Hello everyone.

I've had several requests for a clearly defined set of rules for the forum.

I've put much thought to this over the past few weeks, and I think I have some good ideas.

Before I post anything, I'd like your input.

This is your forum, and so you should, of course, have some influence on the rules.

So this is it. Speak now or forever hold your peace.

This topic is a little more open than the rest. If you choose to discuss the usage of a particular word or phrase, and you know it is questionable, please don't be upset when I edit it after I read it.

Please keep it friendly.

Mike

No liberals allowed...

I've noticed in a couple of posts people telling each other to shut up or be quiet, as if their own point is the final word on any subject. I don't know if there should be an actual rule against it, but perhaps we could all try and get away from that. Shutting up defeats the purpose of this site.

Here's my input:

- It's perfectly acceptable to challenge and attack positions and arguments. But it is NOT permitted to attack or ridicule other people.

- Those who attack/ridicule other people are automatically to have lost the argument.

- If you do have something negative to say, avoid doing it in public. Take it offline and use the personal messages instead. If you two do need to fight it out, do it in private.

- Be prepared to give a source of any premises you cite. Unsubstantiated premises can be thrown out if no source can be pointed to.

- When citing sources, be specific as possible. If citing a book, specify book title, author, and page number. If citing a website, specify the specific page, not just the domain. Also, when applicable, specify section #, article #, etc.

More input please!

I wouldn't really want to set rules on this, but I would like to advise everyone to try their best to use proper English grammar and spelling. I know personally I tend to take those posts more seriously than those that use "internet speak."

I also would like no usage of any racial slurs, unless quoting someone or the topic itself is an examination of such terms. One can prove their point without going there.

Ok, then. I'm at a complete loss for words.

I think that you can look where ever you want, if you cant handle looking at a republican debate without taking cheapshots, then maybe you shouldnt go. Madtown made his/her decision and it was to leave the board and not just that particular forum. And is JP banned, and if so, for what?

JP is banned.

He is the first member to be banned, and hopefully the last.

Unfortunately, he has continually posted racist remarks, and has consistently used profanity.

He had been warned many times.

We had requested he edit offensive posts several times.

Sometimes he refused, and I had to edit them. Like this topic.

The most recent issue was a personal attack against another member. Jaime and I both asked him to change it.

Knowing he likely wouldn't, we gave him a reasonable deadline, and informed him that the consequence would be a 48-hour restriction on his ability to post.

He changed the post, poorly I might add.

He also took it upon himself to private message me. He used profanity in the process of daring me to ban him.

As I said in another post: It is not very smart to cuss out the Admin of the board and challenge him to ban you.

I sent him an email to explain the process through which he can come back, and if he responds appropriately, he may very well be back.

Jaime and I have agreed that we will leave it up to everyone here. We will put up a poll. If a simple majority of the voters want to allow him back, he will be allowed back.

And that is what happened.

As for Madtown, it was a mutual misunderstanding that needed some clarification. She is back. And I'm sure she is disagreeing with me.

But I am very glad she decided to stay.

Mike

The thought of a Rebublican - Democrat Debate was inviting to me. I don't really care that much if someone has to confront head on, but I really think personal attacks on the families of politicians are off base. Do we know the pain of the families? If we do shame on us. If we don't perhaps we should think and study about it.

The president and his family are in the public arena. It goes with the territory. What are personal attacks anyway?
If I say, as I did, that the Bush family is self-centered, that is only a comment, not an attack. That is my
opinion and I think GWB's self-centered personality affects his decisions and his decisions affect me.

Let me see if I can clarify this a little.

Madtown, you have every right to "personally attack" the Bush family's actions, provided it is in the correct forum. Anyone who is a public figure is fair game.

Personal attacks on members of this forum for sharing their views is not allowed. Example: MemberA says "I feel THIS." MemberB chimes in and says, "MemberA is stupid/dumb/insane for thinking that." MemberB was wrong in this instance and should have written something that requested MemberA to justify why s/he stated that or provide proof to support the opinion.

Tell me if that helps or if you think it's too vague.

Screemin D.

If, by cheap shots, you are referring to my remarks about the younger Bush generation, I would like to
explain.

For the last several years the Republicans have been going on & on about family values, as if
only THEY had these values. We should elect Republicans because they have these wonderful
family values.
Now, they are finding out that even people with family values can fall into
hard times. Even the children of good parents can fall into the use of drugs and alcohol.

We've had eight years of Clinton bashing and nobody mentioned cheap shots. Republicans
bad-mouth both Clintons to this day. So don't talk to me about cheap shots.

My only crime was posting in the Republican Debate.

Jaime and Mike.

I am not sure but I think I may be the only foreign national within the forums ?.
I took a big chance joining because the very name implied an internal debate.
I am glad I did.
I have learned a lot about the feelings of everyday Americans.

I have taken a fair bit of stick at times for giving my personal opinions and would like to express my appreciation to the administrators for their handling of it.

It would be good to see more foreign nationals joining.

Alan-

You want a bumper sticker?

I would love to see more foreign nationals in here, and am open to any suggestions on how I could accomplish that.

My webhost is in the UK, and I sent the owner of the company some stickers. He says he'll put one on his car, so let's cross our fingers.

A member of ours, "thesuchoski", is a transplanted American living in Dublin. I need to get him some stickers to plaster all over town.

