On Having a right, and Being right

Get Email Updates Email this Topic Print this Page

Justin
 
Reply Wed 1 Jul, 2009 05:51 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;74116 wrote:
We are not arguing "semantics" whatever that means. I was making a distinction between having a right to do something, and its being right to do that things. I also pointed out that it does not follow from the fact that you have a right to do X, that you are right to do X. It is a matter of logic, not of "semantics". But, I think it is a good thing to hold that distinction in mind. Don't you?

Sure it's a great thing. Now are we done? Can we close this thread and move on?
 
kennethamy
 
Reply Wed 1 Jul, 2009 05:55 pm
@Justin,
Justin;74120 wrote:
Sure it's a great thing. Now are we done? Can we close this thread and move on?


You don't need my permission. You have the right to close whenever you like. But whether it is right to do so is, naturally, not up to you, or anyone.
 
VideCorSpoon
 
Reply Wed 1 Jul, 2009 06:03 pm
@kennethamy,
Catchabula;74088 wrote:
Will they forgive me my verbosity? I'm sure they would say this all in one sentence...

Ask and ye shall receive. I have to say that you are one of the few people on the forum who can almost pull off a "complication of the obvious" and a subtlety for criticism in more than a million words as well execute a sense of irony fit for a cartoon in The New YorkerThe New Yorker?

Your verbosity is forgiven, post ten penitent posts and a thread on theocratic discourse. In nomine forum et chat room et messaging system, achoo!

kennethamy;74123 wrote:
You don't need my permission. You have the right to close whenever you like. But whether it is right to do so is, naturally, not up to you, or anyone.


And just to mix things up and demonstrate that its not just one moderator but the whole moderator staff who takes part in these processes, I hereby close the thread. And this came from me with no discussion, no epideictics, no nothing... thread closed.
 
Aedes
 
Reply Wed 1 Jul, 2009 07:30 pm
@kennethamy,
kennethamy;74105 wrote:
I simply pointed out that it does not follow from the fact that Justin has the right to ban the member, that he was right to ban the member.
Indeed. But he was right on other grounds.

kennethamy;74105 wrote:
I did say that I thought that Justin was wrong to ban the member on the ground that the member advocated violence, since it is untrue that the member advocated violence.
That was the last of many straws. We had to delete an entire 6 page long thread because it was so inappropriate, and another mod had to delete an additional post of his on a different topic.

kennethamy;74105 wrote:
It is about the argument that since he had the right to ban the member, he was right to ban the member. That argument is clearly fallacious.
Fortunately that is not the argument, and the actual justification is ample. If Justin's right (and ability) to ban someone were the sole argument to do so, then it would beg the question of why this guy and not arbitrarily anyone else. It so happens that Justin has given many people on this forum ample opportunity to prove their worth before resorting to a ban, some of whom never needed banishment. So there were unique aspects to Violent Meme that justified his banning, not the least of which was the fact that his values and behavior were unceasingly revolting and reflected badly on all of us.


And might I add that you (not you in particular, but everyone) owe Justin a token of admiration and gratitude, even if it's silently within you, for fostering a thread like this. I've been a mod and a participant in other forums too, and NEVER have I seen a site admin who would open his own management decisions to discussion like this. If you don't feel included now, you never will.
 
 

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/21/2024 at 02:09:06