Intellectual honesty?

I thought I saw some of my own posts get deleted or re-arranged in threads. I suspected, though, I was just being stupidly suspicious. Then I saw this:

Deist:

How come some of the entries were deleted? not a problem just curious.

Is this forum intended for genuine debate or pro-Austrian propaganda?  If it's the latter, then for those of you accusing me of being a troll, I'll have you know that I'd be happy to leave voluntarily if you're going to aggress against me on your private property.

I enjoy engaging you all, but I'm not going to waste my time if my posts are going to be shifted around to put the "Austrian" responses in the front or have some great points of mine flushed down the memory hole because Big Brother doesn't like it.

As Mises noted, using force and not reason demonstrates the lack of substance to an argument. Many Libertarians would find such "paternalism" insulting. They don't need to be misled by a vanguard party in order to figure out that my statements are nonsense.

As the Classical Liberal, John Stuart Mill, noted in On Liberty free and open discourse is a wonderful thing -- not just to support free speech, but also on private property -- because it gives people the benefit of seeing truth's collision with error. If your ideas are correct, it's only through engagement with people like me that you're going to get anywhere.

To quote V for Vendetta, ideas are bulletproof, so I don't particularly understand why any Austrian should find me threatening.

Nathyn:

They don't need to be misled by a vanguard party in order to figure out that my statements are nonsense.

 

I agree. 

Okay, I'll take a pot-shot, because it's too tempting. Indeed, that is not necessary to figure out that your statements are nonsense. Your statements are nonsense based on their own (lack of) merits.

If this were some Austrian propaganda site, you'd have long been deleted (something that may happen for other reasons FYI) and any debate of Austrian economics would be silenced. Rather, what does happen is that flamebaitish, trollish posts get deleted, as does pure spam - and you can expect this. This forum is not public property. So, if you don't want your time 'wasted' then don't waste ours with incendiary posts. We have no obligation to put up with trolls.

I will try to make the moderation process more objective and publicly visible.  I will start by making the deleted posts forum visible to all users.

Inquisitor:

If this were some Austrian propaganda site, you'd have long been deleted (something that may happen for other reasons FYI) and any debate of Austrian economics would be silenced.

You mean like what happened on Mises.org?

HeroicLife wasn't involved -- it was what's-his-name, the guy with the Dutch name. Willy van Wyk or some name like that. He baited me into acknowledging I don't take your arguments seriously half the time and then banned me.

Back then, I didn't have enough knowledge of mainstream economics and philosophy to put forth a strong defense. So, I'd make an argument and, if someone made a B.S. point I couldn't disprove, I'd mostly ignore it guilt-free, since it all seems to be based on irrational assumptions.

To clarify: This no longer is the case after finishing Introduction to Macroeconomics and buying an college-level econ textbook. Outside of here, I mostly ignore Austrian arguments, the same way I ignore Marxists. But just as I'm sure you could probably rip apart the arguments over at RevLeft, I feel pretty confident that 99% of the time, I can do the same here.

The result: RevLeft makes Capitalist users "restricted", only able to post in the sub-forum for non-Marxist. I face the same hostility here from you and I think it has more to do with the validity of my arguments and less to do with any actual claims of "trolling."

"Trolling" is such a silly subjective word that's so often invoked to attack people we disagree with. Please, avoid such ad-hominems and address my points.

HeroicLife:

I will try to make the moderation process more objective and publicly visible.  I will start by making the deleted posts forum visible to all users.

 

Is that sarcasm? 

Do you mean the Austrian Forum perhaps? 

Your arguments, where they are free of flamebaiting and the like, are not deleted. Read the forum rules. Go by them, and you will not have any problems. Make silly little posts mocking Austrian (or indeed any other) economists or users here, and you'll have your posts deleted, and will eventually be banned (and you're not the only one that this applies to.) You still show little willingness to learn Austrian economics (and are by no means unique here in having an education in neoclassical economics.)

HeroicLife:

I will try to make the moderation process more objective and publicly visible.  I will start by making the deleted posts forum visible to all users.

 

It would be nice to have a moderator's comment on deleted posts. For a few of the deleted posts it is not obvious why they were deleted.

Nathyn:

Outside of here, I mostly ignore Austrian arguments, the same way I ignore Marxists.

 

Nathyn, could you briefly summarize for me what are your major problems with Austrian economics.  I'm curious because I have found that Austrian economics is the only study of economics that really makes sense.  Further, what study makes the most sense to you and why?  (Please don't tell me Keynes, but if so, that's your right.)  Just curious.

DBratton:

It would be nice to have a moderator's comment on deleted posts. For a few of the deleted posts it is not obvious why they were deleted.

Unfortunately, the current version does not allow this.  I posted on the vendor's site, so perhaps they will take notice.

I think it is beneficial to have honest adversaries on this forum.  It makes for a more interesting discussion and leads people to learn to develop and defend their viewpoints.  However, such adversaries should not attempt to use this forum to spread anti-capitalist ideas. 

This means that such adversaries should confine their disagreement to a specific thread, and continue defending their position as long as constructive discussion is possible.  They will not be allowed to ignore rational responses and merely repost their arguments in another thread.  If they refuse to address criticism, and keep posting the same arguments elsewhere, then they will be banned.

HeroicLife:

I think it is beneficial to have honest adversaries on this forum.  It makes for a more interesting discussion and leads people to learn to develop and defend their viewpoints.  However, such adversaries should not attempt to use this forum to spread anti-capitalist ideas. 

This means that such adversaries should confine their disagreement to a specific thread, and continue defending their position as long as constructive discussion is possible.  They will not be allowed to ignore rational responses and merely repost their arguments in another thread.  If they refuse to address criticism, and keep posting the same arguments elsewhere, then they will be banned.

 

I agree with this sentiment, however, exercising the mind implies some general resistance, which with other people implies intelligence. The specific person we are all referencing here does not possess this intelligence, which is why I will suggest a new policy proposal - an intelligence requirement.

This will be simple, a general application to continue posting will be e-mailed to all forum users, if they pass they will be allowed to post, but if they do not, then they will be banned.

I am fully confident this will take care of all problems. 

I have two questions:

-Who owns the banstick?

-How much do I need to bribe that person to take some form of action?

->I'll have a paypal account set-up so that the community as a whole can contribute.

Nathyn:

Back then, I didn't have enough knowledge of mainstream economics and philosophy to put forth a strong defense.

 

 

You still don't.

 

Nathyn:

Back then, I didn't have enough knowledge of mainstream economics and philosophy to put forth a strong defense. So, I'd make an argument and, if someone made a B.S. point I couldn't disprove...

 

So you hold the positions you do not because you can defend them and know that they are correct? If you cannot disprove a point, how do you know it is BS? Is that intellectually honest? 

Nathyn has been banned.

Hip hip -

HeroicLife:

Nathyn has been banned.

 

 "applause"