I would like to pose a question. This is not to start any arguments, so please focus only on my question. I have been fairly outspoken in the World Events/Politics gallery, to the point of having some images pulled. I have toned down my posts, and stopped allowing comments in hopes of reducing the amount of hateful comments. I have been surprised at the number of IMs I have received that have been in agreement with my views, and saying that I am brave or whatever for doing this. I don't see it as bravery, but as just being stubborn and outspoken. There seems to be a number of people here who are afraid of airing their views. Now the question: Is there an atmosphere of intolerance that keeps a certain portion of users from feeling free to express themselves? I pose this not to debate any certain political view, but to discuss the issue of freedom of expression. Thanks.

Message edited on: 08/23/2004 07:44

My view is that art is about expression of emotions, and the expression of ideas is a different (not better or worse, jut different) kind of communication. I think the two types of communication are often confused, because they both can use similar media, although I believe that visual images are better suited for art and words are better suited for ideas.

Renderosity is an art community, and a great deal of the members are going to be more interested in investing the time they spend here on studying and critiquing art as opposed to sharing new or rehashed ideas. In all likelihood, those interested in pursuing those interests will do so at other websites at different times.

Yesterday I found myself at lunch with a group of conservative, reactionary women who were complaining about the volume and style of the music in their church. I tried to engage them in discussion about how they might go about compromising with other people in the church, and quite a conflict ensued. I realized later that I was proceeding under the assumption that they would be interesed in sharing my expression of thought on the matter, and engaging in debate. In fact, they wanted to complain about the issue and vent a lot of anger that, IMO was mostly irrational and self-centered. My mistake was that I assumed that just because it was an open forum, I knew what they wanted to do.

Anyway, I think that anytime an artist wants to create art that is emotionally charged, there will be controversy. If the artist also tries to communicate a message, often there will be active resistance in an art community, because the bulk of the community wants to study the art and consider messages at another time or in another contest. It's like going to a concert to see your favorite country singer and finding that his opening act is a rap group. It's not that there's anything wrong with the rap necessarily, it's just a jarring change from what was expected.

I also think it's very important to be aware that Renderosity is not just a public community by and for art enthusiasts; it is a commercial enterprise, subject to laws and business rules & practices that bind in many respects what it can do and what it will do. Regardless of the amount of freedom of expression we as artists and individuals have, no one is obligated to provide us with a forum for our views. We are all welcome to buy our own servers and design our own on-line communities.

Having the right to express yourself does not obligate your neighbor to buy you the soapbox; that's your responsibility that goes along with the right.

Jack

"Having the right to express yourself does not obligate your neighbor to buy you the soapbox; that's your responsibility that goes along with the right." Agreed.

Message edited on: 08/23/2004 08:09

If you jab at someone else's sacred cow, then you'd better be prepared for the screaming that is guaranteed to follow.

Generally speaking, the more insecure someone is, the more hysterical tends to be their response when their thinking is challenged.

Now, tell me -- who is threatening to disrupt who's political convention with violent protests?

Three-year-olds cant stand to be told: NO.

If ones highest goal is to get along, then one had best remain silent.

BTW - Pandora got off easy. Don't expect the same treatment.

I don't see it as bravery, but as just being stubborn and outspoken. Yup. :-) And no, I haven't read your political posts or looked at your gallery, so I'm not commenting one way or the other about that. I'm just agreeing that it's probably being stubborn and outspoken rather than "brave". There seems to be a number of people here who are afraid of airing their views. Well, just as it's not necessarily "bravery" to speak out, it's also not necessarily "fear" when someone chooses to keep quiet. Sometimes people just don't feel like dealing with the backlash, or they don't like to argue, or they just don't feel strongly enough to speak out, or they figure that they're not going to change anything by posting images/posts at Renderosity, or whatever. People are indeed free to express their views (within the Terms of Use of the site). They are also free to choose not to, and may have perfectly valid reasons for that decision. bonni

Generally speaking, the more insecure someone is, the more hysterical tends to be their response when their thinking is challenged. I disagree with that..just because someone has a difference of opinion,{even aggressivly} it doesn't mean they are insecure.

