Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION


casablancalover2
 Share

Recommended Posts

The freedom to express yourself, when it causes on one else harm, should be protected here on the boards.

 

But it is a fine line of expression in discussion of certain topics. This message board I hope gives a chance for some posters here to express themselves, but to remember that their point doesn't have to demean another to have value.

 

I start this thread for discussion true, but also as a place for practice of airing ideas without resorting to name-calling and/or troll behavior (or troll behaviour, as my friends Canadian would write).

 

Even if someone were to be savage in their response, there is another way to respond, not just react. We could even help each other to try out different methods of responding that can diffuse and not accelerate the bullying.

 

Inspiration is even found in the movies.

 

I want people to be themselves here on the boards and not acting out in reaction, or taking a persona out of fear or out of bullying. It is hard to take another's ideas when only shouted or written in disregard of facts yet stated as fact, or demeaning to other posters simply for the temerity of disagreeing. We are better people than that. We may practice that here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=casablancalover2 wrote:}{quote}The freedom to express yourself, when it causes on one else harm, should be protected here on the boards.

>

> But it is a fine line of expression in discussion of certain topics. This message board I hope gives a chance for some posters here to express themselves, but to remember that their point doesn't have to demean another to have value.

>

> I start this thread for discussion true, but also as a place for practice of airing ideas without resorting to name-calling and/or troll behavior (or troll behaviour, as my friends Canadian would write).

>

> Even if someone were to be savage in their response, there is another way to respond, not just react. We could even help each other to try out different methods of responding that can diffuse and not accelerate the bullying.

>

> Inspiration is even found in the movies.

>

> I want people to be themselves here on the boards and not acting out in reaction, or taking a persona out of fear or out of bullying. It is hard to take another's ideas when only shouted or written in disregard of facts yet stated as fact, or demeaning to other posters simply for the temerity of disagreeing. We are better people than that. We may practice that here.

 

 

 

Yep, this is a movie message board. And discussing movies can be done in a serious way or a humorous way... But they are just movies... No cause for getting heated about it (I know, I've taken the bait in the past and got into pointless debates hook, line and sinker)...

 

And the subject heading of the deleted thread yesterday was "over the top," IMHO...

But why not state that in the thread rather than complain to TCM Admin about it??

If you don't like it, start your own thread, ignore it, or argue in the thread about it.

Or start a private debate by PM... (I converse with users by PM, for example)

Don't complain to TCMAdmin.

 

And it just seems that whoever complained, if anybody complained, probably doesn't realize that they have written stuff on the board in the past that others may have found offensive...

Anyway, the subject heading yesterday may have been deemed libelous by TCMAdmin and that's why the entire thread was deleted. I don't know? Maybe nobody complained and that's why it was gone.

 

But I understand that politics can get people heated up faster than a Red Savina pepper...

And to be fair to Americans, we get excited over politics up here in The Great White North too...

And some Canucks go too far too...

 

So try and keep it respectful, if you have a problem, TCMAdmin is a last resort. PM the person you have a problem with, start your own thread, start a debate...

 

And I've noticed, it seems to me, some people seemingly making subtle and disguised insults towards other members of the message board. I'm not going to point out examples, but please knock it off...

 

To quote the late Rodney King, "Can we all get along?"

 

Can I have an "Amen."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agreed, in theory.

 

I don't believe it extends to posts that demean an actor's a***.

 

If politics and religion have no place here, neither do the filthy posts in Mr. Brent's filthy thread. This site is not the place to be discussing Ts and As, and so any poster who is doing so should be ashamed of themselves.

 

You DO know this thread will be shut down before long, don't you cbl?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Will Rogers once remarked about a trend among young female socialites to go around in public smoking cigars. He said words to the effect of, "They're probably looking for attention. If we'd all just ignore them, they'll maybe move on to something more suitable".

 

 

But it sounds as if some members here would rather go crying to "mommy" than let a stupid thread die a natural death. If an administrator didn't see fit to lock down a thread UNTIL the cry babies chimed up, then just let it alone.

