Free speech/military discussion from UHall thread The latest ToS is o.k.ing playing on free shards?!

[TimberWolf]

I am always shocked on how much you Americans claim to embrace freedom of Speech....then spend soooooo much time and effort to quash those exact freedoms!

No bad has ever come from educating people by intelligently discussing a topic.

You all need to spend more time defending your free speech and less time defending your "Right to bear arms"....Make for a better world all around!

 

[S_S]

There is a time and place for everything and this is NOT the time or place to spout your BS about us "Americans".

Back to topic, We all know UO does not support free shards so get over it? Not trying to be mean just straight to the point.

 

[Lord Frodo]

I am always shocked on how much you Americans claim to embrace freedom of Speech....then spend soooooo much time and effort to quash those exact freedoms!

No bad has ever come from educating people by intelligently discussing a topic.

You all need to spend more time defending your free speech and less time defending your "Right to bear arms"....Make for a better world all around!

LMAO I guess I even defended your right to spew your BS.

 

[TimberWolf]

LMAO I guess I even defended your right to spew your BS.

As I have yours....I am sure.

Because in a truly enlightened society the real crime is censorship!

 

[Lord Frodo]

As I have yours....I am sure.

Because in a truly enlightened society the real crime is censorship!

LMAO you would have never survived the places I went to defending the Constitution of the United States of America, so please do not insult me, you haven't defended squat. And in the immortal words of Col Jessep (Jack Nicholson) " I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post."

 

[TimberWolf]

LMAO you would have never survived the places I went to defending the Constitution of the United States of America, so please do not insult me, you haven't defended squat. And in the immortal words of Col Jessep (Jack Nicholson) " I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post."

I picked up a weapon and stood a post for 12 years until I broke my back in the service of Queen and country. And I stood side by side with American special forces for 2 full tours and 6 short hops. I have the decorations and citations on the wall to prove it. So now who is the one "spewing BS"?

 

[Loren]

I am always shocked on how much you Americans claim to embrace freedom of Speech....then spend soooooo much time and effort to quash those exact freedoms!

No bad has ever come from educating people by intelligently discussing a topic.

You all need to spend more time defending your free speech and less time defending your "Right to bear arms"....Make for a better world all around!

 

[Loren]

I love discussing free speech. But you can't yell fire in a crowded theater. Ok, you CAN, but there are consequences and rightfully so. Idk, I think there should be some limits, or allowances. Like if a group should be allowed to be sitting at Starbucks discussing their NAMBLA memberships and penetrating children, I should be allowed to render them unable to continue speaking, mostly by applications of blunt objects, hands, feet, elbows, etc. I am older, fatter, and slower. But change from peaceful, introspective, and philosophical, to exceedingly violent and seeing aggressors as non-persons when certain situations arise, like discussing abusing or actually abusing people. Free speech is a funny thing. I mean there will probably be someone reading what I typed and taking offense. But that is ok! They can be. TW, I will have this discussion with thee. I have responded, I think, to your statement, very seriously. The photos were a jest/jab, I admit. Here is my contribution, which I think is inseparable from discussing free speech. Now, we need to remember, Freedom of Speech as per the Bill of Rights, only means that Govt shall not make law preventing you from speaking (i think). Nothing about lack of consequences for speech inciting a riot, for instance. I find the information in this link accurate, so I ask you sir, what exactly do you find fault with freedom of speech in the United States Of America ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States

