That's probably the most ironic post I've ever read on here. :rolleyes:

It's a good one though, I'll just copy and paste it in future.

Care to explain why? It's basically all I've said for the past week or so so please, explain.

But you said in another thread Shane was allowed to silence Ann ‘because free speech’ free speech paradox

Exactly this ^.

Would you care to explain is more like it?

Congratulations on completely butchering what I said for your own agenda, if you've become desperate enough to lie about what I've said then that says it all, doesn't it?

I said Shane was allowed to oppose Ann's opinion because of free speech, just like she is to his, the problem is that you, like so many others it seems, does not understand that disagreeing with someone's views is not the same as trying to silence them and pressing on with that mentality is in fact an attempt to silence opposition to Ann's views by debasing their right to reply as nothing more than an attack, not them sharing their own views.

If you are going to try to use my words against me, at least get them right next time.

A fair bit of advice, don't jump on posts that try to **** on people you dislike without bothering to know whether it's true or not.

Manipulating people into dismissing someone when they say an opinion is inadvertently silencing someone and you said that was ok

Free speech isn’t as black and white as ‘you can speak = free speech!!!’ There is a grey area that people find loopholes around

This is what we call both a reach and a misunderstanding of what freedom of speech is.

Freedom of Speech is very simple, unless you are preaching hatred or inciting violence then it typically comes under the umbrella of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is the right to share your opinion and the right for others to have their views on those opinions and vice versa.

It's not the right to force people to accept or respect what you have to say, you have the right to say it but, unless they breach one of the previous exemptions I mentioned, anyone is free to not accept or respect or do what they want with that opinion. This is the part you seem to struggle with.

Trying to make out that Shane is actively manipulating the house into silencing Ann is nothing but an incredible reach on your part. Nobody is telling Ann what to think or preventing her from speaking, no matter how much you tie yourself in knots trying to make that a reality, it's simply not the case.

This is just you doing what I mentioned before, debasing people's rights to respond and right to freedom of speech just because you don't like what they have to say.

Shouldn't laugh but couldn't help myself :laugh:

Ah now, this is where you've completely walked yourself into it. Shane is definitely very actively trying to manipulate the house, the whole house has stated so except for Malika. And that is preaching hatred. He wants people to hate Ann. Why else would he start throwing out random facts and figures about her past at people? What has any of that got to do with their time in the house?

You can try tying yourself up in knots all you like trying to pretend he's simply disagreeing with her views but every single one of the people who are living with him in the house don't think so. :smug:

:smug:

No, it really isn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_s...United_Kingdom

Perhaps you should try to understand what hate speech and preaching hatred before you post and 'walk yourself right into it.'

It's an incredible reach and very silly to make out that Shane is doing anything but utilising his own right to freedom of speech, Ann and anyone else is free to do the same. I know you dislike freedom of speech when it doesn't benefit you but please try to understand what preaching hatred and hate speech is before you try to use it in an argument.

Again, never a good idea to blindly agree with someone just because it's against someone you mutually dislike. Questioning your friends is not a bad thing.

There is another thread out there by Bones calling Malika scum. I didn't see you objecting there.
Bones explained it was cleared by moderators who allowed such terms re. HMs.
Personally, I think it brings us closer to the gutter, but a rule is a rule, so if it's ok for Malika, why not for Ann?

Are you preaching to me how to behave. I don’t know Paula D anymore than I know you

I agree scum is a word that should be used in very extreme cases

Where did I say hate speech?? Changing the wording now? I said preaching hatred. Don't even try pulling out your Wikipedia definitions.

Again, if anyone can answer the question what exactly is Shane J's motive in telling everyone in the house Ann's life history then maybe I'll believe it's not trying to turn them against her. He wants people to hate her. That's preaching hatred.

Sorry I don't have time to follow every single thread on here, I certainly didn't go agreeing with it did I?

Yeah, my words were taken a little too literally there. There had been a post made where the member called Malika fans scum. I said that insulting fans was not allowed but insulting housemates was (within reason). Of course its fine to criticize housemates BUT, just random posts of 'X is a bitch' or something add nothing at all to the forum. So insults are fine within reason, but preferable when part of a larger post. if that makes sense.

Like the OP of this thread??

He is getting people to hate Ann. Therefore he is preaching hated and as such is a violation of free speech. He probably wouldn’t be convicted as such because he’s essentially loop holed the system but he knows exactly what he’s doing

Hate speech and preaching hate is a similar thing, they both come under hate speech laws.

