NationStates Jolt Archive

Closed debates prevent other people from expressing their opinion on the subject being discussed. Should these debates, that infringe on freedom of speech, be banned?

Hard to say, but since this is a privately-owned forum, the Constitution does not apply.

Closed debates prevent other people from expressing their opinion on the subject being discussed. Should these debates, that infringe on freedom of speech, be banned?

No they don't, they just prevent you from expressing them in THAT Thread...

I for one won't read the closed Debates... why would I want to listen to something where I don't get to say anything, in a Forum designed for me to have my say?

Regards,
Gaar

This debate should be closed :D

Closed debates prevent other people from expressing their opinion on the subject being discussed. Should these debates, that infringe on freedom of speech, be banned?

They already are banned. If people want to have a closed debate without the swinish multitude popping in they can hold it elsewhere (note that closed RPs are allowed in the other forums).

I thought this thread was about debates in which only the set debaters could post and everyone else was spectators...

Yes. To ensure the posts/replies do not get out of hand.

Closed debates prevent other people from expressing their opinion on the subject being discussed. Should these debates, that infringe on freedom of speech, be banned?

Get. A. Life.

The point was to try to have an intelligent discussion between prepared and informed participants. You can post, if you must, the request is that you don't. Perhaps if you truly have a worthwhile point to add that hasn't already been expressed, you won't be ignored.

You were welcome to sign up to participate.

To what "freedom of speech" are you referring?

You have to belong to every conversation or your oppressed?

Should people be prevented from trying to have an on-topic, intelligent discussion free from trolls, those that don't read the thread, etc?

[And BTW the mods have said the threads are allowed.]

Sure, of course they should be allowed. Now, I personally won't read them - not any fun if I know I can't reply, unless it's a topic I'm really really interested in - but I have nothing against their existence.

You can mark a thread 'closed' in the topic all you like, but unless its actually closed (mod style) then anyone can walk in and say what they like, and assuming that they don't flame and things, all the other people can do is get annoyed or ignore it.

I'm not a part of it but I think it's a great idea and is no skin off my teeth if I can't participate...

I mean seriously-the 'create thread' button is right at the top if you really need to say something on the issue. If the people in the closed debate want to have a reasonable discussion within an agreed set of guidelines then more power to them. Not everyone wants to scan through 444 posts of "My ass smells" "You re teh stupid" eyeroll, sniper, eyeroll, "Commie" "Fascist" to get to the meat of the argument.

I would participate in a rhetorically moderated forum, where you are scored on the quality of your argument alone-just to improve my own skills.

This has become a hypothetical question, as Euroslavia has requested that the "closed" tag be removed from the topic titles.

The possibility of asking for the cooperation of General posters remains; but as Cogitation ruled (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=8467382&postcount=2), "Moderators will not honor requests to remove on-topic posts by people not named ... as participants."

Closed debates prevent other people from expressing their opinion on the subject being discussed. Should these debates, that infringe on freedom of speech, be banned?

If we can do closed RPs, then why not closed debates?

Closed threads are to assure that things do not get out of hand during touchy subjects...like they usually do.

If you want a voice, join up.

Closed debates prevent other people from expressing their opinion on the subject being discussed. Should these debates, that infringe on freedom of speech, be banned?

There is no such thing as a 'closed debate' on this forum.

Closed debates could cause quite a problem if the became prevalent.

The title of the thread asks "Should there be 'Closed debates' on NS?"

The question of the poll then switches the question to "Should 'Closed
debates' be banned?"

There are substantive differences between these questions, but the main thing is the title question indicates those of a certain viewpoint should vote one way, but the poll question indicates they should vote the opposite way.

So, if think closed debates are OK, you have to vote "no" (even though your answer to the title question would be "yes.")

If you think closed debates are not OK and should be banned, you have to vote "yes" (even though your answer to the title question would be "no.")

I note that several people who expressed opinions in a post to the thread that appear to be in favor (or at least tolerant) of closed debates voted "yes." My guess is that the voted based on the title of the thread.

And again, the idea of a "closed debate" was merely that others resist posting out of courtesy and that participants will respond to each other rather than every stray post. If you wish to participate, just sign up.

Of course, what amuses me is that the thread creator appears to assume the entire world is actually a part of the USA.

They talk about how "closed debates" are in violation of "freedom of speech"... but these forums aren't hosted in the US - hence the .co.uk at the end. These forums would be subject to whatever laws are deemed relevant to the United Kingdom.

Of course, if you want to argue the point based on UK laws then feel free but there isn't (as best as I can tell) any validity in debating it using US law or the US constitution.

Any reasons why this should be taken from a US point of view?