DXP Survivor 2014 Part II (Page 3)

Posted by aquasnoz
all ideas are just recycled and renewed but never original.

Hey what kinda Aqua are you 😛

I mean I don't think we should put limits on what mankind can create or achieve because we always seem to find that at some point what we though was impossible turns out that it very much is quite possible.

"The world is flat"

"No one will ever fly"

I agree though. Creativity today is disappointing.

Posted by aquasnoz
Plagiarism
In which capacity does censorship help avoid plagarisim? If we're talking commercial products one should visit China and the many counterfeit phones they produce on a yearly basis. Or the infamous Apple vs Samsung cases, what matters is the acquisition of the first patent. If we're talking about intellectual properly I'm happy to discuss the merits of anything original or creative as I'm an avid believer in that all ideas are just recycled and renewed but never original.

A more popular story perhaps nowadays is the Transformers star Shia LeDouche. Plagarism only exists after the material has been released and not before. In this context censorship simply doesn't apply to acts plagarism, it is completely irrelevant.

Actually censorship can be applied in a situation like a school internet/information network. Students habitually plagiarize online material and some schools have taken the initiative of barring access to sites historically plagiarized like wikepedia...and also trying to bar access to websites selling fully written reports for sale.

Posted by aquasnoz

Protection of Morals of society and religions
This is completely based on the individual culture's perspective. If anything it serves as a roadblock in to a better understanding and acceptance of society as a whole. To censor in this context is an act to segregate one self from the rest of the world so it neither preserves or protect. Without the information available one cannot come to an understanding and when these culutures and societies were to practice its traditions they can be viewed as an aggressor.

Social norms and morals can be upheld through Social filtering which is censorship of topics that are held to be antithetical to accepted societal norms. In particular, censorship of child pornography and to protect children from this enjoys very widespread public support not just here but around the world.

Well I still believe in originality, you just have to be an aqua 😛 jokes jokes haha.

I don't disagree when it involves minor and children and in some it might inevitably be tied into that but that's treading on morales and ethics. I still hold in high belief that censorship only exists to convey a particular groups point of view in other matters and that much is true if you want to take WWII as an example or any war for that matter as it is usually told from the perspective of the victor.

In regards to Education related plagiarism this is where I see there could be a conflict in censorship. The original material set forth by the curriculum must already exist therefore what much of the students do is merely rehashing what's been taught. In cases of perhaps essay related righting where the student has to form an opinion it is hard not to plagiarize as the opinion must be based on existing opinions and facts. As far as know universities have systems that check for it but it does not stop students from paraphrasing, and again where's that line between copying and rewording? More so how are students able to learn if the actual material undergoes censorship that they have no inspiration to draw from.

I agree censorship isn't always an 'evil' tool but where's the line in being protected from what harms us vs being blocked from what we should know. Let's took at societal issues world wide. A good example would be our lovely Kony. Prior to the whole movement not many people knew about it but through the internet and publicity it gained the awareness it deserved. I request you not to look into the integrity of the movement's founders but the power in which internet has and its ability to overcome censorship. What we simply do not know from censorship isn't a force of good but merely ignorance.

Taking the meaning back to its roots, the idea behind censorship is to suppress information. If we were to go by stoic's example what the government is trying is restricting the flow of information. It's attempting to gain monopoly of what the public should see and what if certain incriminating evidence were to arise from youtube? To restrict means to control, to control means power. What good is a societal view if that view is obscured by censorship?

derp *writing

Addressing Damnata and hatespeech.

Let's take a closer look at Westboro Church and I think most can agree they practice hate speech quite well. I implore you to see how this is a benefit. Yes it does bring unrest to the public, the media is all over that but without this freedom of speech in place i.e. no censorship, we can make a more informed opinion, to rally against it and address the inequality.

Merely censoring them would not do justice to what they can do behind closed doors and again censorship in this case isn't a force of good, it becomes an enabler for ignorance if no one knows about it at all.

And after catching up on the Piracy issue I still don't understand how it relates to censorship. In relations to classification as a form of censorship? Piracy doesn't tie into this. In relations to censorship as suppression of information? Still I don't see this... the gaming and music industry release these games prior to them being pirated where does censorship come into play?

If we're talking not censoring the websites which facilitates piracy then I can see the merit. Interesting enough here's a list of artists that support file sharing. As I understand it is an artist's vision to spread their work and it's the producers and labels that make money off it. In this instance I feel piracy isn't always a bad thing as it spreads publicity. On that note the gaming industry and in particular blizzard franchise and any other form of online gaming (as most are these days) require authentication, majority of these games cannot be pirated solely due to the online component. And it is through say for example an online subscription fee they make their revenue.

As for the porn industry... well. Adult entertainment itself borderlines ethical issues. Censorship in any capacity would not matter in this case... although I would want to hear who's 'for' censoring of porn. If it is as widely loved as the internet suggests then the lack of censorship on serves to deliver what is deemed the greater good.