 

 

Anyway, as this forum is already equipped with an "auto censor", freedom of expression NEVER really existed here in the first place.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Sepiatone wrote:}{quote}

>

> But it sounds as if some members here would rather go crying to "mommy" than let a stupid thread die a natural death. If an administrator didn't see fit to lock down a thread UNTIL the cry babies chimed up, then just let it alone.

>

> Anyway, as this forum is already equipped with an "auto censor", freedom of expression NEVER really existed here in the first place.

>

 

Yes, that's true, except that the "ignore" function is something that each individual user can choose to use rather than a censorship that applies to all. I was referring to the thread that was deleted - good and bad posts included. Gone as if it never existed, if I'm not mistaken.

The "locked down" thread is still there for anybody to read, if not post to anymore.

But I guess TCM owns the message board and they make the rules.

 

Just unfortunate that because some people choose not to complain to TCMAdmin about threads or posts that are offensive, those get a pass, whereas some "cry babies" can complain to TCMAdmin and have an entire thread deleted from existence. That seems unfair.

But whatever.

 

And I don't think much either of anybody who uses the "ignore function."

I used it once so as to cool off during a heated debate on the board...

It was only temporary and meant to give myself a break and not really censor the other person...

 

Oh well... Better not to be a coward and instead just be honest and comment, start a new thread, or just read and don't reply (the true auto-ignore)... Save TCMAdmin for something really, really, really bad... As a last resort...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Freedom of Expression is a great thing.

 

What some people fail to grasp is there's a proper time and place for everything. Would you discuss the complications of your Irritable Bowel Syndrome at a formal banquet? Would you mention your yeast infection in your speech to the local interdenominational council? etc. etc. ad infinitum, ad nauseum.

 

This is a forum for and about movies. The only time politics or religion is appropriate for this board is when the discussion concerns the politics or religion depicted in a movie.

 

Mention of an actor's, or anyone else's, religion or politics is totally inappropriate here.

 

It shouldn't take a genius to understand that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Capuchin-

 

I am just following, and not to reply to your comments as singled out. You do make some very good points, however.

 

Religion and politics are topics that are germane here, in how we see and understand the movies we're discussing. Some will take a current viewpoint to expound on their love for a certain storyline, genre, or character or actor. I know there are ways of doing this that allows the poster to be appreciated for his/her viewpoint, even if we do not agree on the viewpoint, without venting the spleen.

 

There are some here who cannot take a step back from the plank, or withdraw the sword when victory isn't needed. Not every discussion is meant to be a debate.

 

I do not see this thread as one to be shutdown. Viewpoints maybe read here without them being threats to another viewpoint. I do not see changing minds when people are not open to change them. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mention of an actor's, or anyone else's, religion or politics is totally inappropriate here.

 

But it's appropriate to have a thread about his a..................................oh, never mind, why waste the time.

 

It shouldn't take a genius to understand that.

 

Guess you haven't seen that thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere along the line, we Americans got the wrong idea. The fact that the constitution says the government shall make no law prohibiting freedom of speech doesn't mean others can't control expression. I can throw you out of my house if I don't like something you say. TCM can throw you out of this board if you go beyond what they decide is acceptable.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capuchin: With regards to 'Mention of an actor's, or anyone else's, religion or politics is totally inappropriate here'; I don't agree was it relates to an actor's religion or politics. This is a forum on movies and thus actors, directors, and all the others in that business.

 

Most movies have some type of 'message' and therefore there can be a tie to religion or politics related to that message. For example, WB made a lot of social message movies in the 30s about poor children and how abusive treatment only helps makes them thugs. This was a counter message to a message of; Thugs deserve abusive treatment, the only way to get them back in line is a kick in the pants.