"Aggressive disagreement" is one thing. Incoherent passion is another.

"Aggressive disagreement" is one thing.
Incoherent passion is another.

I don't especially like to talk to someone who's shouting, especially when it's mostly invective that's light on semantic content, but I respect other people's right to shout and shout back. The thing that bothers me is that so often the shouting seems to be at the expense of facts. Numbers that sound for all the world like valid statistics, rumors repeated as truth, quotes from celebrity figures as though they're speaking ex cathedra, and on and on.

I always know that a political discussion is going to go nowhere at warp speed if I get yelled at for asking for the source for a fact. Honestly, if you don't know the source, or you can't establish the source's bona fides, I don't see anything wrong with adding "I heard this, and I believe it" or "this agrees with my opinion, even if it may be just an opinion also", rather than saying "It's a statistic, and numbers don't lie".

Of course numbers don't lie. People do. Usually with numbers. :) Hmm... now where did that soapbox come from, and why am I standing on it...? grin

Wizard Tim: I think people are trying to exibit a tendancy something like political "Self Control". "It is best to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubt". I personally haven't paid enough attention to the inner goings on of the Renderosity environment to speak out on major topics. By all means - Say what's on your mind.

It's probably an unsolvable paradox, since nobody is impartial: who is intolerant and who is fair-minded? If we object to "trolls" voicing dissenting viewpoints, however crude, does that make us just as intolerant as the "trolls"? If a "troll" says something we don't want to hear, and we gang up on him and call him a "troll", then are we descending into a "group-think", mob-rule situation? I suppose as long as we dismiss dissenters as intolerant "trolls", we still have a long way to go in the evolution of our societies.

It's probably an unsolvable paradox...

I think this blends two different issues together. I think most any point can be made in either a civil manner or in a rude manner. I may disagree with someone, but I will listen to him with respect if he or she is respectful to me in presentation. On the other hand, if a person feels the need to beat me about the head with their words, I may feel inspired to respond in kind, or, more likely, walk away and ignore them. And, most importantly, if I was the one providing the speaking platform at no charge and at expense to myself, I might very well tell that person to go spew elsewhere.

In short, I think the objectional parts of a political discussion are (usually) about the format, not about the content.

Jack

"Now the question: Is there an atmosphere of intolerance that keeps a certain portion of users from feeling free to express themselves?" Well yes there is. However, it would appear that you are not a member of that group of "a certain portion of users". I say this because you have posted a large number (one a day) of images that are overtly controversial from one political point of view and in spite of the fact that you have taken a few press photos and stuck derogatory comments on them about only one political party, you haven't had them removed. Now if you wrote those comments down in one of the forums, without the press photos, you would probably receive a caution, similarly if someone made similar anti bush comments they would be accused of being anti American and probably receive a similar caution. Now I'm from the UK and have some strong opinions on US policy but I have very little interest in the forthcoming elections and even less interest in who wins because my feeling are that to us, people who live outside the USA, it won't make any difference anyway but really your work, in my opinion, is purely a political statement. The press photos are really just a prop for your words. Comments are disabled ,so you obviously don't require any response, I do not mean to disrespect you in any way by this response and in no way am I questioning your beliefs but I'm left wondering what the purpose of your question, in this thread, is? Other than to get a few more hits at your gallery :)

"Now the question: Is there an atmosphere of intolerance that keeps a certain portion of users from feeling free to express themselves?"

Yes, there can be. If you disagree with the wrong person, or you express an opinion or view that is considered unpopular or not held by the majority there can be a backlash that can get you labeled as a troll, get you shunned or intimidated, or made a target of constant sarcasem, ridicule or animus. It's unfortunate, but that's the way it is. There are those that would prefer to remain in the shadows than be the target of the mob armed with pitchforks and torches and screaming for blood. ;)

Mark_uk, I have no need for any hits in my gallery. I think it's clear why I ask the question. I ask an honest question, nothing more, nothing less. Sorry you cannot see this.

