There was a political thread from last August where inappropriate political remarks were made. Another moderator called for restraint. That did not work. I have now removed the topic once and for all.

With all due respect, you have not shut down the thread that started it all:

Carbon Caps and other Lunacy

I have strong political feeling about the subject, but am restraining myself.

dan

I said political jingoism and partisan nastiness don't belong on this forum, because it serves to do nothing but divide us, and we can't afford that. I called one guy out on it because I knew for a fact he was wrong. I don't know what was said in the thread after that.

But I agree, it's interesting this thread gets censored and the other thread gets left up.

That puts me in a very unpleasant position. I have to listen to people wrongly and crudely dole out partisan lies about things I strongly believe otherwise. If I respond in kind, I'm violating forum rules. If I don't, well, I'm sorry. That's not fair.

I too have avoided most political things on here, although anyone who knows me well knows I'm not usually shy about making my views known. We probably should just stick to railroad preservation, although given that much of it touches on government institutions and political strategy from the local to the federal level (like the current unfortunate situation with the Delta Queen), it's really impossible to leave it out altogether. I too, often feel intimidated by the forcefulness of many imposing their political philosophy on the rest of us, especially when I know what they are spouting is wrong, not just philosophically, but factually just plain wrong. I just don't say anything, because some of these folks have made major contributions to preservation, or have a lot more prominence in the community than I.

There has also been a great deal of coarsening of the political discourse in this country over the past 25 years or so. I know who's largely to blame for that, but I'm not going there either. Suffice it to say that topics that in the past that would not have caused great rancor now do, and it's unfortunate that that interferes with the work to be done.

Thank you, I see there are a few who feel as I do.

However, I am now 70 and have decided to discontinue a life of passiveness. I shall spend the remainder of my life speaking out on political issues as well as railway preservation issues! Actually, it is kinda fun.

dan

Agreed that it's not always easy to separate politics from the discussion at hand. I do however have problems with gross generalizations in either direction, specifically knocks against Democratic-leaning environmentalists.

Not everyone who believes in green technology, conservation, recyling, reduction in consumerism, etc. deserves to be tagged with the "wacko" label. You have extremists in both camps and I tend to think as with most matters, the majority falls somewhere in the middle.

Given, the choice, I believe MOST of us want to do what we can to make the world greener and more environmentally-friendly in a "common sensical" way. And with the major crises this planet faces, we really can't afford not to.

Granted this is somewhat off-topic, but I've been biting my tongue at some of the stuff that's been posted on here lately.

Mike Shirk
RCT&HS Webmaster

Ahah! Now you see you are getting into politics. I will not go there on this forum and let anyone know if I am a green liberal or a dirt burning oily Engineer. actually I am an Engineer. All else political I shall reserve for other web sites and personal correspondence.
dan

Oh, for Stephenson's sake, mates, that wasn't a political rant.

THIS is what a REAL political rant would look like on RyPN:

Post #1: "So how about that Obama winning, eh? What does it mean for us?"

Post 5: "Better convert all your steamers to burn manure, Obama's gonna outlaw coal!"

Post 8: "Enough manure here, for sure...."

Post 39: complains that beer prices are being driven up by ethanol/biodiesel demand...

Post 53: "Rails-to-Trails are a Trilateral Commission conspiracy!"

Post 78: demands Bush's impeachment.
Post 79: demands Obama's impeachment

Post 128: berates French "surrender monkeys" as a lousy source for steam locomotive technology advancement
Post 129: points out that Porta was Argentinian and it was Chapelon that was French

Post 147: spam for fake Rolex and other designer watches

Post 176: extensive deconstruction on how white supremacists derailed post-Civil War Reconstruction.
Post 177: someone asks where the General and Texas are.
Post 183: "Post 178's author is a racist"

Post 191: "new Freebies at my Yahoo! group!"

Post 221: berates the politicians that ended the Southern steam program and diverted the money to Steamtown

Post 384: someone standing in a tea chest singing "Casey Jones" because someone has a bag over his head because someone else HAD to say "white supremacist" again....

Post 443: Godwin's Law invoked as someone demands to know whether Hitler made the preserved railroads run on time or not......

