TED Conversations

Tim Colgan

TEDCRED 50+

This conversation is closed.

Nothing's off topic

This conversation is meant to be one where nothing is off topic. That is, a conversation which is unconstrained and able to take on any direction.

The diversity of background and depth of thinking of TED conversation posters is outstanding. Where will an open conversation lead? Let's see.

What's on your mind?




We are all adults here and capable of negotiating differences between ourselves. Although heated disputes have emerged in these conversations, they have as yet not led to violence. And the process of the community resolving conflict is one thing this conversation could exemplify. Remember Chris Anderson's insight:

"You need clear, open visibility of what the best people in that crowd are capable of, because that is how you will learn how you will be empowered to participate."

http://www.ted.com/talks/chris_anderson_how_web_video_powers_global_innovation.html

To posters: PLEASE DO NOT DELETE YOUR POSTINGS. If you are unwilling to allow your contributions to remain indefinitely, please go elsewhere. Let this conversation be an unadulterated record of human interaction.

Share:

Closing Statement from Tim Colgan

Internet forums such as this have become the new "public space". As such, it is essential that users demand normal rights of free speech in the places that they congregate as in any other public space.

This conversation, though initially open-ended, was singled out by TED for early termination, despite the fact that it generated significant traffic and interesting conversations.

Transparency and openness is essential for the success of an endeavor such as the one TED conversations has claimed as its purpose.

This has become a dictatorial and closed environment.



"Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely" (see Birdia's Leopold Kohr quote "The Power Theory of Aggression" below for the more elaborate version).



In memory of Pabitra (PBUH).




For when this gets expunged - an unexpurgated version of this conversation will soon be placed here:

http://tcolgan.freeshell.org/nothing

Googling "Nothing's off topic" should work soon.

And keep your eyes out for TEDanon. For those wishing to relieve the withdrawal pains from quitting TED.

  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jun 15 2011: or just upvote it. and no, i don't want its expiry date modified. i'd like it to be open ended. i don't like half solutions.
    • thumb
      Jun 15 2011: I have never commented on this conversation but I have looked in and enjoyed many of the posts here. Although I have had disagreements with Tim, that is part of a free democratic discourse and I fully sympathise with his disgust in this matter and fully support his efforts to have have conversations without censorship.

      It is regrettable that the one method he had found to avoid censorship is also being shut down.
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 15 2011: You're welcome. I hope others will join their voices in protest also.
    • Comment deleted

      • Comment deleted

        • Jun 15 2011: Birdia..... Let's get drunk on freedom....
      • thumb
        Jun 15 2011: this is quite sad, indeed.
      • Jun 15 2011: "Free at last! free at last! thank God Almighty, we are free at last!"....Martin Luther King.............. Great words.... but I don't think so any more..... Not after 9/11
  • thumb

    TED 10+

    • +3
    Jun 16 2011: We'd like to shed light on what flagging means:
    We encourage you to flag comments when you see it is clearly a spam and when it's inappropriate according to our Terms of Use http://www.ted.com/pages/conversations_terms
    Flagging does NOT result in the immediate removal. While we check all the flagged and unflagged comments, flagging gets our attention first and we take close look at it. We do not delete most of the flagged comments, because sometimes people just flag what they don't like. We know that so we carefully approach to every comment. But it's very helpful to detect violations and take action accordingly.

    Please do not take it as offensive and attack your fellow community members if they flag certain comments.
    After All, TED Conversations is a platform for mature and respectful discussions.

    If You have questions, please email us at conversations@ted.com and we'll be happy to further clarify this.

    Best,

    TED Conversations Admin Team
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: @ Lindsay, you know, I would REALLY want to have a conversation with anyone who is convinced that the holocast didn't happen. Really I would. And that to me would not be a breach of the rules of civility- I just would want to understand how they arrived at that conclusion. I know someone who is 100% convinced that dinosours never existed- they are some invention by some nuthead :) And I have gained a whole new understanding and even awe at the power of the human mind, just by talking with this person. Also, I have learnt how to share the space where our lives meet in a more harmonious and mutually beneficial way, where their belief systems don't determine whether we can plant a tree seedling together, or reach out to one another in times of need.

