Moderators=ThoughtPolice?

Ok, here is a perfect example of what I am talking about. There is no reason to resmod this post. This isn't a personal attack, Briana is simply voicing her opinion in a legitimate manner. Could Lewis possibly be offended by this? Well, yes he could. But my point is that it's OK if he's offended. That's his right.

If he is offended, he has choices to make. He can respond in kind with his opinion of Briana, he can choose to ignore the post completely (something I have seen him do in the past) or, if he thinks that Briana never posts anything worth reading, he can just mute her: problem solved.

Now for the record, I have no clue what Lewis thinks of this post and I am not trying to guess. Replace the names with any ones you like, it doesn't matter. I am just using it as an example to illustrate my point.

Which is this: You can only be offended by what others say if you let yourself be offended. We don't need someone to baby sit us. Just because you don't agree with someone doesn't mean they should be silenced. I don't agree with a lot of things that get posted here. But I don't think that those people shouldn't be allowed to post messages. Most of the time I just don't reply, why bother? They have their opinion, I have mine. It's all good.

Never forget: Just because it's what you believe, that doesn't mean it's right/true. It's just your opinion. Nothing more, nothing less.

If you have such a fragile ego that you worry about what a total stranger thinks about you, you shouldn't be reading the forums in the first place.

She cannot be a Gorean if she's black. NO NO NO. Not according to the Gorean Guidelines supplied by John Norman. NO NO. There are no black people in Gor! They don't like anyone other than blonde, blue eyed slave girls. Beauities of the beauties.. hand selected from best earth women according to John Norman.

So your Mistress canno't truely be a Gorean... but fear not, she could join any of the other off-shoot sub-cultures. Maybe the Gorean-Furry, the Gorean-Age-playing-Furry, the Furry-Age-playing-Dominitrix, the Dark-Elf-Goreans.. etc you get hte idea?

It's just that the books of Gor as written were very white. Sad to say. But that's the racist truth about John Norman and his sexist lameass books.

LOL and a Gorean Mistress??? Is that some sort of a slave instructor? (At least that's what John Norman calls Mistress, or maybe it's a free companion/free wm, one who he says is less freeier than a slave).

Not all opinions are by any stretch equal, however. Some are definitely correct, while some others are definitely not.



That's a highly impractical view when applied to how a forum should be run. Your expectations of the behavior of people as a whole is unrealistic.

it would have been difficult to judge for anyone who is sufficiently conditioned to accept that roleplaying institutionalized slavery and misogony and murder is an A-OK.

now to stay on topic, what exactly is LL trying to accomplish by censoring this specific form of conversation? protecting one of the most dedicated SL communities from negative press? protecting LLs image the exposure that it is ultimately dependant to some degree on a variety of deviants who log into SL to express yearnings that are illegal and immoral in RL?

i did not. get your facts straight.

AR'd for libel. just kidding but do get your facts straight

Hello. I think you must have misread my post. If you'll re-read, you'll notice that I said, "I'm not worried about defending Gor per se (although I do like certain Goreans), but I feel like D/s in general is getting dragged into this somehow."

To clarify, since it seems I must, we're not part of Gor.

That said, at once time, Mistress was actually part of SL Gor. In fact, She trained a lot of the Goreans. As it is now, they're too obsessed with their silly rulebooks and ARE basically roleplayers, most of them, but there are a few things that can be taken from the general Gor "thing" that have some actual value, yes. There's also a lot of worthless garbage, and the latter is what SL Gor seems to mostly have embraced today.

Again, I'm not especially here to defend SL Gor (although I don't think it represents any special kind of terrible threat, either); I'm just getting a sense that our lifestyle is being dragged into this along with them.

Because I expect them to act like adults? Hmm...you are probably right there. =(


Oh btw, an opinion can never be wrong. If someone says "I think...(blah blah blah)" Then they are, by definition, 100% correct. That is what they think. You may think something different, but they are still right to say that's what they think.

Don't equate an opinion with a fact, they are not the same. A person's facts may be incorrect, but thier opinion isn't.

No, but, "I think the Earth is flat," while technically true if the person is speaking honestly, reveals a belief that is, by all available evidence, patently false. Chiefly, I was objecting to the often-expressed idea that all opinions have equal value. They simply do not.

Is she or is she not a Gorean!?

And how the hell do you come on the forum and talk about some Mistress is this your real life thing too? I thought you said you were role playing, why refer to that person as "Mistress" on forum if it's only within SL roleplaying.

Anyways, a black person cannot be a Gorean according to John Norman, so she must have been kicked out?

So if she's a Mistress are you a slave?! Cattle?! WHOO HOO!!

have you ever heard of occam's razor?

titles are brief and eye catching to attract the readers attention. i don't know how you can read the newspaper without understanding that you need to read the first paragraph or two to contextualize the title.

Edit: Ack. Double post! Sorry.

This really isn't that complicated. Have you actually read through my posts?

I'll quote myself. Again.

"I'm not worried about defending Gor per se (although I do like certain Goreans), but I feel like D/s in general is getting dragged into this somehow."

"To clarify, since it seems I must, we're not part of Gor. That said, at once time, Mistress was actually part of SL Gor. In fact, She trained a lot of the Goreans."

She once was. Now She is not. The reasons are complex, very political and personal both, not germaine to this discussion, and have nothing to do with Her skin color.



