• Announcements

    • UnderDawg

      A Few Simple Rules   05/22/2017

      Sailing Anarchy is a very lightly moderated site. This is by design, to afford a more free atmosphere for discussion. There are plenty of sailing forums you can go to where swearing isn't allowed, confrontation is squelched and, and you can have a moderator finger-wag at you for your attitude. SA tries to avoid that and allow for more adult behavior without moderators editing your posts and whacking knuckles with rulers. We don't have a long list of published "thou shalt nots" either, and this is by design. Too many absolute rules paints us into too many corners. So check the Terms of Service - there IS language there about certain types of behavior that is not permitted. We interpret that lightly and permit a lot of latitude, but we DO reserve the right to take action when something is too extreme to tolerate (too racist, graphic, violent, misogynistic, etc.). Yes, that is subjective, but it allows us discretion. Avoiding a laundry list of rules allows for freedom; don't abuse it. However there ARE a few basic rules that will earn you a suspension, and apparently a brief refresher is in order. 1) Allegations of pedophilia - there is no tolerance for this. So if you make allegations, jokes, innuendo or suggestions about child molestation, child pornography, abuse or inappropriate behavior with minors etc. about someone on this board you will get a time out. This is pretty much automatic; this behavior can have real world effect and is not acceptable. Obviously the subject is not banned when discussion of it is apropos, e.g. talking about an item in the news for instance. But allegations or references directed at or about another poster is verboten. 2) Outing people - providing real world identifiable information about users on the forums who prefer to remain anonymous. Yes, some of us post with our real names - not a problem to use them. However many do NOT, and if you find out someone's name keep it to yourself, first or last. This also goes for other identifying information too - employer information etc. You don't need too many pieces of data to figure out who someone really is these days. Depending on severity you might get anything from a scolding to a suspension - so don't do it. I know it can be confusing sometimes for newcomers, as SA has been around almost twenty years and there are some people that throw their real names around and their current Display Name may not match the name they have out in the public. But if in doubt, you don't want to accidentally out some one so use caution, even if it's a personal friend of yours in real life. 3) Posting While Suspended - If you've earned a timeout (these are fairly rare and hard to get), please observe the suspension. If you create a new account (a "Sock Puppet") and return to the forums to post with it before your suspension is up you WILL get more time added to your original suspension and lose your Socks. This behavior may result a permanent ban, since it shows you have zero respect for the few rules we have and the moderating team that is tasked with supporting them. Check the Terms of Service you agreed to; they apply to the individual agreeing, not the account you created, so don't try to Sea Lawyer us if you get caught. Just don't do it. Those are the three that will almost certainly get you into some trouble. IF YOU SEE SOMEONE DO ONE OF THESE THINGS, please do the following: Refrain from quoting the offending text, it makes the thread cleanup a pain in the rear Press the Report button; it is by far the best way to notify Admins as we will get e-mails. Calling out for Admins in the middle of threads, sending us PM's, etc. - there is no guarantee we will get those in a timely fashion. There are multiple Moderators in multiple time zones around the world, and anyone one of us can handle the Report and all of us will be notified about it. But if you PM one Mod directly and he's off line, the problem will get dealt with much more slowly. Other behaviors that you might want to think twice before doing include: Intentionally disrupting threads and discussions repeatedly. Off topic/content free trolling in threads to disrupt dialog Stalking users around the forums with the intent to disrupt content and discussion Repeated posting of overly graphic or scatological porn content. There are plenty web sites for you to get your freak on, don't do it here. And a brief note to Newbies... No, we will not ban people or censor them for dropping F-bombs on you, using foul language, etc. so please don't report it when one of our members gives you a greeting you may find shocking. We do our best not to censor content here and playing swearword police is not in our job descriptions. Sailing Anarchy is more like a bar than a classroom, so handle it like you would meeting someone a little coarse - don't look for the teacher. Thanks.

