Thread Rating:
![[-]](https://bluegrassrivals.com/forum/images/lifestyle/collapse.png)
12-11-2008, 03:42 AM
thetribe Wrote:[Image: http://i91.photobucket.com/albums/k292/N...-horse.gif]
I was thinking the very same thing.:thatsfunn
:thatsfunn
01-02-2009, 02:50 PM
I find it very interesting that so many argumentative comments to the BGR staff members (and I see it throughout the site). I would like to compliment the BGR staff for taking the comments posed and not taking offense. Other message boards would have already booted the chellenging member. Great job to all for your patience. :notworthy
01-02-2009, 03:14 PM
Okay I think this got off topic. My point from the begining was not about if the rule should exist, but that I feel it contradicts itself.
"You may not post any content or links to content that is offensive, obscene, racist, abusive, or anything else that violates any applicable local, state, national or international law. Violating this rule will result in an immediate ban of user account and you could possibly be prosecuted"
Just because someone clicks the box, it really is not legally binding, you could put in there that I have to give you everything in my bank account. Not gonna happen. Its just for advisement. So my point being, if you are to ban or suspend someone for a post they made, isn't that a violation of rule 4. Since it is illegal to restrict someone's free speech?
BTw for the Don Imus thing. He had a legally binding contract. He was not prosecuted for what he said because he had the right to do so. However, he violated his legally binding contract with NBC, and they terminated his employment with them. Something they had the right to do because of the FCC Rules he broke. Which meant they were allowed to terminate his services.
"You may not post any content or links to content that is offensive, obscene, racist, abusive, or anything else that violates any applicable local, state, national or international law. Violating this rule will result in an immediate ban of user account and you could possibly be prosecuted"
Just because someone clicks the box, it really is not legally binding, you could put in there that I have to give you everything in my bank account. Not gonna happen. Its just for advisement. So my point being, if you are to ban or suspend someone for a post they made, isn't that a violation of rule 4. Since it is illegal to restrict someone's free speech?
BTw for the Don Imus thing. He had a legally binding contract. He was not prosecuted for what he said because he had the right to do so. However, he violated his legally binding contract with NBC, and they terminated his employment with them. Something they had the right to do because of the FCC Rules he broke. Which meant they were allowed to terminate his services.
01-04-2009, 04:26 AM
Stardust Wrote:I find it very interesting that so many argumentative comments to the BGR staff members (and I see it throughout the site). I would like to compliment the BGR staff for taking the comments posed and not taking offense. Other message boards would have already booted the chellenging member. Great job to all for your patience. :notworthy
Sorry Stardust
I dissagree with this statement.Every board I am on would think nothing of it.It comes with the job.
There were no rules broken in this topic we were just discussing the topic.As any good staff member of this board or any others knows you must have a level head.If you booted everybody for posing a question or arguing there point in a civil manner you wouldn't have a board for very long.
Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
