The writing is on the wall...

[max]

Black wrote:

But don't forget we have a few individuals here who have been working to disappear this forum, so not everybody who casts this side in a negative light is being genuine.

You should stop bringing up Steve G, all the time...

[SteveG]

max wrote:
[quote=Black]

But don't forget we have a few individuals here who have been working to disappear this forum, so not everybody who casts this side in a negative light is being genuine.

You should stop bringing up Steve G, all the time... go back home

[max]

Steve G. wrote:
[quote=max]
[quote=Black]

But don't forget we have a few individuals here who have been working to disappear this forum, so not everybody who casts this side in a negative light is being genuine.

You should stop bringing up Steve G, all the time... go back home
Did snitching thread rang a loud bell, Steve?...

[Mac-A-Matic]

Black wrote:
No way to carry on a discussion without insults?

Just following your example, Howard.

Black wrote:
There are political contributions on public record that support my statement. That's all you get.

And of course, you chose not to cite those sources.

Either way, what does it matter to you? If you should choose to fund a political forum then let that be your playground to spout whatever liberal, left-wing bias you desire. Then you can make the decisions on whether or not the level of support that forum needs is buoyed your financial/personnel resources.

As I said in the other thread on the other side, I really wouldn't mind if this forum went away.

[Acer]

I found a record of the contributions referred to in about 7 minutes. I recognize that it may not be prudent to link to them directly, just because any conclusions about its relevance to the administrative decisions about this forum are conjecture.
I do think it's a fair suggestion that if the owner of a forum leans one way, but the activity in the forum tends to go the other way, "resources" might appear "wasted" more quickly than if the forum aligned with the owner's views. I have no proof for this, I do not assert that it is true, I merely suggest the conclusion is logical.

Personally, I don't think it's the case. Anybody who bothers to spend time here can recognize that its relatively balanced. I think the moaning about injustice from a few is far more annoying to the owner than the actual discourse within the forum itself.

[GGD]

But then there are things like this that seem to lean the opposite way http://eshop.macsales.com/green/index.html

[Acer]

GGD wrote:
But then there are things like this that seem to lean the opposite way http://eshop.macsales.com/green/index.html

True. The charities OWC as a company supports per their blog are not directly related to politics.

[Mac-A-Matic]

Acer wrote:
I found a record of the contributions referred to in about 7 minutes. I recognize that it may not be prudent to link to them directly, just because any conclusions about its relevance to the administrative decisions about this forum are conjecture.

Again, cite the source.

And there have been many sources cited in this forum that fall short of conjecture.

[Mac-A-Matic]

Acer wrote:
I do think it's a fair suggestion that if the owner of a forum leans one way, but the activity in the forum tends to go the other way, "resources" might appear "wasted" more quickly than if the forum aligned with the owner's views. I have no proof for this, I do not assert that it is true, I merely suggest the conclusion is logical.

While it may be logical I don't think the history of this forum bears that out. If the exodus to MRF occurred in 2006, then it should be safe to say that this forum has been ongoing for seven years. During that time, we've had a republican president who was routinely bashed on this forum for a variety of things. Add to that the continued liberal bias of the forum participants and if Larry was indeed right-biased (as has been suggested here) enough to manufacture some reason to quash the liberal voice on MRF, then this should have happened years ago.

I think the owners of the forum have been very open-minded regarding the positions expressed here.

[Lemon Drop]

This whole "the forum has a bias" thing is pretty funny.

The forum is completely neutral, it has no bias. The topics are chosen 100% by participants, there is no editorial judgement coming to bear.

There clearly are more participants who are liberal-leaning in their politics, as demonstrated by Obama v. Romney polls and responses, but all that means is that there are more liberal participants. It doesn't mean anything more or less than that.