Topic: Fact based on topic relevant information should not be silenced in META - page 3. (Read 734 times)

No. People can set local rules (within reason). Some people don't want to have a debate regardless of the topic. If you feel your voice must be heard, create your own thread.



Not true. If I made a thread and said that someone was not allowed to post in it, and he did, he'd get a warning from a moderator first (post deletion), but a ban would follow if it continued. Local rules are relatively absolute. Now, some things are kind of unenforceable, like, if anyone posts in this thread, they owe me money. Or something to that effect, but not allowing individuals to post in a thread is within their right.

read the rules - you do not dictate them...

That would be only invoked for sales based threads. Where you do not want lower ranks to bid. Or similar situations.

There can be no reason for a moderator ever to remove facts based on topic or relevant discussion. It would be entirely ludicrous especially on a board such as meta.

The optimal result/outcome requires all fact based evidence available be presented for further analysis. You can not start prevent that under any circumstances on a board like meta. I actually believe all facts based opinions should be allowed on ALL posts and that any opinions or statements or accusations that can not be backed with evidence or highly corroborative events should be deleted.

READ THE FUCKING RULES YOU TWO

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/unofficial-list-of-official-bitcointalkorg-rules-guidelines-faq-703657
#26

As long as a thread isn't self moderated by the original poster,then anyone and everyone is allowed to air their various views and as long as such inputs are on topic and makes absolute sense then it sure wouldn't be removed by a mod(as only self moderated threads can the OP preside over the discussions),and in the meta board selfmod threads aren't allowed
With that being said I do not know how according to you certain users are smouldering and sniffing out inputs from certain users as regards their original posts.
A user could add certain "clauses" to their posts and advice certain users not to comment on their topic,probably as such users find it difficult to stay on topic and not result in troll upon troll,and I've seen you add such clause couple of times,so I don't see any problem with it.

Fact based, on topic input should be silenced in meta.

I notice some persons are trying to set some local rules in threads to prevent fact based debates taking place so that they may attempt to present a one sided argument and allow only those that support their side to contribute.

No observable events nor facts should ever be precluded from a thread if they are on topic and relevant surely? this enables misleading and false information to proliferate and appear to be valid since there are no rebuttals allowed. This in meta is ludicrous.

This is not in anyway the same as someone setting rules for the type of person that can purchase their items on the sales board. It is your item you can decide who you sell it to. On a discussion board people have the right to present facts that are on topic and relevant. The very notion of trying to preclude persons that can offer a facts based rebuttal/refutation is net negative.

This is just another attempt to silence people that want to rebut and make a sensible, logical and fact based refutation of the central points they are trying to enforce as truth when perhaps they are not.

Setting " rules" for who can reply on a thread in meta is totally corrupt.

All persons posting in meta are subject to the same rules.

Sensible, on topic debate.

When something is off topic then there should be a sensible case provided for why it was off topic and a warning given.

For something to be off topic again needs clear criteria provided.

Actually as many of you have noticed I am very much in favour of developing criteria that can be applied fairly to every person on this forum.