Comment: Rearden

(See in situ)


What REALLY sets me off those are things that are outright tacky and rude to Michael, who has done a great thing in creating the Daily Paul from scratch. As the homeowner, when simple requests, no matter the reasoning, aren't followed, what else is left but force on your own property? They must be removed, or censored, or moved to the Off Topic section if they violate his wishes.

This isn't your property, and "acknowledging and not arguing against" the property rights arguments doesn't really hold much sway when the crux of your argument is to disregard them entirely. There are ways to respectfully make your wishes regarding the running of the business known. Posting new post after new post as a method of generating support and controversy for your opinion isn't it.

I'm reminded of Hank Rearden in Atlas Shrugged. The public decided his metal was their need, because it was so good, and because it was so good, they had a right to determine how it should be used and distributed. Because it had value to them, they felt they were owed a degree of control over it, even though they didn't create or suffer for it. You may make the argument that the community is what is created, and that by being a member of the community, you have a right to your voice. This is incorrect. What you have done is participate in the conversation that you were allowed to have on the terms you've agreed to when you signed up. If the community isn't what you want it to be because it's instead following someone else's vision, then it's your right to create your own community. Google+ makes it really easy if you want to. However, you, as a user of this site, don't get to determine how it is run. You have no voice. You may want one, and by talking in a nice tone sound reasonable, but what you're actually demanding is that the rules be made by community vote and the threat of "I'll leave if you don't, and I'll loudly try and take anyone else I can with me!" and not by the guy who created the place.

Personally? I'd like to see the 9/11 stuff gone, because I disagree and often find it unhealthy for discussion, but the kicker is that the Daily Paul ISN'T my site. I don't make the rules here, I just try and follow them. So I accept it and work with it as I can and as I want to. That's what we're all expected to do as adults. Mind the rules if we want to be a part of the community.

Rabble rousing is a different story entirely, and it's where I think all of these posts should go. If you don't like how things are run, email Michael and share your ideas and thoughts in a respectful manner. I'm sure he'd get back to you if you were reasonable and shared your arguments. Posting innumerable "but I'm not happy!" threads is rude, tacky, and should get you banned. How hard is it to understand that it's rude to go into someone else's house when you've been invited in and then stand up on a table and try and rally the crowd to either break the rules or go down the street to another house? I mean seriously, just think about what you're actually engaging in with these infantile posts about how you'd run things differently. Remember Michael is a person. Remember that he's done something incredible here.

Sorry for coming off as somewhat of a jerk here, but I get riled up whenever I see this sort of logic snuck in under the guise of polite conversation. Limiting or filtering the topics of conversation on the site is not akin to stomping on your freedom of speech, no matter how much you try to equate the two.

Eric Hoffer