http://e-democracy.org St. Paul Forum Manager Rick Mons Licernsed Realtor for Edina at www.rickmons.com
HEINOUS "chilling of free speech" at a Non-Profit contrary to Title 26 501(c)3
'This seems to be a novel application of the rules..........Rick, maybe you could cite the E-Democracy rule that gives you the authority to moderate a member after a suspension? "
Rick Mons suspended me for two weeks (and shut off my
account, after an off-list comment of mine got posted
on the forum!). He "offered" to "allow" me to rejoin
after March 3 - but only as a "moderated" member for
two months.
Paul Gleeson
St. Paul
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Mitch Berg <http://mitchberg@yahoo.com>
> All,
>
> Mitch Berg here. For starters, I'd like to thank you
> all for your support during this past year of duking
> it out with the SPIF leadership over the whole "rules"
> thing.
>
> Rick Mons suspended me for two weeks (and shut off my
> account, after an off-list comment of mine got posted
> on the forum!). He "offered" to "allow" me to rejoin
> after March 3 - but only as a "moderated" member for
> two months.
>
> Nah. Not gonna do that.
>
> I've written a bit of a "Dear SPIF" letter, included
> below. If anyone could do me the favor of posting it
> on the appropriate forum (Feedback or SPIF, I don't
> care), I'd appreciate it. No offense if you don't, of
> course. And if you do, and have a moment to spare,
> let me know how it goes.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> ========================
>
> I suspect I'll have to wait two months until I'm "off
> moderation". Which would imply that I'd have to
> actually resubscribe, and I"m not sure that's worth
> it.
>
> But here's my big kiss-off to Mons and SPIF.
>
> =====================================
>
> Rick told me that I could "reapply" to join SPIF after
> March 3 - subject, of course, to allowing him to
> censor me for two months afterwards.
>
> After thinking over the events of the last few weeks,
> I think I'll decline.
>
> There are really three reasons:
>
> 1) For all of SPIF and E-Democracy's leadership's
> yammering about seeking "diversity" and "discussion",
> management's every move has been designed to stifle
> actual disagreement. The forum, and the concept, as a
> result, are devoid of integrity.
>
> 2) The idea of the email forum is about ten years out
> of date, on life support, and not worth resuscitating.
>
> 3) Rick Mons will censor me when pigs fly or Larry
> Pogemiller has an original idea.
>
> I'd call Rick's enforcement of the "civility" rule
> "capricious" and "inconsistent", but he'd have to work
> his way up to earn either of those adjectives.
>
> Classic example; a while ago, Andy Driscoll wrote an
> email which said, *in its entirety*:
>
> "When are people going to stop getting sucked in by
> Mitch Berg's irrational illogic."
>
> Andy Driscoll
> Crocus Hill/Ward 2
>
> ...with Rick Mons' complete blessing under the
> "civility" rule. Offline, he wrote "all he did was
> describe your opinions in less than flattering terms".
>
> What on *earth* does Rick Mons think "incivility" is?
>
> Well, apparently to Rick Mons it means that while
> DIRECTLY insulting the intelligence of a named,
> well-known contributor is *perfectly* fine, my
> referring to un-named, unpersonified people *not on
> the forum* who have vowed to wreak havoc on Saint Paul
> as "scumbags" is, somehow, within the threshold of
> "uncivil"
>
> Huh?
>
> Let's recap:
>
> "Unflattering" insult aimed at an actual person: Just
> fine!
>
> "Unflattering" insult directed at unnamed,
> as-yet-hypothetical people: Uncivil!
>
> I'll let you try to get your arms around that logic.
> Don't lose any sleep - you can't, and there is none!
>
> The only rational conclusion is that "the rules are
> whatever Rick Mons (and the "board") wants them to be.
>
> Bear in mind - I'm not complaining about Driscoll's
> incivility itself; good Lord, I can take care of
> myself!
>
> And before Rick responds "I also warned people about
> calling Republicans names" - there ARE Republicans on
> the forum, people with names and faces and homes in
> the city, people who are working for the betterment of
> their families, neighborhoods, schools and the city
> itself. I'm not aware of anyone on the forum, of any
> party (with one possible exception) that hasn't
> strenuously abjured violence and tried to distance
> themselves from the thugs who are vowing to shut down
> Saint Paul, destroy property and harass delegates. Do
> we see the difference, here?