President Eisenhowler

  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About President Eisenhowler

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ
  1. Haven't been offshore in a dog's age. What are the cool kids liking for harnesses / PFDs / harness-PFD combos these days?
  2. Is it reasonable to believe that most people who oppose the death penalty would continue to oppose it, even if it were to be conclusively proven to be a good deterrent, and most people who support the death penalty would continue to support it, even if it were to be conclusively proven not to be much of a deterrent.
  3. I dunno, Jesus was quoted as having said, "Let he among you who is without sin cast the first stone." And Gandhi , "The problem with 'an eye for an eye' is that it eventually makes the whole world blind." But, who the hell are they, anyhow. They obviously don't understnad the world we live in.
  4. If nothing else, I hope you have learned that it's a lot easier to start slinging the shit than it is to stop it. You started the shitfight. Others have been more than reasonable with you, trying to keep the discussion focused on principle rather than personalities. You have continued to take pretty much everything personally. Some of the people whom you have accused of "kicking you while your'e down" and other bullshit, are long-time posters on here, whose reputation for level-headedness and for not being gratuitous dicks speaks for itself.
  5. My image of you is of a wounded, thin-skinned, extremely angry, and not particularly thoughtful person who conflates discussion of principle with the specifics of an individual case, and who interprets disagreement as personal attack. Have I got it about right?
  6. So at the nursing home, 92 year old Sally is waltzing down the hall, saying "Supersex!," "Supersex!", "Supersex!". She stops in front of 89 year old Charlie, who is hard of hearing, and says, once more, "Supersex!". Charlie cups his hand to his ear and says, "What?". Sally shouts "SUPERSEX!!!!". Charlie says, "My backache is acting up, I think I'd better stick with the soup, thanks."
  7. How nice that Fred's got the balls to make his identity known, while you hide behind anonymity and attack him for something he never did. I'm sorry about your personal pain and suffering; I actually know something about this myself as abuse has affected people I love dearly, and I see them utterly deprived of a lot that the rest of us take for granted. Indeed it is a lifetime of damage. But at this point, you are like the beloved, happy-go-lucky family dog who has just been hit by a car and, thrashing around in pain, will bite anyone who approaches. That he bites doesn't make the dog a bad dog; that you are acting the way you are doesn't make you a bad person. But you need to stop.
  8. I agree with you entirely in principle however if you or a family member or friend were the victim of one of those guilty people set free perhaps that would color your perception a little. Often reality is at odds with principles.I can see and understand the point you are making, but the day we let this happen is the day the freedom upon which all our democratic system is based is gone and the path for an eventual dictatorship is open. Agree. Just being empathetic I guess. Much damage is done by reasonable people abandoning principles in an attempt to be empathetic.
  9. I've reread the whole thread. Again. Gouv never accused NSAA of being a pedophile. What he said was, to paraphrase: "When a child is discovered to be an abuse victim, the parents are naturally under suspicion. Since your child was an abuse victim, you were, undoubtedly, at some point in the investigation, under suspicion, simply by virtue of being the parent. If, as you are advocating, everyone under suspicion for child abuse is to be locked away until they prove themselves innocent, then that would have bitten you pretty damn hard." Those of you saying he accused NSAA of being a pedophile are being deliberately obtuse assholes.
  10. Umm.... I belive it is you who are refusing to extend the benefit of the doubt here.
  11. I believe he actually said he wanted the accused locked up until proven innocent but whatever. He also made it very clear that it was only HIS opinion based on HIS significant experience with the situation with his son. Hardly surprising that he would feel that way. Your response was cruel, insensitive, unjustified, and uncalled for and a simple apology instead of endless backpedaling would have been much nicer. The problem was that, while it might have been only HIS opinion based on HIS significant experience, public policy is ultimately created by the confluence of everyone's individual opinion. To let his opinion stand unchallenged flies in the face of everything that a civilized nation living under the rule of law is supposed to be about. To let such opinions stand without challenge is tantamount to endorsing them; it encourages them to propagate. In 1942, plenty of people in the USA had strong opinions about the Japanese race, as a result of their own significant direct or indirect suffering at the hands of the Japenese Imperial Army. As a result, it became American policy to lock up in prison camps American citizens who had not been accused or convicted of any wrongdoing, if they were of Japanese ancestry. Maybe that wouldn't have happened if more people had challenged the early outspoken advocates more vigorously.
  12. I agree with you entirely in principle however if you or a family member or friend were the victim of one of those guilty people set free perhaps that would color your perception a little. Often reality is at odds with principles. And that is precisely why civilized societies make sure to exclude from judge and jury pools anyone who has emotional baggage associated with the crime that is before the court.
  13. Due process and the rule of law are way more important to me than you, your feelings, or your kid. Take your "lock him up until he proves himself innocent" bullshit and shove it.
  14. That's internally contradictory. You say you want CC locked up even though he has not been convicted of anything, and then you say that you never advocated his guilt or wanted to start a lynch mob. What, exactly, is advocating that an innocent person be locked up, with comments like "I dont' care if he's guilty or not." if not a lynch mob?