Trophy Girl (THSCC Facebook drama)

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 5:43 pm

Andrew Jonell wrote:

Haha, you do realize that we have a married couple who were born in Egypt in the club? This is incredibly tone deaf.

haha, you do realize that there are people here who don't appreciate censorship. This is incredibly tone deaf. Could you actually make a valid argument for once? Maybe?

Andrew Jonell · **Joined:** Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:43 pm **Posts:** 1350

Jason Mauldin wrote:

haha, you do realize that there are people here who don't appreciate censorship. This is incredibly tone deaf. Could you actually make a valid argument for once? Maybe?

What?

Richard Casto · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 6:00 pm

steve remchak wrote:

Andrew Jonell wrote:

Richard Casto wrote:

I am not going to quote your entire reply (quotes of other people with no text from you). I assume you want me to read between the lines in those posts to piece the harassment part together myself? My assumption then is that in general the entire FB thread is considered harassment? I don't quite agree with that. People there and here and on both sides of the argument have been quite aggressive, rude and insulting to each other. Not fun if you are on the receiving end at all, but not harassment in my book. If my reading between the lines is wrong (which I am tired of doing) please stop the vague hints and explain.

What do you have to gain by being so pragmatic and scrutinizing these claims of harassment so much?

As long as I have been here this has been Richard's forum.

Likely not well know, but Jason really started the forum (circa 2003). I was just co-admin at the time. Jason stepped back from day to day and I took over. I have stepped back from day to day and now Zach has taken over. The forum belongs to the club.

Richard

JamesMilko · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 6:29 pm

Jason Mauldin wrote:

JamesMilko wrote:

Andrew Jonell wrote:

edit: deleting harassment isn't censorship, just fyi

It is, but not all censorship is bad.

And HERE lies the problem.

Censorship is bad. End of story. Just because you don't like something, and you delete it from in front you, doesn't mean it stops existing.

Here is an example of actual good censorship, unlike the strawman bullshit you invented to prove your own point.

Child pornography.

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 6:37 pm

One is illegal. One isn't. That's a different discussion.

But again. Just because you censor it. Doesn't address the problem.

Andrew Jonell · **Joined:** Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:43 pm **Posts:** 1350

Jason Mauldin wrote:

One is illegal. One isn't. That's a different discussion.

But again. Just because you censor it. Doesn't address the problem.

Harassment and hate speech are crimes.

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 6:52 pm

Then you should've reported it to the police.

Andrew Jonell · **Joined:** Mon Mar 23, 2009 6:43 pm **Posts:** 1350

Jason Mauldin wrote:

And HERE lies the problem.

Censorship is bad. End of story. Just because you don't like something, and you delete it from in front you, doesn't mean it stops existing.

Seems like some sort of variant of "I'm sorry you're offended". Not particularly sincere.

Quote:

You speak about how your parents "hid" the feelings of losing from you. They effectively censored that out of your life. Somehow you're smart enough to recognize the issue with that, but you can't recognize the issue when you do it yourself. Losing is bad, let's censor that.

Never mentioned this? This is a weird ad hominem attack.

Quote:

Objectifying women is bad. Let's censor that out of lives. That will make the world a better place!

Yeah, objectifying women is bad. There's nothing to be gained by removing agency from women.

Quote:

You live in a fantasy land, where as long as you shut up enough people around you and can hide the things that you don't agree with, you think things will just fall into place and the world will be perfect.. Good luck with that.

Another ad hominem attack.

Quote:

You've already won, there are no longer trophy girls at your events, but that's not good enough, you have to tell people that they can't even reminisce about it. Not in front of you, because that will destroy your little utopia.

This was about winning? I haven't told anyone that they can't reminisce about it. I find it weird and gross and people who are romanticizing about how things were better "back in the day". I don't think that ignoring history is good; however, we don't need to glorify the past and hold it up on a pedestal when it shouldn't be. There's no reason why we shouldn't acknowledge the club's past, but being critical towards it isn't done out of malice.