You thought wrong. Again, quoting myself from before:

"In fact I dislike the term 'roleplay' as applied here. We're not playing a pen-and-paper game, we're not playing characters, and we don't restrict things to sexplay. It's not a 'roleplay,' at least not in our case. It's a lifestyle, which is a different thing, in much the same way as a marriage is not a 'roleplay.'"

Please, if you're going to address me about things I've said, first at least read and understand them.

Did you get permission from your Mistress to post on this forum? I thought slaves needed permission before even going to the restroom ?

It's easy to say “this is right” or “this is wrong” when you are talking about an independent object (such as the Earth's shape). But how do you tell when it's a value judgment?

To use the topic at hand as an example:

One person says in a post :”All Goreans are misogynistic bastards who have no respect for women.”

Another person says in a post “No they are not! They are kind, loving people and you just don't understand what you are talking about.”

Ok, which one is right and which one is wrong? There is no way to make a clear distinction between the two.

Both statements are equally valid.

The only way to make a determination as to which is right and which is wrong is to base it on your personal opinion. The answer will be different for different people.

edit all highlighting was done by ny spell checker dont know how it hapopen but disregard it



technically It cant happen in the original post read the [left]dffanition[/left]
again I will high light the [left]pertant[/left]
parts that pertain to the thread in question
Trolling (a post with an intentionally contrary opinion written with the intent of inciting or getting argumentative opinions)[left]OK[/left]
lets break this down


A post-- it is certainly a post this is a fact.

Intentionally contrary opinion -- who is the OP having a contrary opinion with in the thread in question ? I would agree that his post has the [left]possibility[/left]
to be contrary to the [left]beliefs[/left]
of many but can't be contrary to any one else in the thread its the first post.

Written with intent of inciting or getting [left]argumentative[/left]
opinions. --- this could be said of a great deal of the threads in [left]thes[/left]
forums.

My point here is i think that the thread was locked in error because as the [left]resmod[/left]
stated

"In my judgement the original post is an attempt to present an [left]inflammatory[/left]
topic ([left]Gor[/left]
) in a light that is almost guaranteed to start a flame war were it allowed to continue, [left]a.k.a[/left]
trolling."

Almost guaranteed this is the crux of this issue there was no trolling yet who knows what would of happen had the thread been left alone we will never know.

Then I guess now we both know you have a lot to learn, don't we?

Her name is Angelique LaFollette. Feel free to message Her in-game or here on the forums and direct Her to this thread if you think you have a case.

alex, my question doesn't concern whether LL leaves you alone or not and why. it was more concerning why it is that LL would protect you from public discourse when that discourse is clearly not breaking the community standards.



given that LL has taken a side on the topic - first by having a liason post an open ended warning in one thread, and closing another, it makes me curious if LL has a policy in place in regards to some of their most established revenue streams. of course i don't believe that LL is trying to pimp Gor on everyone, but I have to put forth both possibilities to illustrate the naivete of excepting gor, ageplay, etc etc as something that is covered by the spirit of the intolerance standard.

Of course I have.

I read your post, after seeing your provocative and eye-grabbing title. I then saw that you were talking about role-playing Taliban (interesting choice for your comparision though, eh?), and not making a direct comparison.

I wasn't speaking to my personal reaction. I was making a commentary based upon my knowledge of your past threads, which many times are intentionally provocative, and which a moderator might view as trolling.

But anyway, I used the word "possibly", and then went on to say that "I could be wrong.."

I'll just have to take your word for it, if you're telling me I am wrong, just as I will have to take your word for it that this isn't a veiled protest thread.

I disagree. Once we've settled on precisely what is meant by "Goreans," "misogynistic bastards," "respect," "kind" and "loving," we can potentially, given sufficient information, come to a conclusion. The conclusion may well be that BOTH statements are partly or completely wrong, or it may be that we don't have enough data to come to a conclusion at this time, but both statements cannot both be equally valid at the same time and in the same way (by the same criteria and using the same grouping of people called "Goreans" because they contradict one another (unless we mean the same thing by "misogynistic bastards" as we do by "kind" and "loving," which seems extremely unlikely).

And no, I do not subscribe to moral relativism, either.

Can a slave own a slave?? Maybe you could adopt me! Imagine the recursiveness of that relationship. A slave of a slave.... etc..

the difference between d/s and Gor is that D/s is a private roleplay. Gor is a political roleplay.

in a d/s lifestyle it is a consensual relationship between the dom and the sub. these are personal choices.

in a gorean society, the d/s is socially institutionalized. the social heirarchy commits some to slavery, particularly women.

what that means to me is that d/s role playing in SL (i seperate the words to emphasize i do not mean dungeon and dragons) is the roleplaying of a relationship with free choice. gor role playing is the role playing of institutionalized slavery, misogony, etc etc.

it's a given, that this is still role playing. that in rl, those role playing have a choice. that doesn't mean that the imagery that gor conjures is not objectional. the question is why must the objection be erased in the name of tolerance?

I tell you what, when you find a way for it to be humanly possible for people to “settled on precisely what is meant by” those words or any number of similar ones, let me know. I will nominate you for the Nobel Prize in psychology.

You would win for sure.

So your objection isn't to power exchange or even to calling yourself a slave but simply to the window dressing that the Goreans work within?

Well, okay. Help yourself. I don't really care one way or the other, then.

It's absolutely true that people frequently use the same words to mean vastly different things. That's why clarifying definitions in serious discussion can be so important.

calling yourself a slave doesn't make you a slave

in SL the only thing we can talk about is window dressing.