You operate under the assumption this is our views rather than views specifically composed to win a debate. Need I remind you again how we defended our favourite condiments which included butter, salt, magic mushrooms and god knows what else.

Feel free to start another thread to post these concerns where I'm happy to give you my actual views which may or may not offend you and certainly not what I believe to be the consensus. My views are mine and it's at your discretion to not mix it up with everyone.

Just to say again, DXP survivor, DXP game, goal is to win, no matter what.

Not saying you don't have a point seraph. If the opposing team wishes to use this then all I have to say is then the lack of censorship only serves to bring out the legislation much faster ijs.

Covering all bases.

If I wanted to argue I would do so seraph but I'm working with the rules of the game and what you deem to be a weak argument can precisely be that but not to me. Like I said I'll happily address it in another thread or even entertain this within the confines of the game but you have completely missed my original point, that being, this is a game.

A game which you are not part of btw. Not a stab. If you are actually participating I would address it. But know I'm on a particular team trying to persuade the judge.

seraph please take this to the other topic. I am getting lost in your comments and feel I should reply to them but I'm trying hard to focus on the other team.

Scorched get out.

Since we also talked censorship on DXP, this is a good example of the type of censorship that is effective..it would stop derail some threads.

Steve, Stoic will gloss over other people's comments, don't worry about that.

And scorched and seraph were kind enough to understand it and I think won't post any more in this thread 🙂

Players, the only comments to which you need reply during the debate are those posted by other players.

Audience, if you feel the urge to challenge the position(s) taken by any player(s), it would be appreciated if you refrained from doing so until after 9PM EST this evening so as to avoid distracting the players.

🙂

Posted by SteveW
The very bad thing about censorship is that it used for the government to exert power and control in a totalitarian way that controls the people. Imagine if Romania censored dxp from Damnata: no one would know her or her views and she wouldn't have gained information to how Americans are and think.

If DXP is a private site, then the admin can censor me by blocking my account. This happens all the time with trolls..and I think it's a good thing. Sometimes your views are not important enough to be shared with the world...and only promote negative reactions in people. In this case, you can use censorship as a tool to filter the content of what goes through to the world.

Posted by StillWater
sorry guys. been so busy... until what time do we have to debate?

10 PM EST

Posted by StillWater

Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
Censorship is a tool. It has no mind of it's own or makes choices. It is not an entity.

In the right hands censorship can be used for all sorts of good things:
?? The censor of pornographic material prevents the corruption of children;
?? Censorship helps preserve the secrets of a nation being revealed;
?? The act of censorship helps protects individuals?? privacy;
?? The act of censorship helps prevent terrorist groups from learning about dangerous technological advances;
?? Censorship can help hide sensitive military information;
?? It helps avoid plagiarism;
?? Censorship protects children from learning things that could potentially harm them;
?? It limits the amount of violence that is broadcasted over the television;
?? It limits the amount of obscenity and vulgarity seen on television and in movies;
?? It protects the morals of society and religions;
?? It limits the amount of abuse that is viewed over the television;
?? It prevents negative displays of cultures, individuals, or communities.

Censorship is not the evil here it's YOU and ME.

REALLY NYAA?

You're not even going to come up with your own arguments? Not even pick a credible source? I'm disappointed ex-team member.

Ok,all of your points can be squashed because you are arguing that the consequences of not having censorship are worth more than the deontological ethical issues censorship imposes on individuals.

I am going to argue that deontology in terms of morals is more important than consequential arguments.

Deontology is the study that focuses on the characterstics of humans, and how we should be.

Censorship does not permit character growth and even if the truth presented by those who are doing the censors is the correct truth, it imposes a DOGMA. Without the against arguments for truths, individuals will not be allowed a true understanding of a truth.

click to expand

HO HO HO HO FEISTY!

^^^That's just the misuse of censorship.

So we should just do away with all censorship you say huh?

Let it all just hang and let the internet run rampant with pedophiles making money off of the defiling of young children.

Just let Chaos ensue?

Posted by StillWater

Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
So we should just do away with all censorship you say huh?

Let it all just hang and let the internet run rampant with pedophiles making money off of the defiling of young children.

Just let Chaos ensue?

By the way the talks of children, minor/parent relations etc are against the debate rules.

you have already broken this rule several times.

Next time, you bring up children/parent/minor your arguments will be fully ignored.

#aintnobodygottimeforthat

That's cool. I don't mind presenting facts that I don't have to defend. Makes my job easier.

if you recall in his definition of what censorship is.....

