Site Moderation Discussion

[rolymiller]

Hmm go to bed brin? Is that the same as shut up? Free speech? Some have it some dont...

[howdydoo]

I agree with CT's position. Trying to moderate posts on the basis that they are 'woke' or 'anti-woke' - or whatever - is fraught with difficulty. What one person considers unacceptable may be a mainstream view to others.

The moderators are responsible for setting the tone of the board however. If they allow a free for all where offensive and irritating posts are allowed to flourish then people will vote with their keyboards and stop posting. Quite a few people have done that already.

As for the site rules posted by Cam, I would suggest that there may be an issue if one of the moderators is happy to author abusive posts (and invite his chums to take part in a pile on). Who is moderating him?

The moderators have the unenviable job of trying to interpret that across a very broad church of opinion and it will never be easy.

I certainly don't mind having a sticky reminding people of the rules but I don't accept that any of us has a right to dictate where the line in the sand should be drawn - as your statement seems to suggest - on what is acceptable and unacceptable.

If I've misunderstood or misinterpreted your intent, I apologise.

You make good points CT.

The only issue I have is where one mod draws lines in the sand. His pals can rally round as much as they like. The fact is he likes to delete and edit posts he's involved with to change the narrative.

Bring back Millertop

[UlleyMiller]

A couple of points:

Firstly, this is your forum. Much like any self-contained ecosystem (whether a pub, home, knitting group), it can function however the majority decide, with an ongoing respect for any overarching owner/laws, etc. I don't believe Roly is concerned with arguments getting heated and how to deal with that, just moderating what he (and some others) believe to be crossing a line where a demographic is getting insulted.

Secondly, 'woke' is just a way to describe an awareness of prejudice. It's (oddly) become both a pejorative term for people seen as overly sensitive to anything, and a compliment to those who consider social awareness and progressive thinking as positive.

Whilst Kerr has a point that some lines of discussion, terms, etc are going to split a room, others are pretty straightforward. Anyone still pretending that the 'p word' is acceptable isn't being wholly honest (unfathomable that there's still a post with that in there, despite what appeared to be a genuine apology for the person who wrote it). You get the forum you want in the end, and if more members (or those with a sheriff badge) are comfortable with racial slurs, misogyny and homophobic insults, others will have to deal with being around that sort of thing, or leave. If it suits more to go the other way, then as I said previously, members have autonomy over how things are run.

[KerrAvon]

A couple of points:

Firstly, this is your forum. Much like any self-contained ecosystem (whether a pub, home, knitting group), it can function however the majority decide, with an ongoing respect for any overarching owner/laws, etc. I don't believe Roly is concerned with arguments getting heated and how to deal with that, just moderating what he (and some others) believe to be crossing a line where a demographic is getting insulted.

Secondly, 'woke' is just a way to describe an awareness of prejudice. It's (oddly) become both a pejorative term for people seen as overly sensitive to anything, and a compliment to those who consider social awareness and progressive thinking as positive.

Whilst Kerr has a point that some lines of discussion, terms, etc are going to split a room, others are pretty straightforward. Anyone still pretending that the 'p word' is acceptable isn't being wholly honest (unfathomable that there's still a post with that in there, despite what appeared to be a genuine apology for the person who wrote it). You get the forum you want in the end, and if more members (or those with a sheriff badge) are comfortable with racial slurs, misogyny and homophobic insults, others will have to deal with being around that sort of thing, or leave. If it suits more to go the other way, then as I said previously, members have autonomy over how things are run.

I was posting from my phone yesterday and so abbreviated my thoughts. I agree that there are some issues upon which the position is straightforward. Whether they agree with it or not, I think that most people would now know that the P or N words, for example, are wholly unacceptable on a public forum. On that, I note what Frog says about the banning of someone who chose to cross that line. I would suggest that no reasonable person would use such language other than to offend, provoke and insult.

An issue, however, is that what is acceptable to the reasonable person changes over time creating large grey areas.

I like to think that I am a liberal minded person (a certain poster has been known to liken me to Lord Longford as opposed to discussing issues upon which we hold differing views) who believes that any form of prejudice has no place in a civil society. That being said, I have found myself terribly embarrassed and full of regret when I have looked back at diaries that I maintained in my ****s and twenties (a long time ago) in which I used language and expressed some views that I now know to be wholly wrong and unacceptable. Was I a ‘bad’ person then? I was certainly ignorant and unthinking to think and write such things, but I cut myself a bit of slack by acknowledging that I was caught up in the language and attitude of that time.

With the above in mind, I think we should all cut each other at least some slack (not least because we might be using language and holding views that we will know to be wrong in 20 years-time - it becomes statistically unlikely that I will be thinking anything at all much beyond that time frame).