Quote:

Meanwhile in Egypt, women aren't even allowed to expose their elbows without fear of being beat and raped. Way to pick your battles! If you truly cared about the plight of women, you'd be helping these women out. But none of you have the sack for that, or else you don't care half as much as you want your peers to think you do. You'd rather sit here and pick on the old, balding men that laid the foundation for the events that you enjoy today, and that you're so willing to insult. Those guys don't have a place in your little utopian autocross club.

This a false equivalency. An analogue to this would be like saying Ray Rice should not be punished for beating his wife in an elevator because women in the Middle East don't all have the right to vote, drive, or education.

Also, what is with the sack comment? That's pretty gross. I don't know if you think it's masculine or something to accuse other men of not being virile.

Roger McDaniels · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 7:22 pm

Why shouldn't the FB page be censored?

I own two automotive forums. Some people want to post pictures of cars with models in thong underwear and wet t-shirts draped across them. I do not permit that because my advertisers would stop advertising on my forums and I would lose money. My denial of the use of my medium does not constitute oppression, although it is censorship. I do what is in the best interests of the community, which is what pays the bills and keeps the servers online. As the owner/manager of the medium, it is my right and my responsibility.

I have more examples, like when I brutally wielded my paint sprayer to ruthlessly censor the graffiti artists who freely expressed themselves all over the front of my shop. Wow, maybe I am an oppressor.

Censorship is neither inherently bad nor inherently good. It needs to be evaluated in context. Managing our social media presence so that it is less offensive to a target demographic isn't living in a fantasy land; it's simply trying to make the most effective use of our resources.

If a medium is denied to you by the medium's owners/managers, then move on. No harm, no foul, nobody beaten and raped. If you want a FB page with content that you like on it, then make one. Nobody is trying to stop you.

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 7:31 pm

Roger McDaniels wrote:

Why shouldn't the FB page be censored?

I own two automotive forums. Some people want to post pictures of cars with models in thong underwear and wet t-shirts draped across them. I do not permit that because my advertisers would stop advertising on my forums and I would lose money. My denial of the use of my medium does not constitute oppression, although it is censorship. I do what is in the best interests of the community, which is what pays the bills and keeps the servers online. As the owner/manager of the medium, it is my right and my responsibility.

I have more examples, like when I brutally wielded my paint sprayer to ruthlessly censor the graffiti artists who freely expressed themselves all over the front of my shop. Wow, maybe I am an oppressor.

Censorship is neither inherently bad nor inherently good. It needs to be evaluated in context. Managing our social media presence so that it is less offensive to a target demographic isn't living in a fantasy land; it's simply trying to make the most effective use of our resources.

If a medium is denied to you by the medium's owners/managers, then move on. No harm, no foul, nobody beaten and raped. If you want a FB page with content that you like on it, then make one. Nobody is trying to stop you.

Your site your rules. This is a club made up of members. Do we have agreement within the club of what is and isn't acceptable to be posted?

Roger McDaniels · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 7:47 pm

We have elected officials who made decisions. If we don't like the decisions, then elect some different ones.

Edit: And way to go sidestepping the issue!

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 8:00 pm

Okay so the only recourse when you don't agree with an action is to shut up and deal with it until you can vote a volunteer out?

I'm starting to agree with Shawn. You guys aren't creating a welcoming atmosphere here.

Roger McDaniels · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 8:02 pm

Jason Mauldin wrote:

Okay so the only recourse when you don't agree with an action is to shut up and deal with it until you can vote a volunteer out?

I haven't really seen a lot of shutting up.

JamesMilko · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 8:05 pm

Jason Mauldin wrote:

One is illegal. One isn't. That's a different discussion.

But again. Just because you censor it. Doesn't address the problem.

The censorship of it is what makes it illegal, at least on the distribution side of things. Creating it is obviously child abuse.

Same with threatening to kill the president, or making death threats. All of these are limits on free speech.

Jason Mauldin · **Posted:** Sat Sep 27, 2014 8:09 pm

Roger McDaniels wrote:

Jason Mauldin wrote:

Okay so the only recourse when you don't agree with an action is to shut up and deal with it until you can vote a volunteer out?

I haven't really seen a lot of shutting up.

Haven't you?

THSCC Forums

Trophy Girl (THSCC Facebook drama)

Who is online