And about the name, I originally wanted politicaldebate.com, but of course that was taken. Then, I thought politicalshootout.com, but thought that may be a little harsh. So I looked up americasdebate.com, and it was available. I couldn't believe it. Best $9 I've ever spent.


Oh yeah, and I'm still working on the rules, so everyone:

Keep sending me your ideas.

...and if you don't feel comfortable posting them for everyone to see, feel free to send me a private message or email.

Mike

I most certainly would, and would use them.

I dont make a habit of joining sites such as this, in fact this is the only one!!.

I am certain in my mind if more foreign nationals had input to it, with their views bigotted or not, transatlantic relations would be for the better.

Is there someway I can recompense you for the postage?.

Regards...alan.

Mike

Isn't there a member, James, from England?

Alan....recompense? I like that!

Mike.
I put a little "ad" in a CBC message board and I see someone has responded.

Mike/Jaime.

It would be good if folks concentrated on attacking, even ridiculing if they wish, the opinion rather than the individual making it.

The interpretation of facts is another problem.
The 'spin' an individual puts on them is his/hers opinion however the basic facts need to be, as far as is possible, correct and factual.
Hard one this!!

Regards....Alan

As a neophyte here, perhaps I'm closer to having read the User Agreement which is used during registration. I think it puts any rules which I'd recommend reasonably well: "The User agrees, through his/her use of the Service, that he/she will not use the Service to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law." That seems to cover most of the potentially abusive posting - at least in terms of one's fellow participants. Like a few others here, I feel that public figures, elected officials, celebrities, etc. are fair game - for negative characterizations, if not obscenity.

Another item in the Agreement addresses lengthy cut 'n' paste jobs which have ruined other forums in which I've participated: "The User agrees not to post any copyrighted material unless the User is the rightful owner of said copyright." That should cover the excessive quoting of other sources - especially when they can easily be hyperlinked - and especially when they appear within a thread in progress.

So... perhaps just reprinting the pertinent parts of the Agreement would be enough.

I have participated in a number of online discussion boards and many of them are prone to either being extremely one-sided and incestuous or, if there's a good mix of posters, to degenerating into name-calling abuse-fests and off-topic personal attacks. So far, this place looks relatively civil - and seems to represent a fairly broad cross-section of posters. I might add that I wholly endorse the banning of abusive posters. I have supported this elsewhere and have been accused of everything from partisan censorship to infringement of First Amendment rights. This is nonsense. To litter a board such as this with distracting, disruptive, off-topic insults, terms of abuse, invasions of privacy, personal attacks, etc., itself serves to stifle free speech. To my mind, those who confuse free speech with license and use it to post libels about other participants are the real enemies of the First Amendment. By attempting to silence others through being louder, more vulgar, more abusive, and more prolific in their infractions, it is they who are exercising censorship.

Good job with this place so far! I'm delighted to be here.

Thanks for the comments and compliments, Wertz. You hit a lot of good points.

I didn't think that anyone actually read the terms of service.

The official posting of the rules has actually been postponed until the next redesign.

With the new design, everyone can expect a link to the rules and the terms of service at the bottom of every page.

My goal is to implement the new design on or before Jan 1, depending on the stability of the software upgrade due out as a beta next week.

EVERYONE: Please keep submitting your concerns.

Mike

i have a question on posting... how can you go to court when you have 2 accounts?

It is for abusers who consistently register accounts. It is theft of service. Easy solution: register only one account

...and if you need to register a new account because you forgot you password, want to switch names (generally frowned upon), or for any other reason, just send an email to info@americasdebate.com and I'll work with you to solve the problem.

Again, this is a protection for us to avoid abusive users.

Members are only allowed one account. This keeps people from ruining a debate by posting equally opposite posts to the same thread. Believe me, if people were allowed more than one account, it would seriously detract from the debating.

Including the ability for "legal action" in the TOS / Rules and Guidelines allows for protection of the site. If a banned member consistently attempts to circumvent our banning methods, we have the right to take action.

When a banned user consistently registers new accounts, there are several effects.

First off, it takes time. Jaime and I currently spend well over 25 hours a week doing maintenance and administrative tasks. Of course it is all voluntarily, and actually costs us money, but the fact of the matter is that people who consistently re-register steal our time. We have to discontinue their account, delete any of their posts, update the ban settings, and give them proper notification. Do this more than a couple of times, and you can expect to hear from us for reimbursement.

Next up, it steals bandwidth. I am only allowed a certain amount of bandwidth each month. Four gigabytes, to be exact. This month, we will be pushing the limits of that bandwidth, and may very well exceed it. If that is the case, Jaime and I will have to pony up some more cash to keep the site running. I don't think anyone here would expect us to pay for banned members to continue using the site. That would be ridiculous. So if you're banned, and you keep trying to use the site after repeated warning, you can expect to hear from us for reimbursement. We are currently scraping together the cash to upgrade next month.

Next up is processor usage. I'll spare you most of the details, but we're only allowed a certain amount of processor usage and database connections on the server. Repeated registrations take processor cycles and database connections, and increase the likelihood that Jaime and I will have to pony up even more money to keep the site running. So again, if you are banned, and you keep trying to use the site after repeated warning, you can expect to hear from us in the form of a Cease and Desist letter.

So in summary, use the site as it is intended, and you will never experience the "legal" end of the TOS.

Mike