• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About funkejay

  • Rank
    F1 Ace

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    across the pond
  1. Ctrl300????

    Then you don't understand my position. As I have said so many times before - my view is that censorship is never justified, under any circumstances. So as far as I'm concerned, it doesn't matter what Ctrl300 said on this forum. Cav, as long as you recognize the validity of moderation on this or any other forum, you will have inequity in the application of such moderation. Mods are only people, and therefore they cannot divorce themselves from their own subjective biases and prejudices in discharging their "duties". As a result, you will see arbitrary and inconsistent treatment as a general rule. In short, you cannot expect fairness for yourself if you accept the legitimacy of censorship in any form. I've tried to do that countless times. Believe me, it will not work - you are a closed minded lot. If you believe that censorship is legitimized by a mere majority vote, I thank whatever hand of fate has ensured I do not live in a world where you are empowered to make such decisions. If bans are being handed out so frequently and lightly around here that even Ben was banned for a week, then any legitimacy that this forum once had is now forever lost. Speaking one's mind is not a crime. Your analogy stretches credibility to the breaking point. Yet another example of this notion that the majority have a legitimate right to silence the views of the minority. This is no forum in any meaningful sense of the word. Actually Andres, it isn't far from the truth at all. As you posted above, you've implied that his ban was valid becuase you have the weight of popular opinion behind it. Whatever Ctrl300 did, it wasn't a crime. He used offensive and profane language - and while it may be of limited effectiveness - it is nevertheless the form in which he chose to express himself. All expressions of one's thoughts are inherently legitimate, and it is not for you, nor anyone else for that matter, to act as the arbiter of ideas. I agree wholeheartedly. I fear that the heavy hand of the mods on this forum has destroyed the spirit of what this place once was. I've been stopping by only periodically lately, and at first I did not appreciate how far down the slope we've slid. But now I realize the extent to which the use of bans and censorship has taken the place of tolerance and good sense, and it is now so commonplace that I've no interest in participating in this forum any more. To paraphrase the famous quote - you get the forum you deserve.
  2. Jacques Has An Attack Of The Verbals.....

    Great read.... classic JV!!!
  3. Video Released Of American Air Force Shooting British Soldiers

    Hey Bruce. Who do you think the Dems have that will be able to eliminate the two front runners so easily? I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but I'd like to know who you have in mind.....
  4. Women In F1

    Andres, I think you've misunderstood my post. I want to see more women in F1, I just don't think that Danica has what it takes. I do however think that Katherine Legge may have enough talent to warrant some further examination.
  5. Women In F1

    Danica doesn't have the talent to succeed in IRL, little own F1. If she ever makes an attempt at crossing the pond - it'll be purely as a PR exercise for whatever sponsor is footing the bill. Katherine Legge is much more the real deal. She still has a long way to go, but I'd much rather see her make a serious stab at it than Danica. I watched her at the inaugral Formula Atlantic race at Edmonton in 2005 (where she won the race in commanding fashion) and she's been steadily improving in CART since joining the series. Hard to say whether she's got the stuff needed for F1, but I certainly hope so.
  6. Omg Its Snowing Like Mad

    There you go, making moral judgements again....... what's wrong with a consenting relationship between a man and his machine?
  7. I'm Famous!!

    No no no Mike, I didn't mean like that. I've taken to calling it that - a bit of a running joke that my g/f started (though you're right, it is an obvious referrence to Dubya) - and it just kind of spilled over onto the forum. I genuinely wasn't taking a poke at you my friend, I wasn't. I would never presume to compare you to him - you're far too eloquent for that!!!!
  8. The Political Compass

  9. Sexuality; What Are Your Views?

    That was also my point, Murray, but it appears that we are/were wrong. Either you are a Christian on their terms, or you're no Christian at all!!!! (PS - I know I said that I'd spoken my piece, but I posted that before seeing Murray's excellent post, and simply wanted to acknowledge it.......)
  10. Sexuality; What Are Your Views?

    My experience was quite similar. I never really "bought" into the whole Christian mythos at all, it just seemed so contrived, an obvious attempt to regulate behaviour based on fear of social recriminations. I've always been a bit of non-conformist, but I lived in a very conservative community where virtually everyone adhered to a similar world view. I was 17 when I moved away from home, and I found for the first time in my life the freedom to think these things through for myself. I ended up not going to university directly after high-school, instead I took a number of years to myself to sort some things out and get my bearings. When I did eventually go back to school, I took a few courses on philosophy (so I'm no authority, believe me) but it did help to clarify some of the ideas I was already developing. It's just kind of gone from there. In the end, my perspective on all of this is that being "open-minded" is logically inconsistent with a belief structure that presupposes the existence of a supreme being who (either directly or indirectly) authored a text that provides an infallible guide to moral knowledge. Although that world view does not, in my opinion, necessarily engender intolerance on any particular social issue, it often serves to reinforce prejudices and biases that do not originate within any particular belief system, but rather reflect predominant social attitudes which operate independently of any particular faith. As a result, organized religions tend to promote the adoption of a insular mindset that closes one off from self-examination (insofar as they reinforce the collectively held views that define it), thereby limiting our ability to make progress on very important social issues. So there you have it. I've said my piece, and I intend to move on.
  11. The Political Compass

    I'm -5.50 on the economic scale, and -8.10 on the libertarian/authoritarian scale. If the test is right, I make the Dalai Lama look like some kind of right wing extremist......
  12. Sexuality; What Are Your Views?

    Sorry, but do you not see the logical inconsistency in your own argument?!?!?!?! All you're doing is substituting the world "real" for "true". You argue that "real" Christians would not make a distinction between "Christians" and "true Christians", but then you immediately proceed to make that very distinction yourself!!!! Were I to accept your definition, I would have no choice but to conclude that you are not really a Christian. Perhaps it is best to agree that all one needs to do in order to qualify as a Christian is believe in Christ? You may disagree with their perspective, their specific beliefs, and their religious philosophy, but it is impossible to qualify who is "really" a Christian and who is not. In the end, all you are doing is judging their beliefs from the perspective of your own religious views. But more to the point - it is ridiculous to say that one must be a Christian to intellectually understand the rationale for their beliefs or to appreciate the inconsistencies between different denominations. Nor is it necessary to be a lawyer to understand what life as a lawyer is like. Furthermore, being a Christian, or being a lawyer for that matter, is not a universally consistent experience, so it does not follow that simply having had that experience will automatically impart an understanding of another Christian's viewpoints and perspective (which can vary widely - as I've already demonstrated!!!). And BTW - not only was I raised in an extremely devout environment, I was very involved in the Church until my early adulthood, and insofar as my personal life is concerned, for the most part I remain surrounded by people who are Christians. In fact, 90% of the people I know would describe themselves as Christian. It would not be an exageration to say that in most North American communities, one is immersed in Christianity at almost all times. Not that this in any way validates your original point. Christianity is not so rare and foreign a concept that one must personally experience to appreciate, nevertheless I have experienced it first hand. I'm pointing this out only to demonstrate that as with most assumptions, yours is also incorrect.
  13. I'm Famous!!

    I'm not familiar with any of the podcasts on the 'internets' either, but congratulations Mike all the same!!!!!
  14. Omg Its Snowing Like Mad

    Guilty as charged I'm afraid....... But don't worry - my first love is still the internal combustion engine, and anything powered by it!!!!
  15. The Political Compass

    As soon as the racing starts Mike, it will likely be the only topic that gets any of my attention!!!!!