Stop the Mean and Crude Slander

THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Cant we all just get along?

Steven P Munsey A+, MCP, IASO Orange Park | Green Cove Springs munsey13@comcast.net

Thank You from Ms Wilson?  A quick review of your posts reveal slander on Lancaster, State Attorney's office..."on mission to destroy her", Good ol' Boys, Sheriff's office...  The only one you missed was the school board and WalMart!  Granted you were not crude or overtly offensive, just strongly opinionated and judgemental in your accusations (i.e. slanderous).  I agree with the crudeness - no place for it period.  But you have to love the disagreements, wouldn't it just be way too boring if we all did get along? 

"When we are debating an issue, loyalty means giving me your honest opinion, whether you think I'll like it or not. Disagreement, at this stage, stimulates me. But once a decision has been made, the debate ends. From that point on, loyalty means executing the decision as if it were your own."
Colin Powell

Good afternoon, all. I want to say a quick word about conduct on this site.

The purpose of myclaysun.com is to give the citizens of Clay County a place to interact with each other. A brisk discussion on a controversial topic is fully merited. We have seen and even lauded such discussions so far.

However, myclaysun.com is no place for crudeness. Profanity will not be accepted, and from now on such offending material will be removed. This is a community Web site, open to all, and we do not want the experience ruined for everyone by a small number of users. Please also read our Terms and Services.

Finally, I want to thank every one for their interest and use of this Web site. Our discussions have been incredibly enlightening and productive and I see a sense of community beginning to form. Please address any comments or concerns to me; I am "the Web site guy" here, and I always welcome feedback.

Jonathan Bennett

Online Content Coordinator

904.366.6387 e-mail Jonathan

Then why is the profanity and sexual inuendos still present on the One Victory blog on page 5.  In my opinion, those bloggers should loose their priviledges.

We decided against removing the One Victory blog because we had not discussed our policy about removing profane content before the comments were posted.

However, that will be the last time any such content will be allowed.

If more inappropriate content appears, and is not taken down in a short period of time, e-mail me a link to the page.

Jonathan Bennett

Online Content Coordinator

904.366.6387 e-mail Jonathan

I think you are getting yourself setup for a fall trying to police behavior that is almost over the line.

Offending material is just about everything that is written.  Any article written on a subject can and will offend someone.   There is difference between an offensive item, and offending someone.  It is much easier to offend someone, than to have an offensive item.  How long can you go in a single day before someone offends you.  It could even be with a word.  What is profane?    Is something profane when a profanity is used to make a point? What about crudeness, how crude do you have to be?  Must crudeness describe a bodily function.  Is saying that someone is overweight crude?  Maybe not good manners, but hardly crude.

If you take every article that is profane, crude, and offensive off your blog, what would you have left? Crudeness, profanity, and offensive don;t have to be permitted, but what set of rules will you use to determine when you are over the line.  Too much subjective judgment here..... 

What is generally considered to be rude and/or crude has been with our wpecies from day one.  It is borne from many factors, upbringing, lack of respect for others or ones self, lack of education, intellect.  We must also recognize that it is also very subjective.  I fear we will always have it with us.

As far as being offensive is concerned, when someone says that they are offended by something, I usually try to ascertain what criteria they are using.  If they sight as offensive something which runs afoul of the law or realistically harmful to a person or persons, I must agree.  but when a person claims offense because it is against some arbitrary custom or religious prohibition, I draw the line.  A good example is the story of some Muslims refusing to do their jobs, in these cases, a taxi driver refusing to take a passenger who either had alcohol on the breath or carrying some in a bag or a cashier refusing to ring up a sale of a pork product because of a stricture against by their religion.

I'm not singleing out Muslims, I just happened to read the story this morning.  These, and many like them, are excellent examples of claimed "offense" that are not based in logic, intellect or even safety.  The line has to be drawn and then distinguish between respecting the views of others and deferring to the views of others.  First, one has to determine the reason why someone claims to be offended and then judge whether there is a valid offense.  Hopefully, we are starting to see the error of being politically correct as opposed to being genuinely offesive.