Introducing a New Method for Enforcing TOS/Site Rules

[bcampos]

My favorite is that if you say something to someone and they blow up about it, you get hit with these "points." Apparently you can tease level headed people but not anyone who is unstable...

Edit: Ok I take this one back a little bit, aparently you have to TRY to get them to explode... I wonder how they know if you tried or not?

[wilomn]

Hey bc, could you define communism for me please. I want to be sure we're talking about the same thing.

[bcampos]

Hey bc, could you define communism for me please. I want to be sure we're talking about the same thing.

Carefull Wilomn.... It looks like you may be trying to get me to explode which would be a violation of the bear baiting act of 2008. This could cause for an admin or moderator to punish you with a socialistic "point" to which the created system that lacks ideology would punish you with. With this approach, this non-capitalist "classless" society of forum posters would be forced to live in a society where they are placed into this ficticious "classless" class.

I was not going for the exact Karl Marx socialist approach dividing away from historical materialism that brought on communism, but more the general little boy-big brother approach of modern communisitic attitudes.

Its ok, in your 88 years (acording to your profile), I'm sure you've seen alot. Just ask big brother what you think, they will tell you.

[wolfy-hound]

Having moderators that enforce the rules is in no way communism. The definition of true communism would be that all the people contribute, and all benefit. Unfortunately there are these human beings that exist. They ruin it all, by not being ideal. People will fuss and argue and pick fights.
I still fail to see why enforcing rules that already existed is somehow depriving anyone of enjoying the site.

[wilomn]

Carefull Wilomn.... It looks like you may be trying to get me to explode which would be a violation of the bear baiting act of 2008. This could cause for an admin or moderator to punish you with a socialistic "point" to which the created system that lacks ideology would punish you with. With this approach, this non-capitalist "classless" society of forum posters would be forced to live in a society where they are placed into this ficticious "classless" class.

I was not going for the exact Karl Marx socialist approach dividing away from historical materialism that brought on communism, but more the general little boy-big brother approach of modern communisitic attitudes.

Its ok, in your 88 years (acording to your profile), I'm sure you've seen alot. Just ask big brother what you think, they will tell you.

So then, you can't?

Interesting.

[bcampos]

So then, you can't?

Interesting.

If you read my post, you would see that the definition was "hidden" inside......

Some call it an all work all benefit.. Some call it big brother asigning you your life...

Wow

[wilomn]

If you read my post, you would see that the definition was "hidden" inside......

Some call it an all work all benefit.. Some call it big brother asigning you your life...

Wow

Well, I'm not real good at finging things people hide. I'm pretty much a plain and simple guy.

Could you give me the plain and simple version of your definition of what communism is?

[bcampos]

Well, I'm not real good at finging things people hide. I'm pretty much a plain and simple guy.

Could you give me the plain and simple version of your definition of what communism is?

Ok plain and simple guy... If you would like to explain exactly what the text book answer is.

Comunism is "Revolutionary Proletarian Socialism" or "Marxism." It is a political and economical philosophy claiming to be free of ideology. Yet it is a specific ideal in and of itself. It is a structure that promotes a "classless" society of people, yet in doing so creates a distinct upper and lower class. The upper class is usually the organization or political structure that enforces the ideals. Its design is that a mass of working class can push forward without materialism, and create a better world. In reality, it is a "big-brother" attitude of the enforcers keeping the "classless" working class in check and under control.

I think we've gotten away from the topic of the big-brother system, but I'm sure you understand now.

[bcampos]

Having moderators that enforce the rules is in no way communism. The definition of true communism would be that all the people contribute, and all benefit. Unfortunately there are these human beings that exist. They ruin it all, by not being ideal. People will fuss and argue and pick fights.
I still fail to see why enforcing rules that already existed is somehow depriving anyone of enjoying the site.

I don't disagree with rules, it was the big-brother aspect I was trying to discuss. We have just kind of wandered off the path of the conversation and turned it into something it should not have been.

[wilomn]

I don't disagree with rules, it was the big-brother aspect I was trying to discuss. We have just kind of wandered off the path of the conversation and turned it into something it should not have been.

Ok, no now I have your testbook definition above and this comment here but, unless I missed it, I don't have your defintion of communism unless, of course, you argee whole heartedly with the textbook definition you used.

Supposing you do, wouldn't the abililty to simply walk away from the site, out of big brother's sight, negate the implication you make of two classes?