    Now if someone thinks I shouldn't have such a conversation and such great outcomes that improve my day-to-day experience with my neighbor, well then, that just plain sad. But again, maybe they have a reason, perhaps something that they fear, and hence the need to decide for me what I can talk about with you on this forum.

    I heard it said 'Love thy neighbor'. It didn't say 'Love thy Christian or Muslim or Hindu or Atheist neighbor', which I think means we ought to be more open to others unlike us. But again, which all that free love going around, someone's bound to run out of business...
  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jun 15 2011: I am only reminding you that GE is our Sponsor and that we are guests here asked to partcipate in accordance with the TED guidelines established.. By the way, it is not considered civil to direct such personal comments at anyone. Those who are persisting in this rant against TED, Conversations Admin and GE just don't seem to get that this is their site, their rues. Why would they want to finance people who behave and speak as many here to day have? Wh would anyone want their brand associated with this?
      • thumb
        Jun 15 2011: May I remind you that we are the energy behind this project and GE has the honor of gaining visibility through our efforts. (And the potential of giving the impression of being open and honest).
      • thumb
        Jun 15 2011: Lindsay, if what you say is true, I then hereby declare my right of independence from the tyranny of TED, GE and any other entity that desires to suppress my freedoms. I will abide by no such rule and I invite all others to rise up against those who believe they can buy and then nullify human rights.
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: that would be "here here"
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: I think "hear hear" is more appropriate in this case.
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: Yes, Tim..I hear you. so you are really leaving? A loss..truly..you have been a consitently valuable and civil voice here at TED Conversations.

          Will miss you.
  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jun 6 2011: Tell us more of your China experience Nichola. How long have you been there? Where are you from?
    • thumb
      Jun 6 2011: Thanks Nicola, You posted this advice to me once before and I thanked you for it then. I promise to reserve it for other bull headed westerners!
  • thumb
    Jun 2 2011: http://inspire.2ia.pl/ - I love this.
    And this.

    Edit: oh, and there's a beautiful girl on my mind right now.
    And this is perhaps the most "on topic" conversation @ TED Conversations.
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: What about starting a new conversation as this one expires entitled, "Everything's On-Topic" :::)
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: should be opened few minutes before the deadline, and the link is to be put here.

      or maybe in a closing statement? i don't know how it works, i don't believe in the expiry deadlines.
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: Feel free to start it. And put the link here.
  • thumb
    Jun 15 2011: TED's corporate partner, GE owns and controls the largest share of the American media. GE is known to actively practice censorship on what it owns. Audubon TV suddenly lost its GE funding support when it stumbled upon controversial GE logging tactics. GE also did not pay any taxes in 2010 despite earning nearly $15 billion in profits.

    Tim, welcome to spreading worthless ideas.
    • thumb
      Jun 15 2011: GE recently closed up a plant somewhere in the mid-west and moved it to.....mexico!
  • thumb
    Jun 15 2011: The reply button dosent work again. Anyway , Tim . I love the idea of keeping things open-ended and see where they go that you intented in this thread.Its quite experienmental like stream of conciousness. and i saw you in another thread said you will go after this is terminated. I just want to say if you think your contribution has been put a time limit to I dont think your intentions and ideas outside this thread can be put a limit to as i have enjoyed and appreciated your perspectives often even though i havent been here very long.

    Also , I think TED must have some good reasons to make that decision.

    So I encourage communications cuz i believe creative solution is a key to make a change ! Maybe its time for us to walk the talk?

    Lastly, Tim we dont want to see this thread going away and then see you going away becuz of it.