I love the last line of your first point 'don't even TRY to use facts against me, Sonny Jim!'

It doesn't matter what his motive is any more than it matters what motivates Ann to hate dislike Megan Markle, it's their opinion, you can question it and have an opinion on it but you are trying to make out that if anyone can't see into his mind and explain his actions then your opinion of the situation is fact and that's wrong. You can't say it's a fact that he is preaching hatred any more than someone can say it's a fact that she's a racist.

Well except for the fact that what Shane is doing is not preaching hated. You can try to make out that it is all you like but the facts are against you.

But this thread actually has something to talk about. If this thread had simply been 'ann is scum' and nothing else to it, then it would likely be closed as theres no conversation to be had there.

Its a quite difficult balancing act moderating this forum. We don;t want to shut down peoples opinions but at the same time we want proper discussions, not just threads full of one word posts and insults.

Also this thread was made as I closed the other one that was talking about this. When I closed it I did specifically say that if anyone wants to discuss it further then remake a thread about it.

I don't think bitching about another HM on BB constitutes as Hate Speech, if it did, almost every HM ever would be locked up by now :laugh:

Oh do carry on, so your opinion is fact now but mine isn't?

Fine, whatever, don't have any time for this crap. :shrug:

Your views of what constitutes preaching hatred is as wonky as your definition of what freedom of speech is. You can keep twisting things but it doesn't make anything you say factual. Ann's freedom of speech is unimpeded in that house, fact, Shane is not preaching hate by any definition or law in any country in the world, that's not a loophole, that's a fact.

These are your opinions, you are more than entitled to them but the facts of the matter are against you.

I've never said my opinion is fact, I've simply stated my opinion and used the facts of hate speech and preaching to qualify what I'm saying. It's called making a solid argument.

I've never said my opinion is fact, I've simply stated my opinion and used the facts of hate speech and preaching to qualify what I'm saying. It's called making a solid argument based on facts.

Ofc they wouldn’t be convicted like I said but he’s installing hate on another housemate to both housemates and the public. It probably doesn’t fall under any laws but if the public and housemates are manipulated into disregarding someone’s words off of the basis of one persons opinion that doesn’t seem healthy for free speech now does it

Sorry I have to agree that Shane was trying to manipulate the house into shutting Ann down, and she had not even done anything..he did this randomly. He then realized it would not work so stopped that rubbish. Am sure he thought he could get Wayne to attack easily...which was clearly what he was doing,. Might aswell have just came out and said 'go shout at Ann for opinions she has outside of the house that she has not brought up in here but I have suddenly decided its important but will not say anything to her myself'

I really don't think it is a serious as preaching hate. Shane seemed to want to get Wayne to confront Ann but that could be the way it was edited. I don't think he would have said much to Amanda that night as he had tried in the past and she was having none of it. In my opinion, I think Shane was trying to let them know about Ann's more controversial views so they didn't think she is just a nice little old lady in his view. Wayne didn't seem to know about her voting history, but as it happens now he does its not changed muchas far as Wayne is concerned. Plus the night before, Wayne was ranting about Ann in the kitchen so I think Shane may have thought Wayne may have been a more captive audience and interested in what he knows about her.

It's not considered "hate Speech" though in the legal sense of the word so of course it falls into free speech, Shane was free to tell Wayne he thinks he should be challenging Anns anti-gay rights views as a gay man and Wayne was free to tell him no he has no issue with her

I do agree with that, all I was disagreeing with was that it's not a hate crime or hate speech in the legal sense of the word

We're not talking about the legal definition Niamh.

I disagree with you, no-one should be encouraging one person to attack another.

Maybe I articulated myself poorly but I wasn’t trying to argue it was illegal hate speech. What Shane jenek was doing was wrong and gross manipulation

Oh no, its not hate speech :laugh:

I don't envy you and others on the staff. Moderating a lively forum is a tough gig. I moderated a forum and a chatroom in my time and it is a bitch of a job.
Stay strong and carry on :clap1:

A mess at people attempting to defend this disgusting practice

Has Ann’s support of conversion therapy even been mentioned in the house? It doesn’t work and causes psychological harm ofc I don’t agree with it I was just personally tired of seeing people defending Shane js bullying then seeing headlines saying he’s getting bullied :shrug:

Don't think anyone in here has tried to defend it. I don't know how anyone could