In one way or another, whether it's radio, TV, newspapers, or internet, it seems there are always limits on speech. Off-hand I can only think of a few instances where you have relative freedom of speech: 1) In a one-on-one face-to-face conversation 2) writing and publishing a book.. Even then I think you have to worry about what you say: Don't slander, don't threaten anyone etc..

Always remember, "What has been said, cannot be unsaid."

I understand the admins wishes, but it sure would be nice to have some sort of corner of this vast forum, even if t is private and people agree to go into it ... There is just so much information out there about politics that needs to be shared. Hopefully this makes it past the screeners.

Wouldn't a political forum be much like a TV show ... Don't turn it on if you don't want to watch it?

So....why did you read that forum if you didn't like it ??? I thought it was great. I looked forward every day to hear the latest. If you didn't want to read it you could just self censor it by simply not reading it...... Simple! Just like television, if you don't like a program then don't watch it. No need to take that program off the air because some don't like it, but others do. We have lots of forums to choose from and I disagree that because some don't like them we should deny the rest from enjoying them.

You forgot to mention that the bad reputation and shooting from the hip and bad mouthing and name calling were all to the credit of a very few. The other 98% of us where adult enough to handle a discussion.

The 2% plus those who were against anything political would constantly badger the admin with complaints. And for some who have suggested making it private or sign in....IT WAS. Those who complained the loudest had to OPT IN to be able to lurk and then complain.

Please remember it was a very few who baited and set out to disrupt the many. You know like per usual!

btk

Because some people posted in the non-political forums with policital themes. It carried over in a very unpleasant way.

Then the moderator could have simply said this post should be in the political forum. By punishing everyone who enjoys political debate to appease those that can't simply ignore what they don't want to hear is wrong. I got a lot from the political forum and that includes info from the other side that sometimes made me think. What's wrong with a discussion about politics?

I agree Shimpy. I learned a lot from the Political Forum. And the fact that a member had to "opt in" to the Forum should have meant no complaints ... If a member was offended, they could simply "opt out"! But unfortunately the decision was made to shut it down. I continue to hope that it's not a permanent decision.

i just find it an oxymoron of sorts that the opt-in political forum was shut down because of some folks who could not keep their nose out of other people's political comments BUT forums that permit some level of developer-bashing continue to exist.

Dangnabbit!! Why would you assume I opposed the political forum??? (BTW - that was the biggest problem - some posters assumed things from what others said instead of just reading and commenting on what others actually said).

I thoroughly enjoyed the political forum and was a regular contributor. I learned some important things and some others told me I presented good information they were not aware of.

That is not the point. The administration had the right to monitor their website and enforce civility as they saw fit. No big deal. This is America. I've got lots of other ways to express my free speech and continue to learn.

Did I miss the explanation given by the admin for discontinuing the political forum? I've not heard before that they were deluged with complaints from non-participants and the 2%. Unless you can confirm that, I find it somewhat farfetched that they would allow themselves to be influenced by folks whose motives were so obviously spurious. Absent their explanation, I have theorized that they were instead deluged by a steady flow of nasty comments and shooting from the hip, with which they had to spend far too much time monitoring and removing to preserve what they thought was civil discussion befitting TOTV.

You're correct about the 2%. But those folks were almost all passionate participants who just couldn't contain their emotions or stubbornly refused to follow admin guidelines. They ruined something that was good, but we could say that most things in our lives which are regulated came about because of folks like that.