    Just some thoughts

    .
  • Comment deleted

  • Comment deleted

  • thumb
    Jun 8 2011: I have a question:

    One of my favorite quotes is Albert Einstein's: "Imagination is more important than knowledge."

    So much is made of how important it is to learn from history so as not to make the same mistakes. I agree that's true to a large degree, but there are times in conversations when I get a sense that we lean too heavily on history. When it does more to stifle a conversation than promote ideas. When it seems that, unless you're an expert, there's not much you can contribute.

    Do you feel that knowledge/historical perspective can sometimes saddle a debate and and in so doing stifle outside the box thinking?
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: Birdia, I understand what you're saying... I think what Einstein was trying to communicate was that knowledge without imagination is like a match without a spark.

        "It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so.” -Mark Twain

        I guess I'm just trying to say that sometimes the best ideas are not borne out of what we do know, but from what we don't know; what we feel. That it's OK to look at an issue, think about it, and let your imagination go to work on it without the benefit of the history of it.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Perhaps imagination is the spark, but knowledge is the firewood.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Tim,

          Give me a list of what you have been reading lately. Impressive articulation. "Thinking like a child" ideals!
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Wongmo,

          "History tends to repeat itself so that would indicate to me that we are not good at learning from our mistakes!"

          That is not fair to claim!

          The education on historic events is a responsibility of the people in a society not a universal right.

          History will always repeat itself as long there is no education on the past.
        • thumb
          Jun 8 2011: Still a societal issue my friend...

          Teach people to care, they will care to teach.
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: Tim - But what good is firewood without a spark?
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: "But I would like to look at it this way: knowledge is the air that sustains the fire. Imagination is the sound of the burning of the woods."
        Birdia, I think you are placing too little value on imagination! Or maybe we aree defining it differently :)

        Think of it this way: A long time ago, before there was fire, on a cold day, someone took some wood and built a dwelling out of it to keep warm.
        On another day, someone else in the same village rubbed their hands together and noticed it made them warm.
        The two of them had a chance meeting on a cold day and they shared with each other what they did know about keeping warm. Along came a third person who sat and listened. That person used her imagination to put the two pieces of knowledge together and suggested that maybe, if they rubbed two pieces of wood together, something might happen.... Now that's imagination!!!!!
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: Birdia,
        Is it buddhist? Maybe there's some truth in everything.

        Off the top of my head the first example I can think of has to do with the conversation here on TED about Obama's call for Israel and Palestine to begin negotiations based on pre-1967 Israeli borders. Early on in the conversation I felt overwhelmed by the high degree of knowledge and history people were bringing to the table. At one point I think I even said I was going to bow out of the conversation because although I was fascinated by the topic, I felt I didn't have enough knowledge about the history of the issue to contribute in a meaningful way (I didn't feel I was ignorant - just not knowledgeable enough of the history and everything else that makes that issue so complicated).
        I continued to listen, but jumped back into the conversation when I realized that I didn't need to know the history - In fact, I feel that part of the problem IS the pre-occupation with it's history.
        I've learned a ton from others who know so much more about the history of the issue, but still feel my perspective is valid (not “the best” ideas, but valid)

        Another example is Bill Gates. He has said that some of the most innovative ideas he has taken and turned into software, etc. have come not from those who you think know the most, but from those think freely about what might be.

        Although it's not directly related to my question, I think this Robert Kennedy quote comes close to what I'm trying to say: "There are those who look at things the way they are, and ask why... I dream of things that never were, and ask why not?

        I'm not talking about ignorance, though. Ignorance can stifle everything!!
        I'm talking about being able to contribute to solutions without having a complete understanding of what the problem is.

        I'll try to think of more examples when I have time.
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: With regard to history and learning from it, there is that saying, "Those who fail to learn history are doomed to repeat it" - Yet so much of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is rooted in history. Actually mired in it. I think less history and more trust and desire to change is the way to go.