Posted by StoicGoat


For the purpose of this debate censorship shall be defined as —the intentional suppression of information by an individual, group, entity, or government body, or any agent acting under the direction, authority, or influence thereof.?? Note that parent/child, adult/minor, and similar relationships are specifically excluded from the subject matter of this debate. We are not discussing mom??s right (human or civil) to determine what 9 year old Johnny can/cannot read/watch/hear. To offer just one example, we??re discussing whether a government should have the right to order YouTube to remove or limit the availability of a video that contains content it does not want made available to viewers.

click to expand

The government by the way is the one pushing for the censorship of the said subject and not the formerly underlined parent of the child due to content. This is sexual abuse to children were talking about here not consentual sex between two adults.

Posted by StoicGoat
Players, the only comments to which you need reply during the debate are those posted by other players.

Audience, if you feel the urge to challenge the position(s) taken by any player(s), it would be appreciated if you refrained from doing so until after 9PM EST this evening so as to avoid distracting the players.

🙂

To eliminate any potential confusion, I meant to say 10 PM EST in this post.

Posted by StillWater

Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
So we should just do away with all censorship you say huh?

Let it all just hang and let the internet run rampant with pedophiles making money off of the defiling of young children.

Just let Chaos ensue?

Also, to say that without censorship chaos will ensue is a logical fallacy because you cannot prove it; there are too many factors and consequences.

click to expand

Well I really hate to mention what seraph said but...

What would call lynch mobs back 100 years ago before the civil rights movements?

What would you call*

Posted by SteveW

Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius

Posted by StillWater

Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius
So we should just do away with all censorship you say huh?

Let it all just hang and let the internet run rampant with pedophiles making money off of the defiling of young children.

Just let Chaos ensue?

Also, to say that without censorship chaos will ensue is a logical fallacy because you cannot prove it; there are too many factors and consequences.

Well I really hate to mention what seraph said but...

What would call lynch mobs back 100 years ago before the civil rights movements?

Murderers? Killers? Lunatics?

click to expand

Okay I agree

Posted by SteveW

Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius

Posted by aquasnoz
Plagiarism
In which capacity does censorship help avoid plagarisim? If we're talking commercial products one should visit China and the many counterfeit phones they produce on a yearly basis. Or the infamous Apple vs Samsung cases, what matters is the acquisition of the first patent. If we're talking about intellectual properly I'm happy to discuss the merits of anything original or creative as I'm an avid believer in that all ideas are just recycled and renewed but never original.

A more popular story perhaps nowadays is the Transformers star Shia LeDouche. Plagarism only exists after the material has been released and not before. In this context censorship simply doesn't apply to acts plagarism, it is completely irrelevant.

Actually censorship can be applied in a situation like a school internet/information network. Students habitually plagiarize online material and some schools have taken the initiative of barring access to sites historically plagiarized like wikepedia...and also trying to bar access to websites selling fully written reports for sale.

No one is denying that plagiarism is a problem. Teachers now have plagiarism software to pick up and catch plagiarism. What are you saying should be censored with this? What schools have barred those websites?

click to expand

Texas A&M
"To keep the possibility of plagiarism at bay, University officials have taken measures to block and —censor?? some websites, while some of the blocked websites are to prevent academic dishonesty,"
http://www.southtexannews.com/features/1636-fighting-plagiarism-with-censorship/

Posted by Scruffy
Oh yeah...almost forgot...

*flashes Mr Nacho her boobs as Hello rather than as a previous diversion tactic when he was an Airhead* 😛

Why thank you for the gesture.

Posted by Astrobyn

Thank you too!
😄

Those boobs need censorship.

There can be kids on this site.

Scruffy:

How can viable do you think censoring those events would've worked out? Was it even plausible? It's almost a catch-22 situation. As SW stated we don't get the full picture of with censorship how are we able to discern what's right and what's wrong without the free flow of information?

Censorship in that context should be entirely decided by society which by those standards and not the government nor religion. Yes I brought in religion, the world simply cannot be flat, we are the centre of the universe, there is the afterlife and a heaven and hell... however controversial it's undeniable religion have acted to censor information that poses a threat to its integrity. By actively not censoring such issues the general public can make the judgement and by that time legislation or not whatever hate speech would lose its power.

Westboro? Funny stuff, if people wish to believe them then there's no stopping them but the rest of us can just laugh at the pathetic attempts. The truth cannot be uncovered with censorship in any context.

Anyways off to work - catch you all oooon the flip side.

I suppose the Nazi's hate must just be an exception.

Before I go I want to add to Steve's point about hate speech laws. If you guys have a look at the standards across countries you'll see it's set my the morales and ethics of each country and at times very specific to culture.

If it was decided by government it was okay to be racist then and racial slurs won't be counted as hate speech, anything else might be against that and censored.

Perspective.

Posted by GetMisted

Posted by Damnata
Those boobs need censorship.

There can be kids on this site.

