I basically got an infraction for no reason and I cannot reply to the PM (I do not see a reply button and it takes me to the homepage when I click their profile)

But anyways, I got an infraction for no reason, because I have the right yo freedom of speech and to chose what economic/political system I beleive in.

I beleive the person that did that has opposing views from mine and disagrees with me (which is their right, but not the way they reacted.)

They must accept my rights to beleive in what I want the same way I respect theirs.

You made your point in the thread three times. I understand you don't like that we charge for the LQJM. You're certainly not required to use it to find perspective employees. Many job boards do charge (in fact, craigslist charges for nothing except jobs as an an example). The people who have paid at LQ have followed up and said they found value in it.

--jeremy

I think it should be free, I would by no means use that when I could use free sources.

But it's not about that. It's about getting an infraction for posting my opionion

CHina and them arent real communists. The communism I desire does not exist in practice. It was about censoring the internet. I heard this business owner made a virus and put it on facebook and used that as an excuse to block it. That is wrong.

I get the idea there's some misconceptions at play and that things are not going to be resolved here easily.
I invite you to contact me via e-mail and we'll discuss things there if that's OK with you.

Okay I will eml.

I hope w32sux doesnt hate me.

I seriously do not like how people work hard and barely get by while others are rich and dont do anything (the "boss"es). So I hate capitalism, everyone should be able to get by without paying and arm and a leg for living on their knees. I would like to be a business owner, but it wouldnt feel right exploiting people's hard work.

I agree with mpg187 in that the post does not seem to be flamebait, and seems at least somewhat relevant to what content and ideas expressed in previous posts.

From dictionary.com

Flame bait: A Usenet posting or other message intended to trigger a flame war, or one that invites flames in reply.

I think the intent was simply to express a strongly held opinion and that the poster did not intend or expect to create a flame war. Intelligent discussion concerning his opinion could be made, and again, its content seem relevant to the OP.

I hope mpg187 and unspawn can work out a resolution that informs mpg187 about the spirit of LQ's rules, but does not penalize him unfairly.

For what it's worth, the "infraction" resulted from a thread having to do with an employer controlling employees' use of the internet (at work). mpg posted comments that were certainly "flame bait" in my book...as a minimum, they were counterproductive.

In replying, Jeremy referenced mpg's innocuous comments about the cost of posting in LQ-marketplace.

For mpg187;
You might consider just moving on with your Linux career and put this behind you. After you help a few people here---and/or post some thoughtful and polite questions, noone will remember any of this.

Someone please close this......

@ALL: for those that don't deal well with subtle signs or reading between the lines: I already requested the OP to take this discussion to e-mail. Please take that as your cue that any remarks, clarification or attempts at discussion serve no purpose here. So please refrain from posting in this thread.

Thanks for understanding.

@ALL: For the record, the reason I issued the infraction had absolutely NOTHING to do with my view of mpg187's opinion. It was SOLELY due to the manner in which his comment was constructed, which was WAY out of line for a technical forum. In other words, it wasn't about WHAT he said, but rather HOW he said it. It's obvious that political issues will be part of the underlying theme regarding certain technical discussions (such as those related to access restrictions), but there are ways to share one's views and ideas in a moderate, respectful, and constructive manner. Dropping bombshells on threads is NOT one of those ways. If one does have a need to drop political bombshells, I'm sure there's plenty of websites out there where those types of posts are more than welcome. But one-liner, non-factual, off-topic, nonconstructive, explosive remarks such as the one which triggered this infraction have no place here at LQ.

@mpg187: I know that by now you are probably discussing this matter with unSpawn via email, but I would like you to know that my inbox is also open if there's anything you wish to discuss with me. And no, I don't "hate you" or anything like that. This isn't personal.

BTW, the email discussion invitation is open for anyone else too, as this thread is not the best place to have this discussion (as already pointed-out by unSpawn). Please use email instead for any discussions/questions related to this issue.

Can the thread then be closed or removed? If continued posts are not being encouraged, it seems odd to leave it open.

//closed. In addition to the open invitations made by unSpawn and win32sux, I'm always available via email as well.

--jeremy