The Liberal Section (USA EDITION)

[Violet]

It's certainly more his than mine, but the ownership of it is Dal.net's. If being responsible for operation and management meant that one owns a thing, I'm going to have to fire my maid out of not wanting her to own my house. I think that would break her contract, and if it doesn't: oh well, i feel like it.

1. No shit, you own a scrap of it, not responsibilities, not liabilities, nothing.

3.some percent of it, thank you. And in another week or so I pop the donation bar. Chill out.

2. False analogy, your maid has responsibilities as part of a contract, fr0d0 is a guest.

Don't take everything I say seriously, seriously. I still don't want my maid to own my house because she's more responsible than me

3. This is not analogous to a house owner/maid, it's analogous to a landlord/tenant/guest. Dal.net are the owner of the facilities, Adrian leases space from them for the chat room and as such is responsible for managing, and has the liabilities concerned with, anything that goes on inside it. Fr0d0 is a guest, and when a guest insults the host you should expect to be kicked out.

It remains Dal.net's thing that Adrian is politely asking that they will let him use it as if it were his The host is Dal.net, not Adrian. Adrian is just a responsible/liable person with access to the kick command. And Darwinbot sucks at hangman.

Seriously, ownership has absolutely zero to do with managing and being responsible.

No shit, and having access to a chat room gives you ZERO rights to it.

'Rights' are an opiate to the masses, Void Please use a better word to describe whatever you meant by the above statement.

[theVOID]

It's certainly more his than mine, but the ownership of it is Dal.net's. If being responsible for operation and management meant that one owns a thing, I'm going to have to fire my maid out of not wanting her to own my house. I think that would break her contract, and if it doesn't: oh well, i feel like it.

1. No shit, you own a scrap of it, not responsibilities, not liabilities, nothing.

3.some percent of it, thank you. And in another week or so I pop the donation bar. Chill out.

The chat room is not community funded.

Don't take everything I say seriously, seriously. I still don't want my maid to own my house because she's more responsible than me

uhhh...

It remains Dal.net's thing that Adrian is politely asking that they will let him use it as if it were his The host is Dal.net, not Adrian. Adrian is just a responsible/liable person with access to the kick command. And Darwinbot sucks at hangman.

The host is the service provider, Adrian has the responsibilities for what goes on inside #Atheistforums, like I said it's Analogous to the landlord/tenant scenario. Besides, the chat room isn't community funded, all of that money goes towards the server and domain name registration.

'Rights' are an opiate to the masses, Void Please use a better word to describe whatever you meant by the above statement.

You are speaking as if some wrong has been done here by Adrian, it seems like you are demanding of something you simply do not have rights to. I'm not going to assume your position on rights in a response, if you want to explain it go ahead.

[Violet]

The chat room is not community funded.

Forum, chat room, tis hard to know which one someone is talking about at any given time unless they write in big bold letter Chatroom:

Don't take everything I say seriously, seriously. I still don't want my maid to own my house because she's more responsible than me

uhhh...

At a loss for words again? ^_^

The host is the service provider, Adrian has the responsibilities for what goes on inside #Atheistforums, like I said it's Analogous to the landlord/tenant scenario. Besides, the chat room isn't community funded, all of that money goes towards the server and domain name registration.

The service provider is the one who owns whatever the service is (unless someone more powerful can force them to perform their service, of course... though that would mean that they essentially are the service provider). I don't deny that Adrian is largely responsible for what goes on in the chat room.

'Rights' are an opiate to the masses, Void Please use a better word to describe whatever you meant by the above statement.

You are speaking as if some wrong has been done here by Adrian, it seems like you are demanding of something you simply do not have rights to. I'm not going to assume your position on rights in a response, if you want to explain it go ahead.

/beginramble <I don't think I've demanded a single thing in... oh wait, there was that annoying computer fiasco I had to fix. Other than that, at least a month. I think. Did I demand anything else in the last month? 0.o I demand myself to remember everything I've said over the past month! Well, I failed that too At least I can demand the Silicoid Scourge perfectly. Almost perfectly. Very well. In a way that isn't bad. I don't suck. SHUT UP, ARKTUOS! i DON'T NEED TO HEAR YOUR OPINION RIGHT NOW. i WON. AND NO SHE DIDN'T, YOU'RE JUST JEALOUS. I DON'T CARE THAT YOU THINK GIVING THE MRRSHAN AND THE ALAKARI TECHNOLOGY TO KEEP THEM FROM DYING WAS A BAD IDEA. IT GOT THE FUCKING KLACKON OFF OF MY BACK, EVEN IF I THEN COULND'T INVADE THEIR PLANETS TIL ENDGAME. NO, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT. NOT AGAIN. JUST PLEASE SHUT UP!> /endramble

I am commenting that I think it is somewhat hypocritical for someone of his supposed beliefs regarding freedom (did he not say using different words that 'My views toward government's interference with people's lives border on anarchy/zero'?) to then perform authoritarian actions of such an extreme as to ban someone, especially for such a minor thing as disagreeing with a person/feeling insulted by their opinion.

I'd also like to note that I think it was rather unkind of fr0d0 to call Adrian a posh twat (To be frank, i'd rather be considered a twat than posh...). I certainly wouldn't think I needed to say that.

My position on 'rights' is not dissimilar to my understanding of laws. Often I hear people say that 'laws are there to protect our freedoms'... yet this is false. Laws are restrictions. 'Rights' are allowances within those restrictions that have their own restrictions. None of this is about freedom, all of this is about control, and tell me that governments are wrong in their approach.