>
> (Oh, I know some of you don't. I'm being charitable).
>
> What can you say about the integrity of a forum where
> *every single Republican and conservative voice* that
> has regularly appeared is, or has been, suspended?
> Not just firebrands like Tom Swift and I, mind you,
> but even the late *Paul Kuettel*, the most
> mild-mannered fellow who ever posted in these forums?
>
> You can, indeed, say nothing for these forums'
> integrity, for their commitment to "diversity" of
> thought and "inclusive" conversation - because there
> is none.
>
> A very interesting confluence of people - people I'd
> NEVER agree with on ANYTHING political - wrote offline
> a few months back, when Rick and Tim were publicizing
> their little "poll" about attitudes toward this
> "forum". "It looks like they're trying to set you
> up", they wrote. I thought that sounded a little
> paranoid at the time.
>
> Kudos to the correspondents! You won one!
>
> Alan Dershowitz famously railed against Harvard's
> faculty's notoriously monobloc social and political
> views many years ago; "your idea of diversity is
> someone in a skirt, or with different colored skin,
> who thinks just like you do". So, it seems, with
> SPIF.
>
> The difference is that Harvard provides *some* useful
> service to the world. The fact is, email discussion
> forums like SPIF are a relic from the early nineties,
> when email was bleeding-edge communication and the web
> was an exotic novelty. They are an artificial, binary
> idea (either authoritarian, hivelike and hierarchical
> or anarchic and useless) whose train left the station
> ten years ago.
>
> My blog (www.shotinthedark.info) sees more traffic by
> Tuesday morning than SPIF gets all week, but the
> discussion in the comment section is livelier, more
> diverse, AND, largely, more civil than the
> clicque-ruled hive that is SPIF. Like the blogosphere
> as a whole, it is both more diverse AND provides a
> better level of discussion than forums like SPIF -
> provided one is willing to engage their brain in the
> discussion.
>
> Anyway, I decline Rick's offer to "allow" me to rejoin
> this forum (and only as a "moderated", censored
> member). Whether you value my contributions or not
> (and I get plenty of email on both sides), the forum
> is poorer for its current management. The
> "marketplace of ideas" in this "forum" resembles one
> of those eastern-bloc groceries in the eighties, with
> bare shelves and surly staff and posters extolling how
> wondrous and diverse the merchandise *really will be*
> when SPIF gets over 1000 members or when communism
> triumphs, whichever applies.
>
> And for the record, I'll allow the ethical, editorial
> and logical titan that is Rick Mons to censor me about
> the same time I let Grace Kelly perform neurosurgery
> on my kids.
>
> And if you are one of this forum's remaining
> conservatives (both of you!), I gotta ask you - why?
> It takes less time to start a blog (www.blogger.com)
> than it takes to register for SPIF - and the
> reward-to-time ratio is infinitely higher.
>
> So there ya go, Rick! Elvis has left the building!
> The hive has been cleansed, just like you and your
> pals on the "board" wanted! Badthink has left the
> room, and this echo chamber is now a "safe" place for
> all the DFL news releases you can stomach.
>
> Mitch Berg
> My City
>
> Shot In The Dark
> www.shotinthedark.info
> Better than SPIF, without even trying
>
> Northern Alliance Radio Network
> ALSO better discussion than SPIF. Calls from people
> who disagree with us get on first, every time.
> 1-3 PM Saturdays, AM1280 The Patriot
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> mitchell berg
> The Midway, Saint Paul
> Info about mitch berg: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/mitchellberg
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/51c7jQzDI5XBAIpx0gK2L0
> -----------------------------------------
> To post, send your message to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> in subject line and send to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
>
> More info about St. Paul (SPIF) Feedback Forum:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-feedback
>
> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
Paul Gleeson
St. Paul, St. Paul
Info about Paul Gleeson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/paulgleeson
This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2vdXsreCtQKwpiLUfw42E4
-----------------------------------------
To post, send your message to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
in subject line and send to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
More info about St. Paul (SPIF) Feedback Forum:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-feedback
E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
-----------------------------------------
Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
Rick Mons suspended me for two weeks (and shut off my
account, after an off-list comment of mine got posted
on the forum!). He "offered" to "allow" me to rejoin
after March 3 - but only as a "moderated" member for
two months.