Also, here is one of my favorite quotes on the topic from Stephen Fry:
“It's now very common to hear people say, 'I'm rather offended by that.' As if that gives them certain rights. It's actually nothing more... than a whine. 'I find that offensive.' It has no meaning; it has no purpose; it has no reason to be respected as a phrase. 'I am offended by that.' Well, so ****ing what."
I couldn't agree more. ^^^^ I think "tolerance" also ties into it. I find that most people are only tolerant when you are in lock-step with their own ideologies. Black-and-White thinkers. (No not race). I can accept your views, life choices, speech, morality (a fine philosophical discussion on its own), etc, without agreeing with them. I do not have to approve, or even support or promote them. On the other hand, neither would I stand in your way or hinder your pursuit of any of the aforementioned things. I get pretty aggressive, or completely ignore someone, when they start telling me I should feel or react a certain way and I should examine myself to see why... blah blah etc. Bah! Generation now raised up that "Everyone gets a trophy, everyone passes regardless of actual performance, never hearing no" and so on. Example: 18 to 20 somethings like to walk around with half their goodies hanging out. I'm trying to have a conversation with a younger student, who happens to be petite with double D's. I am doing a fine job of pretending not to notice, looking more at my papers, book, and so forth. But she is wearing a very very loose low top, that amounts to about 1/3 of a tshirt, and has a smirk, keeps leaning forward...Im human, I slip up and glance, she pounces and tries to give me **** about it.... I'm thinking are you f'n kidding me ?!? As my momma says "If it's not for sale, don't put it on display". People taking words and redefining them. Like "Objectification". Same other person (before this incident) we are discussing that 10 hrs in NYC video (scuse me I mean viral marketing production). I'm like "Well, I was raised better than that. If I wanted to say something to a lady I saw out and about, I would smile, pause and see if I could get her attention, and go from there. If not so be it, go on with my day. I would not holler at the lady, but if I saw her walk by, I would absolutely think to myself 'wow nice curves' or something like that." This kids response : "That's objectification. She's not there for you." Excuse me Dr Nothing ? No, no it is not. Go read a few APA papers on Objectification, Sexual Objectification, Sexually Objectifying Environments in the Workplace, I have. Objectification must involve an expectation of result or reaction, a right to usage or ownership. Anyway, there is my tangent. You kind of made one when you started the thread.

My speech is free, but I will accept paypal donations. Your move sire. Grats on your service to Queen and Country. You Canadians aren't all bad, you have William Shatner and Maple Syrup. Former US Navy ~9 years meself.

 

[Angel of Sonoma]

here you go.....(i'm sure i'll get some haters from this post)
bruce jenner needs to keep his private life private. i am SO SICK of hearing about his transition to caitlyn.
the confederate flag is HISTORY. you can't erase the civil war. why ban displaying the flag?

 

[TimberWolf]

I love discussing free speech. TW, I will have this discussion with thee. , so I ask you sir, what exactly do you find fault with freedom of speech in the United States Of America ? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech_in_the_United_States"

Loren I have absolutely no issue with Freedom of speech in America or Canada for that matter. I do take exception to and find it incredibly ironic that American companies moderate forums and discussions not based on any of the "Miller exceptions" but based on commercial influences.

This thread wasn't created here it was created in Uhall and moved here after many posts were deleted. This thread and the original post you quoted was questioning why Stratics would allow Broadsword to control content of player forums. I am not talking about the deletion of abusive posts, or threatening posts....Ron Bron feels all people should feel safe to post their views and I absolutely agree with him. What I am talking about is the moderation of a conversation based strictly on another third party company not wanting to see the topic discussed.

In this case I believe it was free shards and/or abusive of power and the corrupt EM program. It appears to be the decision of Stratics that encouraging Broadsword's employees to participate in these forums is commercially better then to allow intelligent open conversations about in game topics. I am speculating here but I would assume Stratics has been informed that Dev participation in these forums would cease if these topics were openly discussed.

I take exception when financial considerations out weigh freedom of speech!

 

[Loren]

Loren I have absolutely no issue with Freedom of speech in America or Canada for that matter. I do take exception to and find it incredibly ironic that American companies moderate forums and discussions not based on any of the "Miller exceptions" but based on commercial influences.

This thread wasn't created here it was created in Uhall and moved here after many posts were deleted. This thread and the original post you quoted was questioning why Stratics would allow Broadsword to control content of player forums. I am not talking about the deletion of abusive posts, or threatening posts....Ron Bron feels all people should feel safe to post their views and I absolutely agree with him. What I am talking about is the moderation of a conversation based strictly on another third party company not wanting to see the topic discussed.

In this case I believe it was free shards and/or abusive of power and the corrupt EM program. It appears to be the decision of Stratics that encouraging Broadsword's employees to participate in these forums is commercially better then to allow intelligent open conversations about in game topics. I am speculating here but I would assume Stratics has been informed that Dev participation in these forums would cease if these topics were openly discussed.