Well, let the " fairness doctrine" reign. I was brought up to believe that vigorous discourse could and should always be pursued, and as long as it didn't degenerate into calling someone a doody head, or questioning their parent's marital status upon the birth of the opposite voices, that was the American way of free speech. Now I see that the ladies sipping and singing society rules are in force, and that he who whines loudest and oftenest ends debate, as we wouldn't want to offend anyones feewings if they tend to lean left. If the carbon thread hurt your feelings or caused your cow to cease the production of milk, I am deeply sorry.

This, then, is a microcosm of the future, the silencing of uncomfortable debate, or the end of expresion of inconvenient truths.

Since we can no longer speak of what one could expect in the way of increased regulation of combustionable fuel use, and how we could prepare for it, or try to influence such, let us get back to the much more important topic of the proper color scheme for Wabash Geeps in February of 1959.

Its just too bad there isn't a place on the internet for those of us who have been known to make a living in the steam railroading operation and preservation could go and discuss the difficult issues without fear of offending sensitive types.

Now back to those Kodachromes.........................

Alexander, you've proposed the discussion of politics. I don't have a problem with that. Sheesh, we OUGHT to be able to handle a simple, respectful political discussion, openly and with an air of tolerance. If we can't then we deserve no success in politics.

My concern is with spinning it a particular way -- like Ruiz quoted. Statements phrased to inflame, challenge and intimidate. This is specialty of shock jocks and internet trolls. THAT doesn't belong here. THAT is not acceptable to me.

Is this concept so hard for people to understand?

Sincerely, what I find hard to understand is how someone would be intimidated by any of the items on Mr. Ruiz’s list.

Yes, but the majority is always wrong!
("The majority is always wrong; the minority is rarely right"; Henrik Ibsen )

Every hear of the 98% rule? Its the rule that says that 98% of the world (US included) is populated by irrational idiots (educated or not) that could not entertain a rational though if their lifes depended on it. It would also be fair to say that those that ascribe to this theory also believe that its not possible to debate politics with the 98%er's without getting into a fight?

Seriously, I agree with most of the opinions being expressed, we really should not talk about real politics (and throw the "Delta queen" into every post) but, we should be able to (somehow) talk about train issues and their associated politics without it degenerating into a brouhaha. But then again, maybe not.

And, moderators please try to be consistent and silence both the; Communistic, Liberal-democrat, bleeding-heats, right along with the; Fascist Holy-rolling conservative-Republican, National-Socialists,

All equally!

Let me correct a misleading statement:

My example was NOT what a RyPN "political discussion" would ACTUALLY look like. I would like to think that most of us are more civilized than that.

That discussion is that which would apparently pass as "political discussion" anywhere else on the Internet, Usenet, newspaper forums, etc.

And Lord know I left out the greenies being accused as Commies, the Christians being called fascists, the obligatory "Rethuglican" and "Bushitler" name-calling, and scads of other automatic robot postings........

And by the way, the tea chest and singing bit to get someone back into a conversation actually happened in one group, supposedly about comic strips. I promptly jumped in and added the offensive phrase one more time, wailing "But it's my only line!"

(Those confused are ordered to study a complete Monty Python's Flying Circus set--an invaluable resource for tourist RR business management....)

Ever hear somebody say a thing like that at a banquet table? It has a social meaning: "I'm resolute. I intend to be loud and unreasonable if you dare to disagree with me." That usually ends conversation on that topic in a big hurry :)

Which is the point ;)

If they were open to discussion, they would have phrased it a different way!

Do banquet rules apply at RyPN? That's up to the moderators. My interpretation of their words and actions (locking threads) is "yes".

Let me restate my position a little better.

I thoroughly enjoy this board and the myriad of topics that for the most part are intelligently presented, discussed, debated, etc. without the foaming.

And IMHO, there is nothing wrong with injecting politics when it's pertinent to the subject at hand.

What I feel we can do without are the political/environmental digs and coloring that at least in my judgement seem to be creeping in as of late?

I like to think that with all the partisanship that's been dividing this country, we can at least try to avoid it to a certain level here at RYPN?

Mike Shirk
RCT&HS Webmaster