Quizzes & Puzzles2 mins ago
Ab Censorship.
200 Answers
Hello AB.
On 02:26 Sun 10th Mar 2019, I posted the following question to the Editor's Blog:
“Why Do You Shut Down Active Threads?”
I then went on to explain why a thread involving me and a false allegation about me had been locked down, preventing any further debate. I received no reply.
Now, a week or so later, I return to see if the AB editors had anything to say on the matter. And lo and behold, the entire exchange on the Editor's Blog has been eviscerated from the site. It's as though my question was never asked. The original question thrown down Winston Smith's “Memory Hole” in true 1984 totalitarian fashion.
Nice one AB. Nice one. Censoring legitimate debate about the matter of legitimate debate. You must be so proud. I hope you sleep well at night in your beds, safe in the knowledge that you are the true custodians of morality and righteousness and that all opinions that differ from your own are illegitimate and morally deficient.
You censorious ***-wits. I don't normally swear on forums such as this but seeing as this post will likely be immediately deleted because of the criticism of AB rather than the profanity, I simply don't care anymore.
On 02:26 Sun 10th Mar 2019, I posted the following question to the Editor's Blog:
“Why Do You Shut Down Active Threads?”
I then went on to explain why a thread involving me and a false allegation about me had been locked down, preventing any further debate. I received no reply.
Now, a week or so later, I return to see if the AB editors had anything to say on the matter. And lo and behold, the entire exchange on the Editor's Blog has been eviscerated from the site. It's as though my question was never asked. The original question thrown down Winston Smith's “Memory Hole” in true 1984 totalitarian fashion.
Nice one AB. Nice one. Censoring legitimate debate about the matter of legitimate debate. You must be so proud. I hope you sleep well at night in your beds, safe in the knowledge that you are the true custodians of morality and righteousness and that all opinions that differ from your own are illegitimate and morally deficient.
You censorious ***-wits. I don't normally swear on forums such as this but seeing as this post will likely be immediately deleted because of the criticism of AB rather than the profanity, I simply don't care anymore.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by birdie1971. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
I personally have no issue with the modding on here for the most part. I sometimes think the censorship goes a bit far a bit soon, but we are all individuals so make individual calls with what we find acceptable or not, and thus I obviously won't always agree with mods decisions. Plus let's not forget they don't get paid you know...
//Hi v-e ( there ! over now!)
you have written ECHR [ read the next bit in a singy voice)
that is ECHR and not ee-cee-jaaaaaay!
they different !
and guess what the effect of Brexit has on our membership of the ECHR ?
None //
...and
//we have had this before you know ...
in which you feature
er gaily ( in the pre 2nd world war sense I stress) confusing completely the ECJ and ECHR//
Why are you addressing these two comments to me, Mr Pedant? I don't particularly give a damn about your incessant sneers, but I on't like being lied about.
you have written ECHR [ read the next bit in a singy voice)
that is ECHR and not ee-cee-jaaaaaay!
they different !
and guess what the effect of Brexit has on our membership of the ECHR ?
None //
...and
//we have had this before you know ...
in which you feature
er gaily ( in the pre 2nd world war sense I stress) confusing completely the ECJ and ECHR//
Why are you addressing these two comments to me, Mr Pedant? I don't particularly give a damn about your incessant sneers, but I on't like being lied about.
Gosh, I think anyone reading this could be forgiven for believing that there is one rogue Mod on the site and his name is andy-hughes.
I don't know how many Mods there are but they will all have slightly different views of just how far to let ABers push threads, or slate others or what those at AB Towers would wish to see removed from the site.
Of course mistakes may well be made but the gnomes seem to put those right in fairly short order.
I think those feeling most aggrieved are generally those who believe their words carry more insight and gravitas than the remaining contributors.
I don't know how many Mods there are but they will all have slightly different views of just how far to let ABers push threads, or slate others or what those at AB Towers would wish to see removed from the site.
Of course mistakes may well be made but the gnomes seem to put those right in fairly short order.
I think those feeling most aggrieved are generally those who believe their words carry more insight and gravitas than the remaining contributors.
//erm because you asked me to comment - I wdna bothered otherwise//
I asked you to comment on the judgment of the ECHR in the case ES v Austria, not pretend that I was confusing the ECHR with the ECJ.
The significance of the ECHR ruling to the UK has nothing to do with Brexit, and I've never suggested it has. It's significant because we are signatories to the Convention of Human Rights and therefore we have a legal precedent which exempts criticism of Islam from protection under the Convention's free speech provisions. A point I made in the other thread.
I asked you to comment on the judgment of the ECHR in the case ES v Austria, not pretend that I was confusing the ECHR with the ECJ.