Message edited on: 08/23/2004 18:18

Yes I can see you asked an honest question and I gave an honest answer, nothing more, nothing less. And my answer, to try and sum up, is that your reasonable words here. IMHO, do not equate with your words in the gallery.

wizardtim --

I agree with your politics. And I've done my share of forum debates.

So far, I haven't taken the political issues into the galleries. I doubt that I ever will. For me, the art galleries are a place of inspiration and......a place to relax.

But this is just my approach. Everyone must make personal choices for themselves.

That's what "artistic freedom" is all about.

Be prepared for the inevitable backlash. If you are going to assert your political opinions, then you cannot avoid alienating the other side.

XENOPHONZ, thanks for your comments. I'm really tired of the debates, because it doesn't change any minds. It's an excersize in futility. And many of those who have opposite views tend to get nasty and/or illogical, so it's not worth it anymore. I have posted things just as a way to show the other side of the argument. Sometimes, I let things really torque me, like a recent post that implied that America is a nation of rapists and torturers. That kind of stuff is designed to push buttons, and serves no useful purpose. Thanks again for your comments.

wizardtim --

You are close to reflecting my own thinking on the matter.

Political debate has no end. Not in this world, anyway.

On-line arguments can become an extreme waste of one's time. I am not saying that there is no place for it: there certainly is.

However, one must carefully pick and choose one's fights. Otherwise, one can end up by expending a lot of personal resources (such as time) on......nothing.

Believe me, I understand your deep offense at seeing our nation slammed by the political left. But as you have mentioned yourself -- on-line contretemps are highly unlikely to change anyone's mind. Such "debates" usually devolve into little more than virtual slap-fights.

Become a commentator. At least then you'll get paid for it.

"Become a commentator. At least then you'll get paid for it." Indeed, I hear the money's good. Thank you.

No comment.

No pay.

"Renderosity is an art community, and a great deal of the members are going to be more interested in investing the time they spend here on studying and critiquing art as opposed to sharing new or rehashed ideas. In all likelihood, those interested in pursuing those interests will do so at other websites at different times." no, actually those of us who were interested in commenting had our forum taken away for no reason at all. You may not like what people have to say, right, left or otherwise, but denying freedom of expression is worse.

... interested in commenting had our
forum taken away ...

sigh

It always amazes me how confused a lot of people seem to be about this concept.

There are business entities who pay for server space on the Internet, and they have mechanisms in place where people all over the planet can post messages and/or pictures for all the rest of the world to view. They are not under any obligation, however, to allow anything to be posted by anyone at any time. Quite the contrary, they are often under a number of legal and other obligations to their investors and business partners to specifically restrict certain kinds of information. And, even if they weren't, they pay the server bills, they buy the hard drives, they employee programmers and designers to bring this service to us; they can define their own rules, and they do.

Nobody took away your forum. Feel free to pay for your own domain name, server space, and telecommunications lines and say anything you want, and invite anyone to participate in any way you dictate.

You have the right to speak your mind. Nobody but you has the responsibility of paying for your soapbox.

Jack

"They are not under any obligation, however, to allow anything to be posted by anyone at any time. Quite the contrary, they are often under a number of legal and other obligations to their investors and business partners to specifically restrict certain kinds of information. And, even if they weren't, they pay the server bills, they buy the hard drives, they employee programmers and designers to bring this service to us; they can define their own rules, and they do."

Under normal circumstances, I'd agree with you 100%. But closing down an Off Topic forum, for posts that were, well, Off Topic (vs the TOS mentioning banning individual people - not closing down an entire forum - for posting personal attacks; which were alleged and continued after the forum was closed) seems a tad overbearing and, IMHO, not in compliance with the agreement made at the time of membership (aka the TOS).