        The saying, " There's no need to re-invent the wheel" implies that once something is done it's done. But I think there IS a need to re-invent the wheel. Again and again and again and again. It's the way we make things better....I think I/we are getting into semantics a little bit here and if there's one topic I refuse to engage in it's semantics!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: Birdia,

        "That's what I would call an 'invention' rather than imagination :)"

        I actually see imagination as having produced the invention. My definition of imagination (there are many forms of imagination but I refering specifically to imagination as applied to problem solving) is when a person can take two or more seemingly unrelated ideas and combine them to create something/solve something/change something. That was what I was trying to exemplify with my little story about the invention of fire. Without imagination we'd all be out in the cold ; )

        David Whyte talks about this kind of imagination in his presentation "A Teacher's Vocation". He is in some ways very close to Sir Ken Robinson on this topic. David Whyte, however, is a poet by trade and has an astounding ability to communicate. Have you heard of him?

        Semantics..... yes, you're right, but they can turn on you without warning!!
      • thumb
        Jun 8 2011: OK, I'm calm now %)

        Yes, I agree, all those things go into invention.... one other thing, too - venture capital!!!
    • thumb
      Jun 11 2011: Hey Jim,

      I share your thought on Einstein's "Imagination is more important than knowledge".

      But in a sense, perhaps it should be "Imagination is more powerful than knowledge". What do you think?

      It's kind of funny that Einstein's biggest legacy are quotes. I'm obviously not disregarding his physics, I am by no mean qualified or knowledgeable enough on the subject anyway, but I would think that Tesla had much more impact on the world through his work than Einstein; yet Albert is probably the most famous scientist today. Perhaps a better PR? At least, he sells much more head-knockers than Tesla and Newton combined :)
  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jun 3 2011: Birdia if anything, parental guidance is steered in a terrible direction more often then not, but it cannot be overrated!

      When I am a parent I will teach my child all that I know as simply as possible. "Dad, what is space like?" "Space, is the ocean of the universe; planets, stars, black holes, and all of life exist" "What is the universe" "Good question, think about it for a while, how did I use it when I explained you first question?"

      That is how I would imagine guiding my children, as how I feel many parents should also guide their children. Maybe not involving complex philosophy but involving life. Which is also problematic considering a lot of philosophies are replaced by fundamental religion.

      What you are upset with is "You can't be gay, that is wrong" "The city is dangerous at night, I do not want you to go" "I do not like that friend, he looks like a criminal" etc

      I agree in your negative emotions, but I do not agree in the generalizations. People are built to have emotional capacities to care about their offspring, it is normal. What is wrong is when their ignorance, delusions, and lack of educations effect their children's development in life. **However what can people really do?** The only people who can fix this are teachers (in my opinion) of the public education and they are too busy teaching kids how to test...
      • Comment deleted

        • thumb
          Jun 3 2011: All I am saying is to some people, guiding their children is letting them know the truth about the world while others it is trying to protect them from the truth of the world.

          Both people have good intentions, but one is doing a better job educating their child.
    • thumb
      Jun 3 2011: Birdia: What about grand-parental guidance?
  • thumb
    Jun 1 2011: Who likes potatoes?
    • thumb
      Jun 2 2011: I like more what potatoes can produce, greasy delectable fries...
      • thumb
        Jun 2 2011: Myth about Fries. (Potatoes + Iodized Salt) "deep-fry, french fry"

        Potatoes are rich in Potasium. = Potasium removes Iodine in the body.
        Salt nowadays are rich in Iodine, no wonder they call it "Iodized Salt" o_0??? in reverse removes Potasium in the body.

        you do the math and what do we get from a McDonalds Fries? who cares !!!

        (can correct me if im wrong...not a nutrionist here. hehe)
        • thumb
          Jun 2 2011: "greasy delectable"

          Verified I knew what I was getting myself into!

          Also what makes McDonald's fries taste so amazing are flavoring additives.