I take exception when financial considerations out weigh freedom of speech!

Firstly let me say I was half in jest to ye. But my opinions are serious. Thank you for filling in the blanks for me

I couldn't agree more sire. As paying customers we have a right to a voice. I also think, that with a ToS, or as a lessor (lease-ee, sp?), or rentor, the Owner, aka Broadsword or Stratics has the ultimate say in what stays and goes. I agree certain choices to be less tasteful. To some degree in other games, so must the free-players be considered. especially when the vast majority of active accounts as per individual owners, are free players. I think we would end up agreeing to disagree on the topic. I may not have my finger on the pulse correctly, but the Golden Rule, is he who has the gold, makes the rules. I agree in spirit with your position, split in two ways. As far as free shards, I see no reason for Stratics or any Broadsword employee to support playing on free shards. They put bread on their table by running pay shards. The abusive/corrupt EM business should be addressed. Interested parties can always make their own message board, or try to track and provide some kind of evidence, write a nicely worded letter to Broadsword. As far as possible corruption goes, solutions depend on how widespread it is, how many servers, do they have replacements, etc. I submit, I do not have experience in witnessing these things. I tried 2 events once, both times I was 'on time' but had trouble figuring out what was going on, the second time I only caught on because...Nails Warstein, I believe noticed my "says" and said go here do this, etc. I pew pewd at some stuff and went to the meeting after, and i guess some people got stuff. I dont know much about it. Would have been more fun if I knew what was going on.

 

[Loren]

here you go.....(i'm sure i'll get some haters from this post)
bruce jenner needs to keep his private life private. i am SO SICK of hearing about his transition to caitlyn.
the confederate flag is HISTORY. you can't erase the civil war. why ban displaying the flag?

The issue of what the display of the flag represents, and 'what the civil war was about' are two separate issues. Slaves, African, Irish, Chinese, or otherwise, were pawns of BOTH sides. Being that the outlook was at least more palatable in the north, well, which side would you fight for. The Union was NOT fighting to free the slaves! Hell no. People need to read more. Find out some things Lincoln actually said, for instance, he was NOT an abolitionist. He gave less than two ****s about slavery. He used the Emancipation Proclamation as a tool to rally more bodies. Winning wars takes spending lives. Then you win by making someone else, die for their country. The Union was fighting to maintain control and benefits as they were of the Union. The Confederacy wanted to do things their way, and cared even less about the slaves as a class.

Personally, no, I do not support laws banning the display. People should fly the flag or not. Gov't buildings, are another matter entirely. No time to discuss that part. Classes in 75 mins. Numerical Analysis, then Queueing Theory (fun!! ). It is also not important enough to me to get personally involved. Fly it. Be prepared to answer questions from people. If it is about Southern Pride, share it with them. Let them get to know you. Learn of each other. Ask why they fear/hate it. I was born and raised in medium sized town in SE Texas. Other half of my life in FL. Mom was an AF brat, Dad was a, well, an actual rocket scientist, aerospace, and secure comm system engineer. He grew up in small towns in Tx. Where I am from, "country" was cool. "Redneck" was you calling me white trash. Not a complimentary, funny, or prideful remark at all. Times have changed. Point being, I have seen it all from both sides. Been friendly, if not friends, with racists on both sides. I still have prejudices. I don't think we will ever erase prejudice from humans. It is not what we think about someone that matters as much as what we do.

I don't care if the loan officer, admissions officer, or police officer, hates me because I am white. I could say Irish-American, but I really hate that hyphenated ****. American. But as long as they treat me the same we are good. I dont give a crap if they love, accept, or approve of me. Just do their job with me fairly. When that doesn't happen, thats racism, imho. So, does the flag mean racism? That depends on the person. In the sum total of my life experiences, I have observed a far far overwhelming majority of people that fly it, in which it DOES mean "we hate ******s" vs "yay we are from the south". Personally, if there was a flag people could fly telling me "I/we hate crackers! Especially Irish ones!" I wish they WOULD fly it loud and proud! Tells me who to avoid! But, that's just me. White, Black, Red, Yellow, Brown, its not the person screaming "I hate XYZ race people" all the time, you gotta worry about. Its the ones that roll down the flag, smile, shake your hand, and throw your application/resume/medical file, in the trash the second you turn around. Know Your Enemy?

