Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: Josh Bailey to Gamgee on Tue Jun 03 2025 10:33 pm

I don't know how to quote tbh on here so i won't until i know how lol.

To start, have you tried looking at the help in the editor you're using?

Nightfox

---
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Cougar428 wrote to FORIEST JAN SMITH <=-

Quoting Foriest Jan Smith to Jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: jimmylogan to Foriest Jan Smith on Tue May 27 2025 08:29:29

But on that same note I also don't CARE if they're being forced to
take it down. People like that should feel unwelcome to have those opinions, in my opinion.

I'll never be mistaken for a moderator, but I don't seem to be able to
follow your conversation. Your reply doesn't really contain any
context for me to grab onto.

Yup, this seems to be a common theme with the noobs lately. Hopefully
they can learn how to quote sometime soon.



... Take my advice, I don't use it anyway.
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Arelor wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

It's also depriving the body politic of money that should be used to
provide for the common good, which is why it's bad.

That would only be true if we accepted that the government has a legitimate claim to authority, which is debatable.

ie. do you think it is ethical for a political party that got in power with 23% of the votes to build infrastructure which is clearly not
needed while politicians and contractors divert 50% of the budget of
each project to their pockets?

When people condemns tax evasion they do so based on the idealized
model of what the State is and what it does represent instead of what
the government *actually is* and how it behaves in practice.

I'd claim that the claim to authority is valid, but grift, while
damaging isn't a reason to deny the claim.



--- MultiMail/Win v0.52
þ Synchronet þ .: realitycheckbbs.org :: scientia potentia est :.

Foriest Jan Smith wrote to jimmylogan <=-

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: jimmylogan to Foriest Jan Smith on Tue May 27 2025 08:29:29

But on that same note I also don't CARE if they're being forced to take it down. People like that should feel unwelcome to have those opinions, in my opinion.

You didn't quot what I said, so I assume you are talking about
a Nazi flag?

If not, then what?

If so, you might disagree with it, but do you agree with them having
the legal right to believe and say what they want?



... WWhhaatt ddooeess dduupplleexx mmeeaann??
--- MultiMail/Mac v0.52
þ Synchronet þ Digital Distortion: digitaldistortionbbs.com

Re: Re: free speech
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Arelor on Wed Jun 04 2025 05:13 pm

I'd claim that the claim to authority is valid, but grift, while
damaging isn't a reason to deny the claim.

It is easy.

In a modern nation-state it is understood that the legitimacy of authority comes from the fact they represent the interests of the people, who delegates power in the government. I don't agrtee but let's follow with the argument.

If a government does NOT represent the interest of the voters then you cannot say they are using the power the people delegated on it as intended. If they are outright abusing such power and not representing the people then they don't get to claim they work with the authority of the people and therefore nobody must take their ethical claims seriously.


--
gopher://gopher.richardfalken.com/1/richardfalken

---
þ Synchronet þ Palantir BBS * palantirbbs.ddns.net * Pensacola, FL

Arelor wrote to poindexter FORTRAN <=-

@MSGID: <6842C68A.37989.dove-general@palantirbbs.ddns.net>
@REPLY: <6840E135.1714.dove.dove-gen@realitycheckbbs.org>
Re: Re: free speech
By: poindexter FORTRAN to Arelor
on Wed Jun 04 2025 05:13 pm

I'd claim that the claim to authority is valid, but grift, while
damaging isn't a reason to deny the claim.

It is easy.

In a modern nation-state it is understood that the legitimacy of
authority comes from the fact they represent the interests of the
people, who delegates power in the government. I don't agrtee but let's follow with the argument.

If a government does NOT represent the interest of the voters then you cannot say they are using the power the people delegated on it as intended. If they are outright abusing such power and not representing
the people then they don't get to claim they work with the authority of the people and therefore nobody must take their ethical claims
seriously.

I would go one further.

If the government is acting against the interests of the nation, and
by that I specifically mean its people, then it is *treasonous* and
should be treated as such.

A government that treats its people as hostile, has not only lost its legitimacy, but its right to continue. The people would be right to
treat it as an enemy.

--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ MS & RD BBs - bbs.mozysswamp.org

MRO wrote to Josh Bailey <=-

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: Josh Bailey to MRO on Mon Jun 02 2025 01:23 pm

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: MRO to Foriest Jan Smith on Mon Jun 02 2025 03:01 pm

Free speech or the world will collapse!

you're in the uk. what do you know about free speech

Wow! MRO, you often (okay, USUALLY) post things I do not agree with. But in this instance....

TOUCHE!

Well played Sir! Well played!



... Remember... RAM is NOT an insertion technique!
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ The Lost Chord BBS - Cheyenne, WY

Josh Bailey wrote to MRO <=-

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: MRO to Josh Bailey on Mon Jun 02 2025 07:52 pm

Not all of this happened in Wales specifically though? Wales is politically separate from other parts of the UK in terms of Wales
having its own Government and Parliament as a devolved constituent country. We have healthcare in Wales that is even more free than what
you can get in England.

---

So.... there's "free" and then there's "more free?"

Fascinating.


... "42? 7 and a half million years and all you can come up with is 42?!"
--- MultiMail/Linux v0.52
þ Synchronet þ The Lost Chord BBS - Cheyenne, WY

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: Weatherman to MRO on Sat Jun 07 2025 03:05 am

MRO wrote to Josh Bailey <=-

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: Josh Bailey to MRO on Mon Jun 02 2025 01:23 pm

Re: Re: Re:free speech
By: MRO to Foriest Jan Smith on Mon Jun 02 2025 03:01 pm

Free speech or the world will collapse!

you're in the uk. what do you know about free speech

Wow! MRO, you often (okay, USUALLY) post things I do not agree with. But in this instance....

TOUCHE!

Well played Sir! Well played!

dude you sure got some balls to talk about not agreeing with what i post.
i still got the screenshots of that little girl picture you posted in irc on bbs-scene years ago.
---
þ Synchronet þ ::: BBSES.info - free BBS services :::

Not all of this happened in Wales specifically though? Wales is politically separate from other parts of the UK in terms of Wales
having its own Government and Parliament as a devolved constituent country. We have healthcare in Wales that is even more free than what you can get in England.

So.... there's "free" and then there's "more free?"

Fascinating.

That actually isn't out of the realm of possibilities. Here in the US, you
are more free in some states than you are in, say, California, and even in
some cities vs. Chicago or NYC.

I am reading what he says with that in mind.


* SLMR 2.1a * Art is I; Science is We.
---
þ Synchronet þ CAPCITY2 * capcity2.synchro.net * Telnet/SSH:2022/Rlogin/HTTP