          Back in the hay day of no vegetarian rights, McDonald's used meat oil (yes, meat oil) to make their fries taste amazing and like they taste today. After the law suits due to this process of making non-meat products, they had to resort to using more chemicals to make their fries still taste meaty but still vegetarian.

          Ever see what they make chicken nuggets out of?

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/04/mechanically-separated-meat-chicken-mcnugget-photo_n_749893.html

          Disturbing.

          You did a good job simplifying the want over the benefit of fries!
      • thumb
        Jun 2 2011: I like the liquid version, vodka!
        • thumb
          Jun 2 2011: I always considered the idea of ice pops (the ones in the plastic you break and push up) should be mixed alcohol for a treat. I think they would be a big hit!
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: I've never seen the watch before, I want the last comment!
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: Fare thee well!!
  • Jun 16 2011: What is CSRF???
  • Jun 16 2011: Help me someone....
  • Jun 16 2011: I seemed to have attacked CSRF... What is CSRF????
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: Come on everybody, take your last swing at someone before time runs out!
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: Watch your step Jimmy!

      Oops. I really didn't mean to trip you.

      Happy trails partner.
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: Btw, do you notice a change i peoples behavior here? I'm less respectful, use foul language and don't even feel the need to fully express myself here... but that might just be me...
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: A question to all participants, do you like the feeling you get from this conversation?
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: Actually, it felt a lot better before the time limit was imposed. I had hopes of adding more topics. And of reaching out to bring more people into the discussion.

        I really think you're overlooking the value of a personal ongoing discussion Jimmy. Ownership means a lot. And having the time to develope means a lot. There is room for all kinds of discussions here. Why, why, why add limitations?

        But I suppose TED got their wish. They thought that by imposing a time limit they would accelerate the discussion. And that they did. But accelerating bodies produce a lot of heat.


        PS - Be sure before passing judgement on what you see here that you compare the timbre of the comments before the arbitrary change on the time limit was imposed and after.
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: Dear Tim,
    One of my life philosophies is: "If I'm not part of the solution, I'm part of the problem". Sometimes, we need to work from within an established system to facilitate change. In my perception, you are an excellent model for what I'd like to see more of on TED, so I hope you stick around. I also respect whatever choice you make:>)
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: Thanks Colleen. I'll miss you. But keep your eye out for TEDanon. Coming soon to a website near you.
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: Jim Moonan:

    "But then we turned to the actual topic that started the experiment in the first place: TEDc administration’s terms and conditions and how they are being implemented - and all hell broke loose."


    Jim:

    Get things straight.

    All hell broke loose when they changed the rules from this being an open-ended conversation to one closing in three days. These people are control freaks and they need to be put in their place. If you are OK with such arbitrary control, that's fine, but I will speak out against the abuse.
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: Replaced comment. Minus one phrase which TED censored:

    Comment:

    Thanks Birdia. And thanks for everyone who supports this cause.

    Internet forums such as this have become the new "public space". As such, it is essential that users demand normal rights of free speech in the places that they congregate as in any other public space.

    We try to operate within the rules established by TED, but they keep pulling the rug out from under us. Changing the rules arbitrarily. Unwilling to openly discuss the decision making process. Total lack of transparency.

    This conversation, though initially open-ended, was singled out by TED for early termination, despite the fact that it generated significant traffic and interesting conversations.


    TED has apparently determined that openness and transparency in TED Conversations is damaging to their ???. Hence, this has become a dictatorial and closed environment.
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: From Richard Dawson below:

    "It was S.R. Ahmadi who said the holocaust was a lie. Of course I disagree with him. But I defend his right to have that belief. He and others are not going to change their beliefs by censoring. Though some might after open debate."


    Agree or disagree? In favor of free speech or not?
    • Comment deleted

      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: .

