yourselves to blame (you can't blame it on me)!

So I ask you to reconsider the way you post, not for me (I couldn't be dragged back here, at least until after November, 2004). But you've got some good people that I think you all consider friends that have left and/or are on the verge of leaving because of the bash-mode that exists here.

You should all do some self-relfecting! And perhaps it is time for some of you (and you know who you are) to leave because your hatred for Bush makes it impossible for you to carry on a well reasoned, non emotional conversation.

[Rockn]

Or is it what you want it to be? Unfortunately this forum mirrors todays political climate of bash and blame and hit and run. I personally thought most here were above that and could actually look at issues objectively instead of from behind the party lines. I guess I was mistaken or nieve.

[Mulderator]

Originally posted by Rockn:
Or is it what you want it to be? Unfortunately this forum mirrors todays political climate of bash and blame and hit and run. I personally thought most here were above that and could actually look at issues objectively instead of from behind the party lines. I guess I was mistaken or nieve.

I want it to be a place where people can have fun with stimulating debate. As I said, I'm not coming back. I don't care what it becomes. My post was not made for me as me, it was made as a moderator who had a big hand in creating the place. As I've said, I take the criticism that was levied seriously. I will not return here because my status as moderator makes it impossible for me to express a strong opinion without it being construed as "official".

Please don't make this about me. I am tired of that bullsh*t and I was reluctant to make this thread because I knew some people would want to again make it about me. For godsakes, take some responsibility for your own actions. I want people to look at themselves and their own motives, not me. Despite the self serving reasons for it, Mulder is not the root of everyone's problems. Grow up and look at yourself.

BTW--Rockn, you're one that should take a long hard look at yourself. You've got a knack for aggravating people on a regular basis. That's not other people's problems, that YOU'RE PROBLEM.

But again, I want this to be a discussion about the forum, not about Mulder or any other individuals.

[John Burns]

Mirror, mirror on the wall - who is the most objective of all? Guess a difference of opinion exists about who is bashing and who is not.

[Stoner]

I think Random should be look at ,also.

I just viewed and reported a personal attack against me in Random.
The disagreements in CivDebate traveled to Random with the apparent purpose of public ridicule. And by a person that previously claimed disdain for that and said he would report any such instance.
post 19
LINK

gbrumb, I haven't thought of calling you a jerk, but I would describe you as a hypocrite.

[Mulderator]

Originally posted by John Burns:
Mirror, mirror on the wall - who is the most objective of all? Guess a difference of opinion exists about who is bashing and who is not.

Yes it does, and right now it's you (not you individually, but you as a group).

Are you capable of considering it?

[Mulderator]

Originally posted by Stoner:
I think Random should be look at ,also.

I just viewed and reported a personal attack against me in Random.
The disagreements in CivDebate traveled to Random with the apparent purpose of public ridicule. And by a person that previously claimed disdain for that and said he would report any such instance.
post 19
LINK

gbrumb, I haven't thought of calling you a jerk, but I would describe you as a hypocrite.

If this is going to become personal, then I'll close the thread.

I am asking people to take a look at themselves, not other people. It is easy to blame others. It is not easy to take an intraspective look at yourself. That is what I am asking for.

[Mulderator]

Maybe I should put it another way.

Read ComputerFix's post above. That's not Mulder that wrote that. That a person who says Bush has lost his vote.

Does he have a point or not? If not, why not?

[John Burns]

I am capable - I don't attack the INDIVIDUALS in here on a personal basis - but I ADMIT I attack the Bush Administration. I wouldn't be in here if I didn't have a strong opinion about the Political situation in the US. I ADMIT I don't like President Bush or his policies on most things. So does that make me a basher?

[Mulderator]

Originally posted by John Burns:
I am capable - I don't attack the INDIVIDUALS in here on a personal basis - but I ADMIT I attack the Bush Administration. I wouldn't be in here if I didn't have a strong opinion about the Political situation in the US. I ADMIT I don't like President Bush or his policies on most things. So does that make me a basher?

It depends on the context. If, as CFix says, you simply disagree with anything Bush does and agree with anything anyone else says or does that is opposite Bush, then you're a basher.

I think the point is, CFix feels as though the only "critical thought" anyone has here anymore is anti-Bush. If you agree or even just don't "disagree", then you are labeled a "Bush Lover" or some other such name.

That criticism was levied against me and I always thought I was simply responding in kind to what I perceived to be me being labeled. I took it seriously and left the forum figuring maybe people had a point.

But here we are six months later and the criticism is being levied in the other direction. I am simply asking people to consider if in fact it is valid.

[GoneForNow]

Okay, I've offered the olive branch HERE.

It is all my fault and I take responsibility for it. Truce, yes or no?

[Stoner]

yes ...........

have to go now, the m/cycle thing

[Mulderator]

Originally posted by John Burns:
I am capable - I don't attack the INDIVIDUALS in here on a personal basis - but I ADMIT I attack the Bush Administration.

I'm not sure you can do that, depending on how you say it. It's like if I say the Democratic party is anti-American and pro-terrorism. Doesn't a Democrat have a right to view that as bashing them?

Republicans take attacks on the Bush Administration as attacks on their character as well. I think you need to understand that "bashing" doesn't necessarily need to be aimed at individuals.

That was the point of LAN's attack on Kerry. There were more than a few here who took it personally. LAN was simply trying to make others see what it was like with the shoe on the other foot.

[izme]

Originally posted by John Burns:
I am capable - I don't attack the INDIVIDUALS in here on a personal basis - but I ADMIT I attack the Bush Administration. I wouldn't be in here if I didn't have a strong opinion about the Political situation in the US. I ADMIT I don't like President Bush or his policies on most things. So does that make me a basher?

well put


the structure of this civ. debate is flammatory to begin with
The direction it goes is very unpredictable, it is the Dynamics of a large site where many post and have seperate ideas. So you can say that the way this site is going is the nature of the beast so to speak. One or a few personal beliefs on how this should be ran is basically futile, two new people could come on and start it right back up or whatever.

I agree that the useless attacks have no good value here, but our own each individual personalities ect. play the biggest part.

You can learn alot more and stay focused on the issues if you leave out the useless attacks. So what if one is a liberal or one is a republican. That is kind of like killing the messenger isn't it?

some have real strong beliefs here and will bark very loudly
I have been known to do that here

the keyword here is DEBATE

and the proper way to debate is the focus on the issue at hand.
Politics are a flaming topic throughout this world

[Al-Firdaus]

PERSONAL ATTACKS, AS WITH FIGHTING, ARE DERIVED FROM PEOPLE WHO HAVE RUN OUT OF IDEAS.