Paul Gleeson
St. Paul
-------------- Original message --------------
From: Mitch Berg <http://mitchberg@yahoo.com>
> All,
>
> Mitch Berg here. For starters, I'd like to thank you
> all for your support during this past year of duking
> it out with the SPIF leadership over the whole "rules"
> thing.
>
> Rick Mons suspended me for two weeks (and shut off my
> account, after an off-list comment of mine got posted
> on the forum!). He "offered" to "allow" me to rejoin
> after March 3 - but only as a "moderated" member for
> two months.
>
> Nah. Not gonna do that.
>
> I've written a bit of a "Dear SPIF" letter, included
> below. If anyone could do me the favor of posting it
> on the appropriate forum (Feedback or SPIF, I don't
> care), I'd appreciate it. No offense if you don't, of
> course. And if you do, and have a moment to spare,
> let me know how it goes.
>
> Thanks again.
>
> ========================
>
> I suspect I'll have to wait two months until I'm "off
> moderation". Which would imply that I'd have to
> actually resubscribe, and I"m not sure that's worth
> it.
>
> But here's my big kiss-off to Mons and SPIF.
>
> =====================================
>
> Rick told me that I could "reapply" to join SPIF after
> March 3 - subject, of course, to allowing him to
> censor me for two months afterwards.
>
> After thinking over the events of the last few weeks,
> I think I'll decline.
>
> There are really three reasons:
>
> 1) For all of SPIF and E-Democracy's leadership's
> yammering about seeking "diversity" and "discussion",
> management's every move has been designed to stifle
> actual disagreement. The forum, and the concept, as a
> result, are devoid of integrity.
>
> 2) The idea of the email forum is about ten years out
> of date, on life support, and not worth resuscitating.
>
> 3) Rick Mons will censor me when pigs fly or Larry
> Pogemiller has an original idea.
>
> I'd call Rick's enforcement of the "civility" rule
> "capricious" and "inconsistent", but he'd have to work
> his way up to earn either of those adjectives.
>
> Classic example; a while ago, Andy Driscoll wrote an
> email which said, *in its entirety*:
>
> "When are people going to stop getting sucked in by
> Mitch Berg's irrational illogic."
>
> Andy Driscoll
> Crocus Hill/Ward 2
>
> ...with Rick Mons' complete blessing under the
> "civility" rule. Offline, he wrote "all he did was
> describe your opinions in less than flattering terms".
>
> What on *earth* does Rick Mons think "incivility" is?
>
> Well, apparently to Rick Mons it means that while
> DIRECTLY insulting the intelligence of a named,
> well-known contributor is *perfectly* fine, my
> referring to un-named, unpersonified people *not on
> the forum* who have vowed to wreak havoc on Saint Paul
> as "scumbags" is, somehow, within the threshold of
> "uncivil"
>
> Huh?
>
> Let's recap:
>
> "Unflattering" insult aimed at an actual person: Just
> fine!
>
> "Unflattering" insult directed at unnamed,
> as-yet-hypothetical people: Uncivil!
>
> I'll let you try to get your arms around that logic.
> Don't lose any sleep - you can't, and there is none!
>
> The only rational conclusion is that "the rules are
> whatever Rick Mons (and the "board") wants them to be.
>
> Bear in mind - I'm not complaining about Driscoll's
> incivility itself; good Lord, I can take care of
> myself!
>
> And before Rick responds "I also warned people about
> calling Republicans names" - there ARE Republicans on
> the forum, people with names and faces and homes in
> the city, people who are working for the betterment of
> their families, neighborhoods, schools and the city
> itself. I'm not aware of anyone on the forum, of any
> party (with one possible exception) that hasn't
> strenuously abjured violence and tried to distance
> themselves from the thugs who are vowing to shut down
> Saint Paul, destroy property and harass delegates. Do
> we see the difference, here?
>
> (Oh, I know some of you don't. I'm being charitable).