        Ronald Kiman's comment from below (important to this thread):

        @ Lindsay, you know, I would REALLY want to have a conversation with anyone who is convinced that the holocast didn't happen. Really I would. And that to me would not be a breach of the rules of civility- I just would want to understand how they arrived at that conclusion. I know someone who is 100% convinced that dinosours never existed- they are some invention by some nuthead :) And I have gained a whole new understanding and even awe at the power of the human mind, just by talking with this person. Also, I have learnt how to share the space where our lives meet in a more harmonious and mutually beneficial way, where their belief systems don't determine whether we can plant a tree seedling together, or reach out to one another in times of need.

        Now if someone thinks I shouldn't have such a conversation and such great outcomes that improve my day-to-day experience with my neighbor, well then, that just plain sad. But again, maybe they have a reason, perhaps something that they fear, and hence the need to decide for me what I can talk about with you on this forum.

        I heard it said 'Love thy neighbor'. It didn't say 'Love thy Christian or Muslim or Hindu or Atheist neighbor', which I think means we ought to be more open to others unlike us. But again, which all that free love going around, someone's bound to run out of business...
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: Tim - Yes I'm in total agreement with this example you give and also with Birdia's point of view.

      I think it would help get this discussion back on track if we weigh in on some other examples and just let our opinions fall where they may....Here is an example (It is not hypothetical)

      Someone uses comments you made within a different conversation and ties them to sexual abuse of chiildren.

      In favor of this remaining in the thread?
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: Perhaps I would object. But I wouldn't want you to be the one making the judgement call. That should be my decision. Maybe I want it to remain so that I can call attention to it and address the issue in public. Then the person making such misleading statements would become known as unreliable. And others who have the tendency to act that way would be discouraged.

        This red-flagging behind the scenes is just an abuse of power. And destroys the whole flow of the conversations. Usually the people involved in the conversations would prefer the debate to remain intact.
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: "This red-flagging behind the scenes is just an abuse of power. And destroys the whole flow of the conversations. Usually the people involved in the conversations would prefer the debate to remain intact."

          I don't know what the answer is as far as red flags and their misuse (I definitely see how they could be). What If the red flag was removed from visibility but a person still had the ability to object to TED about a comment made by another based on TED terms and policies, and then TED had the ability to make a decision to remove the comment if they deemed it inappropriate. But I do think TED needs to stand their ground and steer far clear of trying to be politically correct when it comes to red flaggers with agendas!

          Birdia, I totally agree that the integrity of conversation (and the integrity of the person) is violated when someone lifts/uses a comment made by someone within one conversation and uses it to (supposedly) prove a point in a different conversation. It feels like stalking and runs against the grain of TED.

          So SR doesn't believe the holocaust happened (actually he does believe something happened, but not on the scale that the rest of the world knows it happened).
          So WWTD? I think TED would do exactly what Tim says they would do. Accept it for what it is and let the people who know better get to work using their best persuasive skills. If that didn’t work, then maybe that’s the time we just have to accept that the world is a far from perfect place - TED included.
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: At best somebody will succeed to change his mind, at worse he's only doing discredit to himself. It's not a few misguided people who will make TED look bad.
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: I'd like to say that at the worst he makes someone else believe that it didn't happen...
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: Conversion to an irrational belief is most likely to occur in a closed system
      • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: personally, if the holocaust denial is the topic somewhere, i tend to keep out of that zone. it is like you don't go in a room that stinks.

      but i would strongly oppose any legislative, coercive measures against such opinions, whatever moronic they are. some people who bear the smell, will try to shed some light in the intellectual darkness.

      however, it is completely OK to kick out such individuals from a club for example, and it is the club's decision. TED community is a club. the community can decide to kick such individuals, or disallow to express such opinions. every club is a self organizing, sovereign entity, and they are very different. so it is not against any "written in stone" rule for TED to exclude any opinion from its premises. it does not make the decision good or bad, of course, but it is the owner's decision to make.

      on the other hand, non-owner members can and should propose ideas and changes, express opinions about the club's internal dealings. and it is wise for TED to listen to those.

      my vote is: allow holocaust denial, but only in topics dedicated to it. or maybe if the conversation opener agrees to let it go.
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: Free speech? YES!
      Free speech at TED? NO!