AFAIC, R'osity made their decision and I'm fine with it, but it doesn't mean that people have to agree with the reasoning behind the decisions. In fact, The Den emerged, more or less, as "OT Lite" a few weeks/months later because there was, is, and always will be a desire to communicate information that is not necessarily topical to the theme of the forums/site.

Now, I was gone for a few months, so update me on this: I thought that the DEN was a new name for OT... not an entirely different room. LoL... I've been in there complaining about the Olympics. >:)

Attached Link: http://www.winternet.com/~mikelr/flame92.html

I thought that this one had died.

Necromancer.

And... you can make a donation. Is that tax-deductable?

On-line arguments can become an extreme waste of one's time. I am not saying that there is no place for it: there certainly is.

The operative word is arguments...and there lies the problem. ;)

What I recall was twenty or thirty people participating in huge mud-slinging political debates. I (of course) enjoyed it because I'm a Republican. [ dramatic pause ] I don't really see any problem with it at all. Did I miss something while I was gone?

Some things are best left buried, and not dragged back up from the grave. We fought that fight several months ago.

Besides, the story of "what happened" would be colored by the prejudices of the individuals who responded to you.

I, for one, don't care to open up that particular can of worms again. It's already been hashed over -- it's done.

The OT forum is dead and gone.

OT is lamented by some -- and its grave has been danced on by others. But that issue has already been kicked around the block numerous times. If you weren't here for the excitement -- then you missed it.

Just keep in mind that the Den isn't the OT forum. The Den is experimental/probational. Also -- and this is important to note -- the Den is not a "free-fire zone".

BTW - I, too am a Republican.

I also have a taste for onions.

If I am looking to get into a flame fest -- then I don't indulge the inclination here.

Fine, then.

Attached Link: Den: About this forum

Refer to the link if you want to know the reasons the Den came about. There was some topic drift - especially toward the end - but it should help explain a little if you missed the grand opening.

"Some things are best left buried, and not dragged back up from the grave. We fought that fight several months ago." That fight isn't over for many of us. Many people are still very angry about the complete unfairness of it. Long time members of rosity either quit or were banned over the issue. As far as claiming all the problems, well, we all created our own board to discuss exactly the same things, and both dems and repubs are there. The exact same people who loved the OT forum here and considered it home. And you know, we don't seem to be having huge arguments or flaming or any of the problems that were claimed here. The entire brouhaha was caused by one or two people using several names with the specific intention of shutting down the forum and causing trouble. The OT forum was my home on the net. It was where I went every day. Its loss has made me feel alienated here at rosity, which I've been a member of almost since the beginning. With my life and health swiftly falling apart, I feel that loss deeply. I can remember when this site had barely 40 pages in the gallery, and not more than a hundred members. But, evidently it threatens or offends people fpr others to express opinions they don't agree with, and they want only shiny, happy people who don't think at all. The monster of political correctness bowed to a couple of troublemakers who are probably now sitting back and laughing because of what they did. But the fight over? Never.

But the fight over? Never.

That's entirely up to you, of course.

If it were me (which it isn't) -- I'd just let the past drift away.

It sounds as if you've found a new home. But I would hope that you would still feel welcome here, too.

Okay, I think that I've got the groundwork. I was never much for personal attacks, and I do think that other people (such as newcomers) should feal welcome there. I'll do my best to uphold the decision. Now... heh... what was this thread about? :p

Attached Link: http://www.renderosity.com/messages.ez?ForumID=12356&Form.ShowMessage=1896919

Well, I can remember comments about individuals with "opposing viewpoints" that were personal attacks. Sometimes you could read paragraph after paragraph about someone's stupidity, lack of knowledge/research and persistance to post things anyway. "Oh, geez... "such and such" wrote something again! He continues to go on like a blithering idiot even though everyone knows he's a half-witted "this and that" that only posts things to relieve the pressure of his...." on and on and on. I can see where that would stop a newbie from expressing their view.