The above gets me to cup-cakes. I can’t recall seeing it being used on here and so don’t know the context, but until you mentioned it, I don’t think I would have immediately seen it as homophobic. Now you have mentioned it, I can see the argument, but much would turn upon the intention of the person using it.

As I have said, I don’t know the context in which cup-cake was used, but if it was not obviously being used as a term of endearment, the question surely has to be why it was used at all. At best, it is patronising and provocative.

Perhaps the site should operate to the ‘tap-room’ test. Would you call a complete stranger ‘cup-cake’ in a pub? I wouldn’t.

[the_idiotb_stardson]

Would you call a complete stranger ‘cup-cake’ in a pub? I wouldn’t.

How do you think I met my husband?

[UlleyMiller]

I was posting from my phone yesterday and so abbreviated my thoughts. I agree that there are some issues upon which the position is straightforward. Whether they agree with it or not, I think that most people would now know that the P or N words, for example, are wholly unacceptable on a public forum. On that, I note what Frog says about the banning of someone who chose to cross that line. I would suggest that no reasonable person would use such language other than to offend, provoke and insult.

An issue, however, is that what is acceptable to the reasonable person changes over time creating large grey areas.

I like to think that I am a liberal minded person (a certain poster has been known to liken me to Lord Longford as opposed to discussing issues upon which we hold differing views) who believes that any form of prejudice has no place in a civil society. That being said, I have found myself terribly embarrassed and full of regret when I have looked back at diaries that I maintained in my ****s and twenties (a long time ago) in which I used language and expressed some views that I now know to be wholly wrong and unacceptable. Was I a ‘bad’ person then? I was certainly ignorant and unthinking to think and write such things, but I cut myself a bit of slack by acknowledging that I was caught up in the language and attitude of that time.

With the above in mind, I think we should all cut each other at least some slack (not least because we might be using language and holding views that we will know to be wrong in 20 years-time - it becomes statistically unlikely that I will be thinking anything at all much beyond that time frame).

The above gets me to cup-cakes. I can’t recall seeing it being used on here and so don’t know the context, but until you mentioned it, I don’t think I would have immediately seen it as homophobic. Now you have mentioned it, I can see the argument, but much would turn upon the intention of the person using it.

As I have said, I don’t know the context in which cup-cake was used, but if it was not obviously being used as a term of endearment, the question surely has to be why it was used at all. At best, it is patronising and provocative.

Perhaps the site should operate to the ‘tap-room’ test. Would you call a complete stranger ‘cup-cake’ in a pub? I wouldn’t.

Appreciate the post and clarification.

I've almost worn out the point that this is not my forum, nor my place to tell people what's right and wrong, but I do believe the forum members have the right to collectively decide if the behaviours are okay, if the forum 'owners' have adequate rules, and if the mechanisms and those handling them are suitable. Personally speaking, I think the moderators failing to deal with the 'P word' is a problem, whereas 'cupcake' is just one minor example in a sea of examples of where Brin is at as a person. You're right, 'cutting slack' is important. I don't think anyone makes the forum a better place by operating a 'one strike and you're out' approach, and I've warmed to some people over time, as I'm sure others will have. There are points where that ends though - you can potentially misjudge a person by a few comments, but eventually you run out of ways to justify their manner.

I've lived in the town for 40-odd years, so it's not really shocking to hear people call each other c*** or pr*** as a term of endearment, but context is king. Likewise, I remember seeing faggots being sold near where I previously lived, and more recently being sold at Burton Albion, but to pretend that word creates confusion if used as an insult is obviously ignoring context. It feels to me like people abuse the relative anonymity afforded online to fight these little free speech battles to help them with some other internal issue - although maybe I've just not seen/heard them in my local or anywhere else, challenging the world.

[Townerslovechild]

To summarise then....the mods do a good job generally policing a somewhat childish forum at times, which is populated by slightly racist, homophobic ,***ist,woke,anti woke,middle to old age white men who sometimes watch Rotherham United.

[UlleyMiller]

To summarise then....the mods do a good job generally policing a somewhat childish forum at times, which is populated by slightly racist, homophobic ,***ist,woke,anti woke,middle to old age white men who sometimes watch Rotherham United.

Captain Paranoia says so:

If the cap fits wear it as they say. ����

[gru]

Cyber bullying who've tried it with me on here they're on my ignore list. Don't want to know. I don't mind people calling me for my views on Roth U but they take it further than that. Leave it at that.

[rolymiller]

BOTN . Why is it childish to have grown up debate on a forum for debate? It is more childish not to debate surely? Also smacks of td childish because its not what i want to hear. Fingers in the ear job of a 3 year old?