 

Take the movie High Noon and the reactions of Wayne, Cooper and other in the industry to the theme of the movie. This related to the politics of those involved. I feel there is a place for that type of discussion and I found the discussions here related to this interesting as well as enlightening. It is all in how the discussion is conducted by us.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*"TCM can throw you out of this board if you go beyond what they decide is acceptable."* - swithin

 

Yep. Them's the rules

And everyone has been on notice since January when Admin posted this Announcement in the top most Forum -

http://forums.tcm.com/thread.jspa?threadID=163269&tstart=0

 

*Warning: As we head deeper into the campaign season, some of you seem to forget that this is the TCM Message Boards. This is NOT a space for discussing modern politics and any sort of political rhetoric that falls ANYWHERE outside the realm of movie fiction is NOT going to be tolerated. It is disruptive, rude and not the reason these forums exist.*

 

*Posting political rhetoric that violates the spirit of this policy may result in the loss of posting privileges. So, find somewhere else to discuss politics.*

 

*Please feel free to PM if you have any comments or questions about this policy.*

Posted: Jan 10, 2012 5:25 AM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting post. The "movie fiction" part is something I didn't realize, meaning it would be difficult to discuss somewhat fact-based films such as JFK, Nixon, The Killing Fields, and even Goodnight and Good Luck. What if David Hare's play about Iraq (Stuff Happens) had been made into a film -- or was it? If this board existed in the Vietnam War era, imagine a discussion about Coming Home and The Deer Hunter! I thing the problem is not the focused discussion, it's the ease of being led astray into a real political argument.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To add to Kyle's insightful post, that includes trolls.

*Trolls* (those who create a false persona in which to attack/intimidate others).

Not everyone is who they claim they are. In that respect, it's a little like online dating. Take it with a grain of salt, get to know them more. If you have not met them personally through other sources, don't assume you know them. Some here also have the ability to manipulate. If you remember that it is a game they play, you are less likely to fall for it.

 

The trolls are especially good at dumping on someone one moment, then be charming to other posters. It is a old divisive strategy, oft-used by bullies. Bullies have their friends, and they use their "friends" to help attack others to whom they don't agree or just pick fights.

 

As Kyle reminds us: We are here only as a privilege to the rest of the group, and we need to abide by the rules. If someone gets out of hand, they will be gone or outed. Outing doesn't seem to be any good, for they can always return in another identity, or another persona.

 

I don't understand why some are here to pick fights or intimidate others and create divisions. But they are. It does feel like 7th grade around here sometimes, and we need to help everyone feel comfortable in their own skin.

 

We are here to share ideas and our validity is in the posting, not how many agree. If you can be yourself, we can accept you as yourself. But if you use a persona here to hide behind, what is the purpose? There must be threads around for people to get their donnybrooke on..

 

Edited by: casablancalover2 on Sep 1, 2012 3:07 PM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lest anyone think I was the instigator of getting recent threads locked or removed, I posted in the "locked" thread myself Thursday night. To me that discussion was about Clint Eastwood and nothing more so it was unexpected to find the thread locked Friday morning.

 

Friday is also when I noticed Michael/WebAdmin had updated the Announcement thread with a new post that includes this -

 

*If you see such a thread appear, please report it. If you begin such a thread or post, you will find your posting rights restricted. This includes direct or indirect references, and will be strictly enforced.*

Posted: Aug 31, 2012 3:04 PM

 

Even being oblique is not going to fly for the next few months. So no one should expect to get away with drawing comparisons between "the Taylor Machine" and any contemporary references --even though I do think Edward Arnold resembles a contemporary political figure.--

 

I wonder if TCM tried to acquire *Brigham Young* for showing this fall?

 

I guess there is still Inauguration Day in January.

 

Kyle In Hollywood

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=casablancalover2 wrote:}{quote}

> Religion and politics are topics that are germane here, in how we see and understand the movies we're discussing.

 

This may seem like splitting hairs, but it's where our viewpoints diverge drastically.

 

If a poster feels their viewpoint is affected by their affiliations, it should be enough for them to say, "As a lotus-eating Existentialist and retroluddite Federalist, I felt the star should have stopped at his third emotional plateau." It's inappropriate, in my book, to say, "Whigs, and every other intelligent person of taste, equates the way the star slammed that door as a condemnation of this country's lack of moral leadership."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess I missed all the warnings about making posts concerning the upcoming elections in US.

And guess TCM does own the message board and can do whatever they want.

 

Guess we all just have to be careful when discussing politics and religion in regards to movies.

That means not intending to offend in the first place, and also keeping an open mind for those who disagree.