Do I have the 'right' to do something? That doesn't have an influence on what I can do, and the influence on what I will do is often slight. It doesn't stop me from murdering someone... it only makes me attempt to not get 'caught' for doing so. A law is a half-measure that assumes that a society at large will respect the lawmaker enough to follow the laws that are made. Giving someone the 'right' to do something only matters if the person is owned by you.

Unlike most people, I am not owned by a government (because I am not controlled by one, though I do tend to work within a system where one already exists). I'm dangerous in that extent: a wild card that doesn't base its actions on an arbitrary statement of something generally regarded as powerful. Ownership is control. If you do not have it for that thing, then you do not own that thing. A person who cannot control himself owns not even that.

There's more indepth to all of that, of course... but I think that explains those three related ideas well enough for now (iow: one cannot make a law in a place they do not own, one can't declare what is allowed where they cannot defend against what is not, one cannot control, defend, or take a thing without power in the first place. Power is what defines government, and without it there is no government).

Adrian is given 'rights' by a more powerful being to exercise some limited power to some limited discretion. He does not own the chat room, though he owns the people who enter into the chat room. Maybe it's nitpicking on my part, but I think there is an important difference to be found there.

[fr0d0]

1. No shit, you own a scrap of it, not responsibilities, not liabilities, nothing.

And only dal.net do.

2. False analogy, your maid has responsibilities as part of a contract, fr0d0 is a guest.

I am dal.net's guest the same as Adrian

3. This is not analogous to a house owner/maid, it's analogous to a landlord/tenant/guest. Dal.net are the owner of the facilities, Adrian leases space from them for the chat room and as such is responsible for managing, and has the liabilities concerned with, anything that goes on inside it. Fr0d0 is a guest, and when a guest insults the host you should expect to be kicked out.

Adrian leases fuck all - get real. He's a guest and a person who has set up a room. dal.net remain fully responsible for everything, Adrian gets to act like a despot if he so chooses. He can ban me for no good reason apparent to me, that's his prerogative.
The chat room is an extension to this site, where this site's members can choose to communicate in a different medium. It is not independent from this site. I could set up my own chat on dal.net for atheistforum.org members, but I wouldn't be able to integrate it into this forum or advertise it prominently as it is now.

The fact we're discussing it here shows the integral link. I see no reason why Adrian saw fit to ban me, and so far he has offered no reasonable explanation as to why.

If Adrian were to set up a chat room independently to the forum, then I wouldn't be discussing it here. His actions would be entirely independent.

[HeyItsZeus]

Are you all fucking serious? This thread is not meant for your bickering! Discuss politics now!!!!

[theVOID]

1. No shit, you own a scrap of it, not responsibilities, not liabilities, nothing.

And only dal.net do.

By agreeing to the terms and conditions Adrian has accepted a number of responsibilities and liabilities.

I am dal.net's guest the same as Adrian

Did you register the chat room and agree to a legally binding contract with terms and conditions that require you take on certain responsibilities and liabilities? No. Adrian did. He is not in the same position as you.

Adrian leases fuck all - get real. He's a guest and a person who has set up a room. dal.net remain fully responsible for everything, Adrian gets to act like a despot if he so chooses. He can ban me for no good reason apparent to me, that's his prerogative.

1. That's not true, he is in a position similar to someone who leases a flat, he is responsible for making sure it complies with Dal's terms and conditions and if not he can lose his account and be barred from starting new rooms. You are not responsible for anything that goes on inside the chatroom.

2. He said you insulted him, making assertions about someones life can piss people off, if you piss someone off on the chat room that they are responsible for managing you get banned. It's really not that hard to see is it?

The chat room is an extension to this site, where this site's members can choose to communicate in a different medium.

No it isn't, it's a separate entity with a common name.

It is not independent from this site. I could set up my own chat on dal.net for atheistforum.org members, but I wouldn't be able to integrate it into this forum or advertise it prominently as it is now.

You could set up a chat room on Dal and target it towards af.org members but anyone on the Dal server is free to join.

There is a single link, that's about as far as prominently advertised as you can get.

The fact we're discussing it here shows the integral link. I see no reason why Adrian saw fit to ban me, and so far he has offered no reasonable explanation as to why.

No, it only shows that you think you have some rights to the chatroom that you do not, that you've come here to complain about it only shows your sense of entitlement, it does not make the chatrooms and the forums one and the same.

He banned you for refusing to stop making false assertions about his life, he offered you a chance to correct yourself and get unbanned.

If Adrian were to set up a chat room independently to the forum, then I wouldn't be discussing it here. His actions would be entirely independent.

He did set it up independently, without using any resources of this forum or it's members, that he chose to do this and provide a link so people here can use it should we wish does nothing to change that.

[fr0d0]

Everytime you sign on to dal.net you're presented with terms and conditions. I'd expect to comply with blanket requirements regarding decency and illegality. That's all Adrian has signed up to.

Answer me this:

Part of my evidence here is that Adrian is in denial about his well off background. Should I, as a friend, apologise and let him continue in his delusion unchallenged, or should I tell the truth and stick it out?

[HeyItsZeus]

[reverendjeremiah]

I thought this was a liberal post area that AF liberals could subscribe to and get updates onliberal stuff...not a place where chat room shit slinging fights are to be drawn out..oh well..sling your shit...I cant follow this complain very well anyways. What are we complaining about again?

[fr0d0]

Ann Coulter rocks tho' doesn't she?