Warn Level

[ykickamoocow 0]

Do you think its is a good idea for everyones warn level to be visable to everyone.

I personally think that warn levels should be visible to everyone.

[narain fan 0]

i remember bajo saying that polls are no longe rallowed

[ykickamoocow 0]

i remember bajo saying that polls are no longe rallowed

when did he say that.

[narain fan 0]

when did he say that.

yesterday...

[Wez 0]

Everyones seem to be on 0%, so I dont think there's much point in us even seeing our own...

[admin 0]

i remember bajo saying that polls are no longe rallowed

now thats just silly. Of course Polls are allowed...

[monza gorilla 1]

I am very much against members warn levels being visible to all the members. As has already been suggested (by Narain Fan, I think), it may encourage more unscrupulous members to cause trouble by provocation. Some of our members are quite excitable, and I can see it becoming something of a sport to goad these persons into rash actions. It is for these reasons that I think it would be a bad idea to advertise warn levels in the forums.

[kiko01 0]

I am very much against members warn levels being visible to all the members. As has already been suggested (by Narain Fan, I think), it may encourage more unscrupulous members to cause trouble by provocation. Some of our members are quite excitable, and I can see it becoming something of a sport to goad these persons into rash actions. It is for these reasons that I think it would be a bad idea to advertise warn levels in the forums.

Wise words... We don

[bajo39 0]

I am very much against members warn levels being visible to all the members. As has already been suggested (by Narain Fan, I think), it may encourage more unscrupulous members to cause trouble by provocation. Some of our members are quite excitable, and I can see it becoming something of a sport to goad these persons into rash actions. It is for these reasons that I think it would be a bad idea to advertise warn levels in the forums.

I can't imagine any of our members doing such a thing...

I support visible 'warn levels'.

now thats just silly. Of course Polls are allowed...

I didn't realize the button had been buried in the 'new topic' selection. When the 'poll' button disappeared, I thought polls were no longer allowed. I know I'm not alone either because we haven't seen any polls since this one in a long time.

[Kennye 0]

I agree with Monza, this is between the member and Admins of this site. Having this open to everyone would 'entice' some folks to pour gasoline on a smoldering fire.

[Max Mosley 2]

I am very much against members warn levels being visible to all the members. As has already been suggested (by Narain Fan, I think), it may encourage more unscrupulous members to cause trouble by provocation. Some of our members are quite excitable, and I can see it becoming something of a sport to goad these persons into rash actions. It is for these reasons that I think it would be a bad idea to advertise warn levels in the forums.

I was following you perfectly until your concluding line.

[ecapdeville 0]

Whats the use of a "warning" alarm if you are not going to be warned...

Everybody should know how is he doing at the forum in every aspect...we dont like surprises.

[admin 0]

I thought I better let you know that the forum software has no provision to make 'Warn Levels' available to everyone. The only options are that they are hidden or each member can see their own level.

[Wez 0]

Whats the use of a "warning" alarm if you are not going to be warned...

Everybody should know how is he doing at the forum in every aspect...we dont like surprises.

Interesting Avator Ecap

[Max Mosley 2]

Ah I make it dead even! What fun we could have had...

[Shadow 0]

Wise words... We don

[Kennye 0]

My warn level has gone up to 0%... What do I have to do to change that....

[pumpdoc 2]

My warn level has gone up to 0%... What do I have to do to change that....

just keep it up buck-o and you'll find out

[funkejay 0]

The notion of even having warn levels is ludicrous, not to mention anti-thetical to the notion of free speech.

And before anyone argues that this is merely a racing forum, and it's not important to safeguard the free exchange of ideas here, I caution you against being so eager to welcome the embrace of your beloved thought police. Once you accept that there are ever valid limits on the free expression of ideas, you've given purchace to the thin edge of the wedge, and it then becomes very very difficult to predict how far it might travel......

[kup 0]

To everyone - yes, yes, and yes again =)

"say "what" say "what" again" =) © Pulp Fiction (Samuel Jackson)

[Max Mosley 2]

The notion of even having warn levels is ludicrous, not to mention anti-thetical to the notion of free speech.