Personally, I have no idea why the threads were on the message board but I did get involved and tried to tone things down...

Oh well... Life goes on...

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

>Capuchin wrote: If a poster feels their viewpoint is affected by their affiliations, it should be enough for them to say, "As a lotus-eating Existentialist and retroluddite Federalist, I felt the star should have stopped at his third emotional plateau." It's inappropriate, in my book, to say, "Whigs, and every other intelligent person of taste, equates the way the star slammed that door as a condemnation of this country's lack of moral leadership."

 

No comment, no argument here, Capuchin. I just enjoyed the verbiage so much it needed repeating..

 

It read like NIles and Frasier Crane fighting. Love that!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, TCM does own the message boards, and if you've been on other boards, you'll know that this board is one of the most decent and understanding and tolerant of the lot. As I've noted, one board edits a person's post if that person dares to complain about the board itself.

 

Religion and politics, like George Brent's a**, have no place on this board because posters here, like posters on just about every other board out there, have the anonymity of the internet to smugly foist their puerile petards on fellow posters and threads usually devolve.

 

What is most amusing is that these mooncalves still don't know that their o-p-i-n-i-o-n-s are just that, o-p-i-n-i-o-n-s.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Got a THESAURUS for Christmas, did you willbefree?

 

 

Actually, as others responded to, or even STARTED, threads about who's the prettiest, ugliest, fattest, skinniest or dumbest "star" from the "golden age", then George Brent's arse is fair game. Sometimes these things become someone's stock in trade, like Durante's nose, or Mae West's bustline.

 

 

As far as political discourse, it IS possible to discuss politics in a rational, civil manner. However, I've YET to see it go on for long on internet message boards. I'm not sure WHY that is, but it seems too many people think they're being "witty" with condescending or needlessly snide remarks that leave the rest of us waiting for them to show the OTHER half of their wit. So it would be fitting and proper to shut these down.

 

 

I don't really give a damn about ANY of that crap. I don't consider myself a liberal OR a conservative. I prefer to do my OWN thinking, thank you, and I have several friends who are on opposite poles from me politically and religiously. But we refuse to let things that insignificant get in the way or destroy a friendship. And I'll refuse to do it HERE as well.

 

 

Sepiatone

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, my major was English lit.

 

I don't need no stinkin' spellcheck either. :)

 

threads about who's the prettiest, ugliest, fattest, skinniest or dumbest "star" from the "golden age", then George Brent's arse is fair game.

 

I don't agree. If I went on about how ugly Zazu Pitts was, or how fat Orson Welles was, for pages and pages, someone here would, in all their brilliance, shout me down. And IF I did that, I would be as stupid as those who think it funny to post pages and pages about George Brent's a**.

 

I don't consider myself a liberal OR a conservative. I prefer to do my OWN thinking

 

Well, we agree there. Better to think for oneself than follow a heelot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=}{quote} but it seems too many people think they're being "witty" with condescending or needlessly snide remarks that leave the rest of us waiting for them to show the OTHER half of their wit. So it would be fitting and proper to shut these down.

That can apply to any thread here on the message board, not just anything concerning politics...

 

TCM Admin seems to only enforce the rules after somebody complains.

Like a municipal bylaw that people normally break until somebody complains to bylaw enforcement and then that scofflaw gets a ticket, or whatever... It doesn't really seem fair, but whatever...

 

Better to keep an open mind and be respectful of others, hard as that can be...

And try and stick to movies without having a secret agenda...

 

Everybody is aas different as snowflakes on this message board. Various IQs, various reasons for checking out the message board, various likes and dislikes...

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I've been clear on since day one, is that a webpage owned by someone else is private property. That means that the property owner can decide who can participate and under what restrictions. Like the owner of a house who has had enough of a certain guest, the guest can be asked to leave by the owner anytime.

 

The First Amendment applies to Congress, not to private individuals (who are free to tell each other to shut up and go home!) Congress can not pass a law barring you from participation on Time Warner websites; but Time Warner can exclude or restrict participation all it wants on it's own media!

 

 

 

 

 

 

speakthelma.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...