TLDR: To be clear, yes I think generally, the flag DOES represent a prejudiced persona. Of course there are exceptions. Mostly a new generation. They think it is cool and controversial. Or they just like being southern/country. But, I do not think anyone should be prevented from flying it. Then again has that really happened? I thought it was all about gov't buildings, or municipally funded parks and such. I gtg get ready for school. School is cool.

 

[TimberWolf]

Stratics and Broadsword have no relationship what so ever. No Fiscal connections, not even any official "unofficial status" if you get my meaning. These censorship decisions seemingly are based solely on the perceived value of having Dev's comment occasionally on threads.

I would rather the Dev's didnt comment and we had free reign to discuss any and all UO topics. Personally I think the Dev's would still have to comment occasionally because this site is a fast easy way to communicate changes to their player base.

 

[Loren]

I can't really add much here. I am not as connected to the game as most, by virtue of lack of participation over time. I do not know of EM Corruption, since I have limited experience with that also. Free Shards? I could care less. I think though that Ron can do as he wishes with Stratics and Dev's can do as they wish with commenting/support. If Ron/Stratics and Dev's come to agreement, it is a moot point on if I like it or not. I recognize you feel strongly about it. Perhaps you could start an opinion poll thread. Asking nothing but, "How important is Developer participation in UO Stratics to you?" not 1 to 10 , say more like the Not at All, mostly unimportant, Neutral, mostly important, Must Have options. See what opinions are? As conjecture, I offer that the decision was made, if indeed it was made based on that, because Stratics feels the majority is better served by having them here vs discussing particular topics. Have you tried messaging Ron and asking him exactly what was what? That's between you guys. I wave goodbye to this thread. I have stuff to do. As we all. I hope I get to visit Sosaria this week.

 

[Xenobia]

There is a time and place for everything and this is NOT the time or place to spout your BS about us "Americans".

Back to topic, We all know UO does not support free shards so get over it? Not trying to be mean just straight to the point.

Amen to that!

LMAO you would have never survived the places I went to defending the Constitution of the United States of America, so please do not insult me, you haven't defended squat. And in the immortal words of Col Jessep (Jack Nicholson) " I would rather you just said thank you, and went on your way, Otherwise, I suggest you pick up a weapon, and stand a post."

Thank you for your service Lord Frodo!

 

[Loren]

Heya TW. I forgot about this thread. Going to be so busy this semester. Went back to work with a full time outside job, as circumstances dictated, still have 2 courses + FPE for the MS + several hours of work per week for the math dept in exchange for tuition remission on 1 class. But that is not why I am here. I found one of my college papers from a course very early on during my BSc program.... I wrote something (not entirely original thought) that fits in here, very well:

"We did not defeat the British military with the First Amendment, we shot them."

 

[Nexus]

I am always shocked on how much you Americans claim to embrace freedom of Speech....then spend soooooo much time and effort to quash those exact freedoms!

No bad has ever come from educating people by intelligently discussing a topic.

You all need to spend more time defending your free speech and less time defending your "Right to bear arms"....Make for a better world all around!

You know I've been watching this thread for a while, and in light of this and other conversations I've seen over the years, and more recently, I finally decided to chime in.

Statements like these are only made by people who do not fully understand what having a freedom means. I'm not faulting you or anyone else for your statement, it's a rather common misconception, so in the name of having an enlightened society I guess I'll pass on a bit of prudence.

Having a freedom does not mean there are no limitations; every freedom comes with an obligation, and understanding that one has to exercise self-restraint. It is only through the careful and prudent exercise of self-restraint that people can achieve a state of Liberty. Here are some examples of discussion on this from greater minds than mine..

Montesquieu in Spirit of the Laws states that, "Liberty is not the freedom to do whatever we want: if we have the freedom to harm others, for instance, others will also have the freedom to harm us, and we will have no confidence in our own safety. Liberty involves living under laws that protect us from harm while leaving us free to do as much as possible, and that enable us to feel the greatest possible confidence that if we obey those laws, the power of the state will not be directed against us."