And before anyone argues that this is merely a racing forum, and it's not important to safeguard the free exchange of ideas here, I caution you against being so eager to welcome the embrace of your beloved thought police. Once you accept that there are ever valid limits on the free expression of ideas, you've given purchace to the thin edge of the wedge, and it then becomes very very difficult to predict how far it might travel......

What about racist posts though? Surely its OK to ban them and their ilk because otherwise I could disrupt the forum by offending half the posters (you bloody canadians are all too stupid to think these things through (seriously, you are beginning to sound like Dan though!))?

[funkejay 0]

What about racist posts though? Surely its OK to ban them and their ilk because otherwise I could disrupt the forum by offending half the posters (you bloody canadians are all too stupid to think these things through (seriously, you are beginning to sound like Dan though!))?

No, I don't agree. Even racist posts should be allowed. Have we now become so delicate and fragile that the mere suggestion of offence taken from someone else's words or ideas might cause us such greivous harm that we need guard against it by censoring its very expression?

Leaving aside for a moment the issue of what arbitrary yardstick against which one might measure such offence, and assuming that a consensus might be possible on what constitutes offensiveness (which it is not), then there are far better (and more effective) ways of dealing with offensive speech, (be it racism or any other form of offending expression) than the use of censorship.

I think you would find that if a racist comment was made on this forum, that the majority of posters would speak out and castigate the author, and there may even be a few who might attempt to educate the offending poster as to why his views are racist and therefore unfounded and ill-informed. It may even be possible to affect the poster's views through the use of reason and persuasion, and even if it were not, an illuminating debate would surely result. In the end, even if none of these approaches were successful, at least we would then know who the racist in our midst was.

Although I recognize that the impulse towards censorship is sometimes benevolent, we should nevertheless not attempt to isolate ourselves within a cocoon of soothing platitudes and sophistries about preventing the dangers of unfettered free speech, while we ignore (at our own peril) the reality that exists around us. If one attempts to homogenize views by the application of political correctness or any other means (whatever it's justification), you not only risk failure but you also risk subverting attitudes and ideas which, if given free expression, are likely to cause much less social upheaval.

I realize that many on the forum might find that too weighty a response, but the topic of censorship should never be considered lightly.

[Max Mosley 2]

Very interesting reply funkejay. Weightiness is good imo. I thought I was strongly in favour of free speach! Personally I think I'd still draw the line when someone is primarily trying to disrupt the forum or cause extreme offence. I do agree with you that all views should be discuss-able in society but in the right place and time and amongst those old enough (I include older teenagers there). Are you opposed to laws against incitement to racial hatred (we are about to extend ours to include religious hatred in the UK)? Btw I agree too that there are far too few places that allow that kind of discussion. When I was at uni there were protests all the time in favour of censorship but I would agree with you, I imagine, that that is completely unacceptable there.

[funkejay 0]

Very interesting reply funkejay. Weightiness is good imo. I thought I was strongly in favour of free speach! Personally I think I'd still draw the line when someone is primarily trying to disrupt the forum or cause extreme offence. I do agree with you that all views should be discuss-able in society but in the right place and time and amongst those old enough (I include older teenagers there). Are you opposed to laws against incitement to racial hatred (we are about to extend ours to include religious hatred in the UK)? Btw I agree too that there are far too few places that allow that kind of discussion. When I was at uni there were protests all the time in favour of censorship but I would agree with you, I imagine, that that is completely unacceptable there.

I recognize that I take an extreme view on this issue, but I am never in favor of censorship in any form, at any time, in any forum. Censorship is premised on the notion that it is possible to evaluate the merit and/or quality of speech and discern between that which is good, and that which is not. Generally speaking, the defence of censorship requires an adherence to a belief in moral "goods", in that speech which is said to offend or violate said "goods" ought to be censored, as being harmful to society and/or a quality or ideal valued by society. To the extent that I refute the ability of mortal man to accurately discern and define such "objective" values (assuming that such objective values even exist), censorship becomes an arbitrary exercise, and therefore lacks legitimacy. Given that there is unquestionable harm in the "chilling effect" of censorship (in addition to the infringement on man's inherent liberty) I would, in every case, err in favor of allowing speech, and then debate its merits.

[monza gorilla 1]

Well reasoned argument as always, Jay. I think a warn level, or whatever you like to call it, visible only to the member himself can act as a guidance tool. I'm thinking of the younger members here, or am I making unfair assumptions again?