I was threatened by Wrong Planet based on my opinions here.

Page 1 of 5 [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

reddingcal
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 121

02 Apr 2009, 6:52 pm

Here is my open and public statement based on them trying to restrict my free speech concerning Amanda Baggs.

First of all I am unaware of Amanda Baggs actually being a member here, but that point is irrelevant anyways. Amanda Baggs is a public figure who has appeared on various news outlets such as CNN. Given the publicity this has received and her willingness to seek it was a choice that she made. I believe that it is unfair to restrict reasonable discussion about someone in the community, especially someone so public. She is portraying a certain view point about Autism rather if she likes it or not. To reprimand all reasonable opposing views (or views that are questioning) is to silence all opposition in such a way that goes against basic human rights and constitutional democratic principles.

I am going to give YOU a warning, but first I want you to clarify something. What exactly did I do wrong outside of stating a valid set of opinions backed up with valid source material? Have I said or done anything outside of our constitutional right to freedom of speech? I have not threatened anyone, I have not insulted anyone directly. I am asking questions and trying to understand. I would chose your words carefully and with the full understanding of the other staff members and owners of Wrong Planet so that when you make such a statement it will truly represent WP. I am contacting the ACLU and I've already talked to a layer about this. For too long the internet has dictated an unconstitutional way of restricting free reasonable speech. A Precedent is going to be set but its a matter if you want to be a loser in such a fight. I pitched the idea to a layer to sue you for a sizable amount of money on the principle of giving the excess beyond layer's fees to charity. Do you really want to stand in the public lime light trying to restrict reasonable free speech without even the defense that I'm doing it for money? Good day. I will make this very public and I WILL IN FACT PRESS THE ISSUE TO THE FULLEST EXTENT OF THE LAW, WIN OR LOSE.

Pick your battles carefully WP.



Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

02 Apr 2009, 6:56 pm



reddingcal
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 121

02 Apr 2009, 7:02 pm


I agree.  There should be free and reasonable speech.  I'll have to check out that site some more when I get a chance.  It is ironic that a community of Autistic people would turn around and persecute people based on opinions.  I don't care if they retort with site ownership and home rule excuse.  Walmart owns property where you shop, but they cannot break and or modify your constitutional rights now can they?  As long as you're following reasonable rules you are ok.

So go ahead and pick your battles WP.  You'll find me an intelligent and skillful debater.

I've asked around and I'm aware of other accusations that a certain moderator abuses his or her powers.  It would be a shame if WP got into a long drawn out constitutional law battle because of the statements and abuses of one member.  Thats why I say this member should now talk it over with the others before speaking for WP so that WP doesn't have any excuses for their statement(s).



Last edited by reddingcal on 02 Apr 2009, 7:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.

AspE
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,114

02 Apr 2009, 7:03 pm

I'm not familiar with the particular issue you were talking about, but owners of a website can restrict free speech in any way they like. They can ban anyone for any reason. It's like a private club.



Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

02 Apr 2009, 7:04 pm


I agree.  There should be free and reasonable speech.  I'll have to check out that site some more when I get a chance.  It is ironic that a community of Autistic people would turn around and persecute people based on opinions.  I don't care if they retort with site ownership and home rule excuse.  Walmart owns property where you shop, but they cannot break and or modify your constitutional rights now can they?  As long as you're following reasonable rules you are ok.


In short everyone here likes to think they are superior to one another. Or lets rephrase and say that everyone wants to be in the Aspie Elite, anyone above them is of course a non-aspie.



Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

02 Apr 2009, 7:05 pm

AspE wrote:
I'm not familiar with the particular issue you were talking about, but owners of a website can restrict free speech in any way they like. They can ban anyone for any reason. It's like a private club.

It being legal does not make it right.



reddingcal
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 121

02 Apr 2009, 7:07 pm

AspE wrote:
I'm not familiar with the particular issue you were talking about, but owners of a website can restrict free speech in any way they like. They can ban anyone for any reason. It's like a private club.


Can private clubs restrict and or modify local, state, and federal constitutional laws based on property ownership? I'm sorry internet but your flimsy exuses for unconstitutional violations are going to come to an end sooner rather than latter.



Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 60,749
Location: Stendec

02 Apr 2009, 7:09 pm

Kangoogle wrote:
AspE wrote:
I'm not familiar with the particular issue you were talking about, but owners of a website can restrict free speech in any way they like. They can ban anyone for any reason. It's like a private club.

It being legal does not make it right.