Rousseau in Of the Social Contract says, “for the impulsion of mere appetite is slavery, and obedience to the law one prescribes to oneself is freedom”

This necessity for self-restraint is why we have rules in place on Online Forums like here at Stratics, or in games such as Ultima Online, it's why you can't go to your place of business and begin spouting profanities at customers or clients and expect not to be reprimanded, and why when interacting with the public there are laws in place which if breached will result in your being arrested. These Laws, Standards of Conduct, and Rules are the principle guidelines provided for how and when to exercise self-restraint in what ever environment and/or situation they happen to be in.

And as a last thought, in the US, the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, only prohibits government agencies from passing law which abridges free speech, it doesn't apply to non-governmental institutions right to do so within the confines of their property, nor does it prohibit or endorse punishment for the content of said speech.

 

[TimberWolf]

You know I've been watching this thread for a while, and in light of this and other conversations I've seen over the years, and more recently, I finally decided to chime in.

Statements like these are only made by people who do not fully understand what having a freedom means. I'm not faulting you or anyone else for your statement, it's a rather common misconception, so in the name of having an enlightened society I guess I'll pass on a bit of prudence.

Having a freedom does not mean there are no limitations; every freedom comes with an obligation, and understanding that one has to exercise self-restraint. It is only through the careful and prudent exercise of self-restraint that people can achieve a state of Liberty. Here are some examples of discussion on this from greater minds than mine..

Montesquieu in Spirit of the Laws states that, "Liberty is not the freedom to do whatever we want: if we have the freedom to harm others, for instance, others will also have the freedom to harm us, and we will have no confidence in our own safety. Liberty involves living under laws that protect us from harm while leaving us free to do as much as possible, and that enable us to feel the greatest possible confidence that if we obey those laws, the power of the state will not be directed against us."

Rousseau in Of the Social Contract says, “for the impulsion of mere appetite is slavery, and obedience to the law one prescribes to oneself is freedom”

This necessity for self-restraint is why we have rules in place on Online Forums like here at Stratics, or in games such as Ultima Online, it's why you can't go to your place of business and begin spouting profanities at customers or clients and expect not to be reprimanded, and why when interacting with the public there are laws in place which if breached will result in your being arrested. These Laws, Standards of Conduct, and Rules are the principle guidelines provided for how and when to exercise self-restraint in what ever environment and/or situation they happen to be in.

And as a last thought, in the US, the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, only prohibits government agencies from passing law which abridges free speech, it doesn't apply to non-governmental institutions right to do so within the confines of their property, nor does it prohibit or endorse punishment for the content of said speech.

Wow you really dug this out of the files Nexus...My original post was written last August ( a little behind on your readings?)

A few points first no where did I reference the 1st Amendment to your constitution. ( yes remember I am a Canadian, but a studied Canadian that is typically more knowledgeable then most American's on this subject...)

Next you are comparing apples to oranges when you compare my comments to "it's why you can't go to your place of business and begin spouting profanities at customers or clients and expect not to be reprimanded"
or when you speak of Laws of this Land and of an enlightened society. ( of which America is seldom accused of being).

I was speaking directly about Stratics' insistence that we should never discuss anything that Broadsword doesnt want us to. I think we should not concern ourselves with what does or does not violate Broadswords TOS.. We are NOT Broadsword nor are we governed by them in any way shape or form. They dont pay the bills and they dont provide significant contributions to these forums in any way.

I believe if we want to see improvements in UO we need to honestly and openly discuss and criticize all aspects of the game we Love. Many of the very best features in UO today were stolen by Broadsword from the very same freeshards that Stratics refused to allow us to discuss because it might offend Broadsword.

And Lastly,...Nexus the fact that you would even reference Rousseau in this discussion makes me question why you dredged up this post that is nearly half a year old. Are you hoping to impress someone?? Your reference hardly addresses the core point of my original post!

 

[Taylor]

The problem here is that the phrase "freedom of speech" is characterized by huge volume of literature dating back centuries. It's a loaded phrase and completely counterproductive to discussions about censorship on a privately-owned forum. If we can start by agreeing that no one has "rights" (another loaded term) at a privately-owned forum with voluntary registration, then I think the discussion about what can/cannot/should/shouldn't be permissible topics at Stratics immediately becomes more productive.