I agree


7. CONDUCT

You agree not to post, email, or otherwise make available Content:

a) that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, defamatory,
libelous, invasive of another's privacy, or is harmful to minors in any way;

b) that is pornographic or depicts a human being engaged in actual sexual conduct
including but not limited to (i) sexual intercourse, including genital-genital,
oral-genital, anal-genital, or oral-anal, whether between persons of the same or
opposite sex, or (ii) bestiality, or (iii) masturbation, or (iv) sadistic or
masochistic abuse, or (v) lascivious exhibition of the genitals or pubic area
of any person;

click to expand

You can agree that it needs to be censored all you want... But you're wrong if you think I've violated dxp's TOU. You need to check again muther fucker!

No.

Posted by GetMisted

Posted by Astrobyn
No.

Your post should be censored or your account banned for harming the eyes of the children on this website.

click to expand

Dunc wont ban me for tumblrporn. I've tried many times even with *whispers* genitals

And btw goat already stated that children are irreverent in this debate. So you should focus on pulling your own weight in this debate.

Well I frown upon your religion, And I will gladly stfu and observe, if you would kindly stop addressing me with your wrongness.

Posted by GetMisted

Posted by Astrobyn
Well I frown upon your religion, And I will gladly stfu and observe, if you would kindly stop addressing me with your wrongness.

I think not. It supports my arguement. Censor the porn

click to expand

supporting an invalid argument, that will not be considered in the judgement of this competition. You should try harder, and stop talking to me.

Posted by GetMisted

Posted by Astrobyn

Posted by GetMisted

Posted by Astrobyn
Well I frown upon your religion, And I will gladly stfu and observe, if you would kindly stop addressing me with your wrongness.

I think not. It supports my arguement. Censor the porn

supporting an invalid argument, that will not be considered in the judgement of this competition. You should try harder, and stop talking to me.

You can go away now. If you want to dispute it, do it in the audience thread troll.

click to expand

Are you mildly retarded?

Posted by StillWater
Through out history, there has always been struggle between certain individuals in power who want to keep the public and the masses IGNORANT in order to persuade people to live a certain way and to think a certain way.

The problem is not whether that life is for the best of the public or not BUT the crucial point is that the risk of people wanting to live another way and not being able to due to ignorance is too dangerous.

A certain way to think might be right for one individual but not for another individual.

Thats being relativistic and saying that anyone can rationalize whats right for their own reality.

Posted by duchessedenemours

Posted by NotYourAverageAquarius

Posted by StillWater
Through out history, there has always been struggle between certain individuals in power who want to keep the public and the masses IGNORANT in order to persuade people to live a certain way and to think a certain way.

The problem is not whether that life is for the best of the public or not BUT the crucial point is that the risk of people wanting to live another way and not being able to due to ignorance is too dangerous.

A certain way to think might be right for one individual but not for another individual.

Thats being relativistic and saying that anyone can rationalize whats right for their own reality.

No it's not. One person might want to censor porn while one person might want to censor religious groups. She's stating that different individuals will support the censorship of whatever opposes their agenda and that agenda varies.

click to expand

So by that guise I could decide to engage in child pornography since I find it correct for my reality?

Because I find jews inferior should I be able to go form hate mobs and kill jews.

After all my reality is the only reality relevant from my relative point of view with this type of thinking.

Steve can you stop with Seraph? This is a debate about censorshop not Seraph.

Posted by StillWater
To practice child pornography is not the same as the freedom of expression to state that child pornography should be allowed.

Censorship is about ideas which is outside of legislature.

Legislature outlines what we are allowed to do and not to do. However, censorship is about not allowing a free flow of intellectual ideas!!

That is the negative view that has been nurtured sure. But that would mean censoring never can be used for good.

The debate is over Robyn. Please stop bringing porn in here.

Posted by StillWater
As a society we should have access to everyones point of view in order to make an informed decision.

Censorsihp is agains the very trait that makes us human: our autonomous nature.

Rational individuals should be able to make informed, and un-coercied decisions to be able to be accountable for their actions.

Censorship takes away from that and is hence against the very thing that makes us human. Then, I ask you what is the point ot have other Human Rights if fundamentally we are stripped of our autonomy and by reference, our ability to take accountability for our actions if we are not allowed access to complete information.

Points of view that don't have the purpose of causing histeria sure. Censorship that denies you to get your point across in a civil an rational manner is wrong your right.

But

You seem to attribute this to being a problem with the *tool* we call censorship rather than the people or governments who are using it.

Its not over till the Goat says its over.

Posted by Damnata
The debate is over Robyn. Please stop bringing porn in here.

No

If you folks (the 2 teams) want this not to get diluted, let the people post in here now the debate is over.

And support my proposal for a separate immunity/ellimination thread.

We have 5 votes, we need one more.

I think the goat only cares that he doesn't have to sift through a bunch of bullshit while he is trying to make his judgment. I doubt he cares what kind of inconveniences you people incur.