The concepts of "Right" and "Wrong" are defined by legalities, whether religious, secular, or membership agreement.

Deal with it.


_________________
 
No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.


Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

02 Apr 2009, 7:11 pm

Fnord wrote:
Kangoogle wrote:
AspE wrote:
I'm not familiar with the particular issue you were talking about, but owners of a website can restrict free speech in any way they like. They can ban anyone for any reason. It's like a private club.

It being legal does not make it right.

The concepts of "Right" and "Wrong" are defined by legalities, whether religious, secular, or membership agreement.

Deal with it.

You need to delve into some modern political philosophy then. There is no proven political obligation towards a state - rather people follow it because it carries the illusion of choice. Most serious modern political philosophers are in essence a form of anarchist.



reddingcal
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 121

02 Apr 2009, 7:19 pm

Fnord wrote:
Kangoogle wrote:
AspE wrote:
I'm not familiar with the particular issue you were talking about, but owners of a website can restrict free speech in any way they like. They can ban anyone for any reason. It's like a private club.

It being legal does not make it right.

The concepts of "Right" and "Wrong" are defined by legalities, whether religious, secular, or membership agreement.

Deal with it.


And you will find my friend that the cold calculating hand of the law will probably rule in my favor based on my argument and not some moderator that gets rubbed the wrong way by what I say.



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

02 Apr 2009, 7:24 pm

why didn't you also post the PM I sent to you?

you say you were threatened, let's see the PM.

Merle


_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon


richardbenson
Xfractor Card #351
Xfractor Card #351

User avatar

Joined: 30 Oct 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,553
Location: Leave only a footprint behind

02 Apr 2009, 7:29 pm

reddingcal wrote:
I am contacting the ACLU
are you serious? if you are this is absolutley hilarious. i mean yah man i really see the value of a lawsuit here! my goodness, but then again this is america and nobody said there was a wrong lawsuit. can i give you some advice? get over yourself. getting upset that a topic of yours was locked/moved isnt worth taking a gigantic crap on the floor


_________________
Winds of clarity. a universal understanding come and go, I've seen though the Darkness to understand the bounty of Light


reddingcal
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 26 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 121

02 Apr 2009, 7:30 pm

sinsboldly wrote:
why didn't you also post the PM I sent to you?

you say you were threatened, let's see the PM.

Merle


For the record I haven't mentioned you by name. You have willingly entered this and revealed yourself (and one other moderator who is nameless for the time being) as the offending party.

Telling me to cease reasonable discussion is threatening me, and threatening free speech. If you were not threatening me why did you send me a PM?



sinsboldly
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Nov 2006
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,488
Location: Bandon-by-the-Sea, Oregon

02 Apr 2009, 7:32 pm

reddingcal wrote:
sinsboldly wrote:
why didn't you also post the PM I sent to you?

you say you were threatened, let's see the PM.

Merle


For the record I haven't mentioned you by name. You have willingly entered this and revealed yourself (and one other moderator who is nameless for the time being) as the offending party.

Telling me to cease reasonable discussion is threatening me, and threatening free speech. If you were not threatening me why did you send me a PM?


still won't post what I wrote to you, huh?

(shrug)

Merle


_________________
Alis volat propriis
State Motto of Oregon


02 Apr 2009, 7:33 pm

reddingcal wrote:
sinsboldly wrote:
why didn't you also post the PM I sent to you?

you say you were threatened, let's see the PM.

Merle


For the record I haven't mentioned you by name. You have willingly entered this and revealed yourself (and one other moderator who is nameless for the time being) as the offending party.

Telling me to cease reasonable discussion is threatening me, and threatening free speech. If you were not threatening me why did you send me a PM?



A warning?


I have gotten the same from her too and I didn't think I was threatened. Just informed about the rules on here and reminded. My thread was also deleted only because I had posted that thread link on another aspie forum and the mods don't want a drama between two forums. I wasn't intentionally trying to start one.



Kangoogle
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 903

02 Apr 2009, 7:37 pm

sinsboldly wrote:
reddingcal wrote:
sinsboldly wrote:
why didn't you also post the PM I sent to you?

you say you were threatened, let's see the PM.

Merle


For the record I haven't mentioned you by name. You have willingly entered this and revealed yourself (and one other moderator who is nameless for the time being) as the offending party.

Telling me to cease reasonable discussion is threatening me, and threatening free speech. If you were not threatening me why did you send me a PM?


still won't post what I wrote to you, huh?

(shrug)

Merle

Thats a bit hypocritical of you...