      If I read "the holocaust is a lie" I would flag, flag and flag (comment, conversation and member)... There is certain shit that you need to keep to your own fucked-up mind here at TED!
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: Careful with that foul language Jimmy. Someone might be offended.

        Plus - could you respond to the argument instead of just blurting out your gut feeling?
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: Jimmy: Did you ever read the comments on the holocaust or the Palestinian threads? I thought they were very revealing. They represented a broad spectrum of views.

        The fact that S.R. Ahmadi seems to have holocaust denial tendencies is an interesting point in itself. Especially considering the fact that Ahmadinejad, the president of Iran, has expressed similar views. I think it is worthwhile for the world to be aware of those facts.

        And the greatest argument in favor of allowing those ideas to be expressed is that then they can be debated. Analyzed. And discredited.

        Now perhaps you have less lofty goals for TED. But I thought it was all about exploring ideas.
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: I have to absolutely support Tim on this one.

          I went on to challenge SR directly in another thread on Antisemitism based on the consensus and input we had during the first conversation on Palestine and he not only admitted it happened but we could talk about why he hated what he considered its misuse. I believe however, that without the sincere and respectful dialogue that the common ground could never have happened.

          I absolutly want us to have the freedom to talk about the tough stuff but it can only happen in a civil environment where people are not attacked and ridiculed.
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: Even if I strongly disapprove of almost everything I've read that S.R has written, talking about him as an example of someone who's views are wrong at this scale seems a lot like bullying...

          I did not read them, I will no longer go into conversations hosted by SR, after visiting "Is the Koran a miracle?". If a TEDsters opinion differs too much from mine and I don't even find the person being able to reason in the same way as I do, I usually don't waste my time.

          Concerning my "blurt", I thought that I was able to say anything in any way here... I stand behind most comments that promote some kind of censoring here at TED, the rules are sufficient as they are but they can be improved...


          P.S. I must say that I'm certainly not feeling the TED-Love that usually goes around and that I'm actually glad that this conversation will be closing soon...
    • thumb
      Jun 16 2011: I am not sure your correct and you should not use his name here like that.
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: Could be your last chance to flag me Lindsay. Better grab the chance while you can. I know how much satisfaction it gives you.
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: Have you been red flagged???? That is very hard to believe. If you like though, happy to be the first..only problem..you haven't earned..thna godness..that's why you will be missed.

          Sorry you are leaving with this really stupid idea that I am responsible for every deletion that ever ocurred.when in fact I have doen very few..until this recent bizarrre tirade.

          The problem here is a few people never got it..I guess that';s why they hired a conversation manager maybe???? I don't know. I only know that very big hullabaloo I've seen here has been caused by the same 4 or 5 people doing the same things..over and over and over. Icall them the magpies.

          .
        • thumb
          Jun 16 2011: Lindsay,
          Give it a rest. I'm ONLY entering the conversation because you say the "same few people never got it". Do you "get it" darlin'? You admitted on a site that you flagged an entire segment I was involved in because you didn't think it was "on topic".
          You also have said many times that calling people names is not acceptable!
          One of the "magpies"
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: @ Lindsay “Birdia re "holocaust is a lie" a really shocking reaction that is in itself an offesne to common decency..

        And that is the whole problem here with the greatly disgruntled...a few gaps in undertsanding what is and isn't civil.”

        And what is Birdia’s “really shocking reaction” re "holocaust is a lie"?

        It is this:

        “Lindsay, I might have missed the "Holocaust is a lie" post, but if you have a problem with it, give evidence (links, videos, etc.) to prove that it is not a lie. Flagging a lie doesn't give you truth.”

        According to Lindsay this isn’t civil and an offence to common decency and Birdia displays a lack of understanding about civility with this remark.