The significance of the ECHR ruling to the UK has nothing to do with Brexit, and I've never suggested it has. It's significant because we are signatories to the Convention of Human Rights and therefore we have a legal precedent which exempts criticism of Islam from protection under the Convention's free speech provisions. A point I made in the other thread.
Good evening all - just come to this because I have been off-line for a couple of days.
Since I am brought into the discussion by name, I am happy to repeat for the umpteenth time (!) what I see as a Moderator's duties, how I know from experience that they operate, and my personal take on this thread.
First of all - as I have said I don't know how many times, but it seems not to sink in - Moderators are not permitted to remove posts that they find personally objectionable, or which clash with their personal opinions, or any of the subversive Machiavellian nonsense that some are determined goes on.
Moderators remove posts that they believe contravene Site Rules, they are identified by the Editorial Team as having done so, and they are required to provide a reason for the action they have taken.
Contrary to what some believe, the Editorial team can and do over-rule Mods' decisions, I speak from experience, I have had deleted posts reinstated more than once. On the same subject, I have had my own posts and threads deleted, and closed - as with everyone else on here, Moderators included, I am not exempt from the rules, I know some would love to believe that I receive some sort of divine dispensation, I assure you (again!) this is simply not true. I don't know how often I have to say it - I suspect that those who are convinced otherwise will never believe me, and there is nothing I can do about that.
I believe that Moderators operate with the best interests of the site at heart. They do am increasingly thankless task for no reward, and a lot of criticism, most of it unjustified - but that is always going to happen on a site like this, it is unavoidable.
Speaking personally, I get more than my fair share of abuse and controversy as a contributor, which is fine, I contribute a lot almost daily, and I do upset people, and I accept some of the criticism as valid, and respond accordingly.
I also get personal abuse as a Moderator, with the notion that I immune as a poster or because I am a Moderator, from the same rules as anyone else, I can only reiterate (again!) that I am not immune, I an censured and censored if I step out of line, and I have no issue with that at all.
So, those who think I am lying I can do nothing about, those who are unsure, I hope I have reassured you about the way the site is run.
Think about it, the Editorial Team are not in the business of shedding contributors if it can be avoided, but they must police their site appropriately, and they do so with the help of Moderators who they choose, and they can and do dismiss those who they feel are not effective, for whatever reason.
You are welcome to argue any point you like with me, that is debate, and that is fine. You are not entitled to malign the character and integrity of myself and my fellow Moderators, that is unacceptbale, and is dealt with accordingly via implementation of the Site Rules.
OK - onwards ...
Since I am brought into the discussion by name, I am happy to repeat for the umpteenth time (!) what I see as a Moderator's duties, how I know from experience that they operate, and my personal take on this thread.
First of all - as I have said I don't know how many times, but it seems not to sink in - Moderators are not permitted to remove posts that they find personally objectionable, or which clash with their personal opinions, or any of the subversive Machiavellian nonsense that some are determined goes on.
Moderators remove posts that they believe contravene Site Rules, they are identified by the Editorial Team as having done so, and they are required to provide a reason for the action they have taken.
Contrary to what some believe, the Editorial team can and do over-rule Mods' decisions, I speak from experience, I have had deleted posts reinstated more than once. On the same subject, I have had my own posts and threads deleted, and closed - as with everyone else on here, Moderators included, I am not exempt from the rules, I know some would love to believe that I receive some sort of divine dispensation, I assure you (again!) this is simply not true. I don't know how often I have to say it - I suspect that those who are convinced otherwise will never believe me, and there is nothing I can do about that.
I believe that Moderators operate with the best interests of the site at heart. They do am increasingly thankless task for no reward, and a lot of criticism, most of it unjustified - but that is always going to happen on a site like this, it is unavoidable.
Speaking personally, I get more than my fair share of abuse and controversy as a contributor, which is fine, I contribute a lot almost daily, and I do upset people, and I accept some of the criticism as valid, and respond accordingly.
I also get personal abuse as a Moderator, with the notion that I immune as a poster or because I am a Moderator, from the same rules as anyone else, I can only reiterate (again!) that I am not immune, I an censured and censored if I step out of line, and I have no issue with that at all.
So, those who think I am lying I can do nothing about, those who are unsure, I hope I have reassured you about the way the site is run.
Think about it, the Editorial Team are not in the business of shedding contributors if it can be avoided, but they must police their site appropriately, and they do so with the help of Moderators who they choose, and they can and do dismiss those who they feel are not effective, for whatever reason.
You are welcome to argue any point you like with me, that is debate, and that is fine. You are not entitled to malign the character and integrity of myself and my fellow Moderators, that is unacceptbale, and is dealt with accordingly via implementation of the Site Rules.
OK - onwards ...
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Shopping & Style17 mins ago
Crosswords23 mins ago
Crosswords48 mins ago