>
> What can you say about the integrity of a forum where
> *every single Republican and conservative voice* that
> has regularly appeared is, or has been, suspended?
> Not just firebrands like Tom Swift and I, mind you,
> but even the late *Paul Kuettel*, the most
> mild-mannered fellow who ever posted in these forums?
>
> You can, indeed, say nothing for these forums'
> integrity, for their commitment to "diversity" of
> thought and "inclusive" conversation - because there
> is none.
>
> A very interesting confluence of people - people I'd
> NEVER agree with on ANYTHING political - wrote offline
> a few months back, when Rick and Tim were publicizing
> their little "poll" about attitudes toward this
> "forum". "It looks like they're trying to set you
> up", they wrote. I thought that sounded a little
> paranoid at the time.
>
> Kudos to the correspondents! You won one!
>
> Alan Dershowitz famously railed against Harvard's
> faculty's notoriously monobloc social and political
> views many years ago; "your idea of diversity is
> someone in a skirt, or with different colored skin,
> who thinks just like you do". So, it seems, with
> SPIF.
>
> The difference is that Harvard provides *some* useful
> service to the world. The fact is, email discussion
> forums like SPIF are a relic from the early nineties,
> when email was bleeding-edge communication and the web
> was an exotic novelty. They are an artificial, binary
> idea (either authoritarian, hivelike and hierarchical
> or anarchic and useless) whose train left the station
> ten years ago.
>
> My blog (www.shotinthedark.info) sees more traffic by
> Tuesday morning than SPIF gets all week, but the
> discussion in the comment section is livelier, more
> diverse, AND, largely, more civil than the
> clicque-ruled hive that is SPIF. Like the blogosphere
> as a whole, it is both more diverse AND provides a
> better level of discussion than forums like SPIF -
> provided one is willing to engage their brain in the
> discussion.
>
> Anyway, I decline Rick's offer to "allow" me to rejoin
> this forum (and only as a "moderated", censored
> member). Whether you value my contributions or not
> (and I get plenty of email on both sides), the forum
> is poorer for its current management. The
> "marketplace of ideas" in this "forum" resembles one
> of those eastern-bloc groceries in the eighties, with
> bare shelves and surly staff and posters extolling how
> wondrous and diverse the merchandise *really will be*
> when SPIF gets over 1000 members or when communism
> triumphs, whichever applies.
>
> And for the record, I'll allow the ethical, editorial
> and logical titan that is Rick Mons to censor me about
> the same time I let Grace Kelly perform neurosurgery
> on my kids.
>
> And if you are one of this forum's remaining
> conservatives (both of you!), I gotta ask you - why?
> It takes less time to start a blog (www.blogger.com)
> than it takes to register for SPIF - and the
> reward-to-time ratio is infinitely higher.
>
> So there ya go, Rick! Elvis has left the building!
> The hive has been cleansed, just like you and your
> pals on the "board" wanted! Badthink has left the
> room, and this echo chamber is now a "safe" place for
> all the DFL news releases you can stomach.
>
> Mitch Berg
> My City
>
> Shot In The Dark
> www.shotinthedark.info
> Better than SPIF, without even trying
>
> Northern Alliance Radio Network
> ALSO better discussion than SPIF. Calls from people
> who disagree with us get on first, every time.
> 1-3 PM Saturdays, AM1280 The Patriot
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> http://mail.yahoo.com
>
> mitchell berg
> The Midway, Saint Paul
> Info about mitch berg: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/mitchellberg
>
> This topic's messages may be viewed at:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/51c7jQzDI5XBAIpx0gK2L0
> -----------------------------------------
> To post, send your message to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
> in subject line and send to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
>
> More info about St. Paul (SPIF) Feedback Forum:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-feedback
>
> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
> -----------------------------------------
> Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
Paul Gleeson
St. Paul, St. Paul
Info about Paul Gleeson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/contacts/paulgleeson
This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/2vdXsreCtQKwpiLUfw42E4
-----------------------------------------
To post, send your message to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on,"
in subject line and send to: stpaul-feedback@forums.e-democracy.org
More info about St. Paul (SPIF) Feedback Forum:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-feedback
E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules
-----------------------------------------
Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net
