Ab Censorship.

[birdie1971]

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.

[10ClarionSt]

Ed, suspended or deleted? Suspended = how long for? Deleted = permanent.

[diddlydo]

I often get the impression that some comments on this site are removed because someone deems them to be too "left wing".

[dannyk13]

10cs, Where is the word 'deleted' mentioned in the Ed's post?

[Old_Geezer]

Surprised this isn't closed.

Suspended (and banned) apply to accounts.
Deleted applies to posts.

[naomi24]

//Surprised this isn't closed. //

Well done Ab Editor for not closing or removing this thread.

[ichkeria]

You’ve been advised that the term “censorious ***” aimed at the object of your ire is not enough to get you suspended, which seems quite tolerant to me. If I was you, I’d rejoice in that news, count to 20 and move on :-)

[10ClarionSt]

Well, suspended implies that the account may be activated again. I can't see anywhere in the rules that specifies a time period. So does this mean suspended or deleted?

[dannyk13]

10cs, Suspended is temporary for a period determined by the Ed.

[ladybirder]

I hope you don't leave us Birdie, I regularly look out for your posts.

[pastafreak]

Naomi @ 8:58...words that say it all. And should be read by all.

[anotheoldgit]

AB Editor

/// because it states in the Site Rules: ///

/// Any posts asking or discussing why a post or thread was removed or closed, or why a member was banned or suspended, will be removed. ///

Since at times there are many who contribute to a thread only to find that for some unknown reason the thread is removed or closed down, or that a member has been banned or suspended without any explanation.
In these circumstances I can't see why it is against the rules for those who have taken part in the thread can't be told why these measures have been taken.
Better still perhaps you could consider removing this controversial rule?

[wolf63]

I agree with AOG.

[hc4361]

Everyone should have the right to freely express their opinions, no matter how extreme or unpalatable to others.
Website owners have the right to moderate as they wish, usually to appease the advertisers who provide the income and to keep the site appealing to the widest audience.
These two aims are not compatible. It really is very easy to set up your own website if you feel your opinions must be heard by others but fall outside AB rules. It is also easy to get your views across and stay within the rules of AB if you choose your words carefully.

If you don't like the rules - go elsewhere. The WWW is a huge place and if you can't find a forum that suits you, set up your own. I recall some former ABers doing just that because they didn't like the moderation of this site - it didn't last long.

[Spicerack]

Hc. Certain people get the most innocuous of posts removed.
Certain others are teflon coated.

[Peter Pedant]

// "So, under Austrian law you, I and several others are criminals for telling the truth about a dead nonce".
//

o go read a law book will you or
look outta the window
the signs dont say - kaffee und kochen ( coffee n cakes should Ni be reading - she dsesnt do forrin see?)
but Lenz Caff - or Ay-mirz Caffe

that is coz you are in England - see and not austria

Meanwhile under islamic law you would be stoned
and under pakistani law - hanged
and under Maghrebi law .....
and under

what point exactly are you making?
There is censorship in this country or
there SHOULD be ?

[Spicerack]

It was a European Court ruling, pp.
Last time I looked we're subject to their rulings.
(part of the reason we voted for Brexit)

[Peter Pedant]

// Well done Ab Editor for not closing or removing this thread.//
creepy - - teachers pet

o god ( o gawd just for you!) I learnt the arabic for that the other night ; gattat mudarris

o jsut to add to this thread of non sequiturs:
someone was saying that first amendment in the land of the free - there is no censorship
but they have libel laws there ( admittedly very weak, ) so evern THEY admit there are limits to free speech

we just have to decide where they are

[spathiphyllum]

"Everyone should have the right to freely express their opinions, no matter how extreme or unpalatable to others. "

Disagree.

[jno]

Certain others are teflon coated.

including those who swear at the Ed, obviously.

[Peter Pedant]

// It was a European Court ruling, pp. //

this is not a catch all - like in the sixties -" it is techonological dat is...." [ the white heat of the techonological revolution - Harold Wilson 1962]
or in the nineties " the computer says no"

chapter and verse please
(no please dont quip - "no you find it den!!")
I predict it will be a case where a treaty on free speech doesnt trump domestic legislation in this case
and that it has NOTHING to say to us except sometimes treaties render legislation inactive and sometimes they dont.

and no I cant say until you tell me which case you are talking about