[polldaddy poll="1118155"]
feel free to leave a comment
Tags: Charles Johnson, lgfsucks
New Poll: What bugs our Readers about LGF
Comments
Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.
Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.
Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.
We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.
Play nice!
Not listed: The fact any opposing viewpoints were scrubbed or the person who disagreed was attacked by the brainwashed lizardoids and then banned.
I don’t judge a blog on whether or not it agrees with me on every point. I do judge a blog that imposes its view without allowing polite dissent or alternative views. I mean, why have a public blog if you won’t allow debate?
Oh, I forgot to add:
Also the fact Charles is a coward who bans someone and then lies about why he banned the person who is unable to defend him/herself.
Hey DJM, check out lgf, Charlie Manson and his family are having a meltdown about the censorship awards.
You just know that there are hundreds of LGF readers looking at that thread and having to sit on their hands. They know damn well that only certain opinions are welcome. No matter how polite or reasonable you try to express yourself, certain viewpoints are verboten over there.
Exceller, Charles likes the weak minded much easier to control. Whats sad is they stay there knowing full well that they can’t say certain things. They are swarming like bees in that thread.
CowardKerry – Lol! Sometimes the most potent weapon is truth. Notice he once again lies in suggesting (without giving anyone the opportunity of rebuttal) that everyone here is a “racist” and were banned for “supporting fascists.”
In fact, Charles, and anyone else from LGF reading this, I was banned for posting ONE link out of dozens that Charles didn’t like. And my second account was blocked for politely pointing out that up until that point, I had been a loyal lizard.
exceller – Absolutely. They know if they complain about the censorship, even respectfully, they’ll be banned and labeled a “racist” or for “supporting fascists.”
The brown-nosing on the “censorship” thread is incredible. I was banned last week, with no explanation, for I guess dinging Charles or one of his pets down on one of the STUPID intelligent design mockfests. Banning Mama Winger-WTF?
While there, I noticed Killgore the religious bigot has dredged up something about Texas professors being 99% against the teaching of ID in the curriculum. I didn’t stay long enough to read it and barely glanced at the title.
The only thing that this proves is Ben Stein was right; who wouldn’t say that if they feared for their livelihood which is exactly what is happening in the academia circles if you reject evolution as a whole? How many examples must be shown on the big screen before the leaders “of free speech” at LGF recognize their own hypocrisy?
There was a time that 99% represented a magic number of fraud in a vote. Like fear and suppression? Remember Saddam’s 99.5% landslide or Yasser’s 99% election victory? Those were trotted out at LGF daily – and everyone knew they were bogus results. But not now. Not when it’s your pet issue.
Something else. What Charles and the always moronic Killgore invariably fail to mention is that poll after poll overwhelmingly shows the general public wanting something as alternative taught in conjunction with evolution. Call the alternative what you will.
But the fact remains, Charles and Killgore the bigot are not in the vast majority as they wish to believe.
Tex you aren’t being objective. 99% of doctors would probably say that Ebola was deadly, that doesn’t mean that Ebola isn’t deadly. Sometimes “99%” is a magic number implying that a thing is fraudulent, sometimes it’s a magic number implying that everyone simply agrees.
I’m agnostic on the whole evolution/creationist biz. Personally, I only care about what works. If believing in the Giant Spaghetti Monster would get us more vaccines, I’d go for that too.
I voted for the “Anti God” option, but I also agree with reasons stated in posts #1, 2, and 4 above!
DJM, me too- after I posted links to sites with information against Darwinism, next time I tried logging into LGF, I was confronted with a box that says “that account is now blocked.”
I hardly ever posted at LGF anyhow. I lurked most of the time.
When I did post, it was not often, and I was a pretty polite person.
I avoided all the threads at LGF about European political parties, Neo Nazis, and racism, mostly because such topics did not interest me.
Hey DJM I am sorry you did not like the poll. What options would you have?
I liked the poll, I just would have added the things I mentioned in comment #1 & #2
For the record, I’m not so much mad about being banned from LGF. Its not my blog and Charles can ban whoever he wants for whatever reason he wants. My complaint is that Charles then LIES about why he banned certain people, even going as far as libeling them, when he knows they cannot respond in the same forum. That’s just cowardly and dishonest.
Eggggzactly.
DJM said:
“Oh, I forgot to add:
Also the fact Charles is a coward who bans someone and then lies about why he banned the person who is unable to defend him/herself.”
DLM, this is exactly correct. Set aside his philosophical crusades; this is by far my biggest beef with CJ: I expected that after Rathergate, he would be a caped crusader for the truth. When he directly lied on LGF about several things regarding me and my family, committed libel in doing so, and when provided with the facts showed no inclination to consider that he may have been wrong, he showed that he is as trustworthy as a rattlesnake. The most offensive thing is that due to his “reputation” for straight shooting, he has his minions believing his lies about individuals
This is not hyperbole: At root, either through negligently gross sloppiness or through the direct lie, he is using the same technique at root as Goebbels. No, CJ doesn’t = Hitler. Yes, CJ = Goebbels in technique. Free speech cannot do its clarifying work when subjected to a totalitarian corrupting censorship engendered by blog ownership.
Food for thought.