December 11, 2012 at 1:46 pm #91016AnonymousInactiveYoung Master Smeet wrote:I don't follow you. I'm not a moderator. How does your comment relate to my quoted text?
Because I said exactlty that and MY post was removed as you will see when the IC overturn admin's decision.December 11, 2012 at 3:58 pm #91017adminKeymaster
ADMIN NOTE: TheOldGreyWhistle has been banned for continual offtopic comments and flaming. See Post #60 above.December 11, 2012 at 7:27 pm #91018
I have read this entire thread in the last hour or so. I am duty bound to ask, specifically because I do not know what comments are, or are not allowed! The post above (61), where has OGW been flaming? As I have said, I have read through the thread and can find no instances of what you allude to!As far as "off-topic" is concerned, if this is the case then quite a few of the posts have been "off-topic"! Post 59 stands out. Off-topic, flaming, and to my mind, trolling and insulting. Rather than discuss the issue, gnome tells OGW he is free to leave and that it would "give the rest of us 'a break' ". Well gnome, speak for yourself, personally I do not need a break from OGW's posts. Or are they to uncomfortable for some comrades ears?Are there limits, boundaries and restrictions we should not cross? Remember this thread is called Free and open discussion on Sticky! Are there those who can transgress "rules" and not be called to account? vis a vis post 59 as a prime example? No hint as to this post being, off-topic nor inciteful posting. Was post 59 not off-topic, inflaming the situation, uncomradely or injurious to another "comrade and moreover a case of trolling?The saying, whats sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander springs to mind. Is the lenience given to gnome in post 59, not an instance of what OGW has alluded to? I think it is a perfect example!YFS Steve.December 11, 2012 at 7:43 pm #91019
post 59 should have been 58.December 11, 2012 at 8:08 pm #91020adminKeymaster
A full report on this incident will be released in due time.December 11, 2012 at 8:27 pm #91021
DJPI suspected you would use the Socialist Standard as an example, you have mentioned it before.However the Standard is, as I am sure you are aware, (originally) a monthly paper journal, the flagship of the SPGB. It is meant as a socialist platform, propaganda if you like, with limited space, it is not a discussion platform. It does allow a little room for two or three letters and replies etc.The forum is an open platform, members are free to discuss a number of topics, contribute freely and openly, answer questions and engage in, hopefully informative debate. I need not say the forum has more space than the Standard to allow wider input.As for discussing gearboxes on a pizza internet forum. Members could ignore or engage with that person if they so wished. Someone may fancy learning about gearboxes. If no one is interested and the offending poster continues pointless posting with no relevance to the forum, that person could be confronted by a moderator and asked to desist. It may even lead to suspension.Ignoring posts and/or dealing with the issues as they arise is surely preferable to censorship. Not really a problem as far as I can see.I think most people on this forum know the definition of censorship and how it is a problematic method of controlling people.Do you advocate censorship as part of a blueprint for a socialist society? Probably not, I hope not.But the very party advocating socialism uses censorship to silence people on their forums?December 11, 2012 at 11:34 pm #91022
With reference to post 64 by admin, I hope gnome is judged by the same criteria as OGW was. Fair is fair after all! Remember the aocryphal goose please.December 11, 2012 at 11:37 pm #91023
To SP, censorship is the domain of the intellectually incompetent and redundant.December 11, 2012 at 11:45 pm #91024
Watch it there Steve, you might get censored.December 12, 2012 at 2:46 am #91025
What? again! Think I'll be able to talk my way outa it? I'm innocent guv, honest. I really am.December 12, 2012 at 2:47 pm #91026
In a earlier post about the issue of censorship and moderation on this site, I said the following.SocialistPunk wrote:Ignore me, but don't censor me!
That is fine, if the person being ignored is ranting on about pizzas, by all means ignore.However when someone makes a valid point regarding a topic being discussed (in this case the problems with censorship as moderation) and one party involved in said discussion then refuses to answer reasonable questions and relevant points, then it is not unreasonable to assume that the person doing the ignoring has nothing to counter the valid argument of the other party.How many times have you faced a refusal to debate further, coming from supporters of capitalism when they have no defence left to offer?Silence in such a scenario is priceless.Gearboxes anyone?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.