Quote:
Originally Posted by FuckingRotter
As I understood it, the rule, or etiquette was introduced for a very good reason. That is that posts were being made, the edited or deleted completely, after that post had been replied to. My own thoughts are that words posted to a public forum are not personal property, especially when they involve other posters. Freedom of speech does not include retrospective self-censorship when the poster regrets what they wrote and wishes to cover it up. Once what they wrote has been seen and responded to, they should have the courage to stand by what they wrote, or to apologise or admit regret.
Censorship should be the domain of the moderators, whose role in part is to decide what is acceptable on this or any board. Removal of a post that has been seen and responded to in part censors the responder, as their retort then becomes confusing, inexplicable, no ordinary poster here has a right to censor another.
|
Thank you FR for your thoughtful consideration... and very well stated. In general I agree a person should
try to commit, as much as possible, to the statement they've made, even if it is out of matter of personal integrity... after all "a man or woman must be of his or her word", especially when telling the truth, making a deal, or keeping a promise. You could likewise say that everyone should say what they mean, and clearly mean what they fucking have to say. Beyond those constraints, minor indiscretions of statement might be made on posts (especially those based on immediate, and most temporarily gratifying, emotional influence) which the author might feel at later time to change. I certainly have done so... and the damage which might have been caused is kept at a minimum.
I feel the mods themselves have the responsibility of maintaining civil order within the community they reign - ensuring both legal or amenable cooperation takes place between members. This allows for the greatest level of free discourse to take place... which every member freely feels able to contribute.