        Respectfully in my opinion there is nothing uncivil in that response. It suggests the correct way to respond to such a statement and correctly points out flagging a lie doesn’t give you the truth. A lie has to responded to with the truth and not censorship.

        @Lindsay "Three thumbs up on Birdia's remark suggesting the appropriate response is videos and documentaion to prove the holocausr was not a lie would suggest that the problem here are the four involved in that.”

        So anyone who disagrees with Lindsay and thinks Birdia has a point are "the problem". It is a pity you view the world that way.

        @ Lindsay “..Civilized intelligent people simply don't go around saying the holocausr was a lie.This is really pointing to the core truth of what the problem really is here. What is of issue here. What needs to be .sorted out here at TED Conversations… this is about a few people who need to work on civility.”

        This shows your idea of civility - anyone who disagrees with you (which in this case is also the majority world view). The issue was never about whether the holocaust was a lie or not - it was about whether a person has the right to say it. That is what I will always defend. It was not said accompanied by any rude language or abuse so civility has nothing to do with it.
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: @ Lindsay "“@ Birdia.."Lindsay's Red Flagging Habits" a mem you are planting and promoting as is your personal style. Red Flags are anonymous and I use them sparingly and always 100%vin accordance with our common "terms of use agreement".

        I will pusue a more formal resolution, if necessar, but I strongly suggest you try civility and remove that unwarranted and untrue remark."

        That threat is obvious and something that you use as your preferred method of control.

        I guess saying things like "I strongly suggest you try civility" is very civil.

        That unwarranted and untrue remark was merely a link to your own words regarding flagging in another conversation.

        It can only be concluded from the above that you have shown a desire to control conversations you are taking part in, based on your opinions of what is right or wrong. And you are using the flags as the method for your control.

        PS Talking about civility would you say "There is certain shit that you need to keep to your own fucked-up mind here at TED!" is very civil language?

        And Jimmy gets 2 thumbs up for that. You dont need to be Sherlock Holmes to guess who those may be.
      • thumb
        Jun 16 2011: Let go of trying to control Lyndsay. You'll feel a great relief. I assure you.

        And TED - This may seem like a valueless conversation to you. But believe me, there is a lesson here to be learned.
  • thumb
    Jun 16 2011: Well, it looks like Nichola has been expunged from this conversation. Just like Masonic 33rd Ring was expunged from other conversations of mine. Sure does hurt to see a friend blown away like that.
  • Jun 15 2011: Is it just me or has anyone else noticed that there has been a slow down of comments on other Questions, Ideas or Debates. Tim your debate should have been titled "Ted Conversations" or "Tim Conversations" instead of "Nothings Off Topic"...... I think my next topic for conversation will be "WHY' ...... But, I already know the answer, it's "WHY NOT"..... so I won't bother....
    • thumb
      Jun 15 2011: Sorry Gio. I'll be freeing up the bandwidth real soon.
  • Comment deleted

    • thumb
      Jun 15 2011: are you leaving? why the farewell notes? i expect a second part of this conversation to to open, and a link be put here shortly.

      (down with the healthcare reform!! this one is just to tease you.)
  • thumb
    Jun 15 2011: latest development in the conversation: admin deleted his own comment. or one admin deleted the comment of another admin.
    • thumb
      Jun 15 2011: the censors censoring the censors. i noticed that too. where will it end?
      • thumb
        Jun 15 2011: let's call that a free association, and not a related remark: the good thing about socialists is that eventually they shoot each other.
    • Jun 15 2011: I sense some panic in the air.... I have a great solution for what ever the problem is here..... First I have to figure out what the problem is. Think, analyse and draw up some conclusions. Then begin my draft then post my answer...... Then I want to make sure I don"t violate any rules so that my answer will be posted.... Oh wait..... I have one day four hours and 30 minutes....... Not enough time ..... Forget it......