07 Mar 03
Originally posted by !~TONY~!If that was the case, then most TV and radio should be censored. If you don't like what you are reading, change the channel. Lets not get too "PC" here.
I agree with most except that I think that if one person finds it offensive then it should be gone also. I don't see the logic that if a group finds it offensive it's gone but if one finds it offensive, then it should stay....it seems a little tipsy....mosts posts that are iffy are talked about by the mods......I agree with punishing offenders too......
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by Bobla45While I agree that the current situation is not ideal, I do not think that a 'rigid' guideline is such a good idea. That would probably trigger more problems than it would solve.
I do not think a post should be removed because 1 person finds it offensive. I'm not sure a post should be removed if more than one person finds it offensive. I agree that any post can be brought to the attention of the moderators, for consideration of removal if a member does find it offensive, but a rigid guideline of what actually is offensive should be followed, and if the guideline is too broad you are right, things will get dull.
I think that it would be sufficient to have some general categories of deletable posts, and have a deleted post replaced with a message like "____'s post deleted for [insert category]".
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 599534
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by richjohnsonSorry Rich I think I chose my wording poorly, I think we are close to being on the same page. By rigid guideline, what I was trying to say was that posts considered offensive should be kept to the absolute minimum
While I agree that the current situation is not ideal, I do not think that a 'rigid' guideline is such a good idea. That would probably trigger more problems than it would solve.
I think that it would be sufficient to have some general categories of deletable posts, and have a deleted post replaced with a message like "____'s post deleted for [insert category]".
07 Mar 03
I'd like to address the issue of 'off-topic' postings. I think, particularly in the general discussion forum, that there is a time and a place for conversations that veer from one topic to the next. One cannot dictate the evolution of a discussion, and if it heads in one direction it should be allowed to follow its course. That being said, if the conversation becomes idiotic (meaning endless streams of people posting just smiley faces, or messages that consist of 'look, I posted something, my counter just went up by one'😉 then it should be moderated, but otherwise I think there should be room for natural swings in conversations.
To address the offensive issue - I believe that any person should have the ability to flag a post for review. A moderator, who has agreed to accept a reasonable perspective on all postings, should then review it and decide if the post is appropriate for the discussion. Other moderators can weigh in if they have an opinion. But I think if the moderators are chosen wisely, then this should be sufficient.
-mike
07 Mar 03
To address the offensive issue - I believe that any person should have the ability to flag a post for review. A moderator, who has agreed to accept a reasonable perspective on all postings, should then review it and decide if the post is appropriate for the discussion. Other moderators can weigh in if they have an opinion. But I think if the moderators are chosen wisely, then this should be sufficient.Isn't that what the 'alert moderator' link is for?
-mike[/b]
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by willatkinsBy being new here I have no clue if I have any input on this, but in any place that deals with a "public" things will be said that could be construed as offensive.
No, I think that a rant section could lead to tons of personal attacks and the like.
Bennetts' reference to a "circle of frauds" is appropriate becuase he did not mention anyone by name. It was directed at the people who knew who he was talking about.
Bennett, I think she was refering to cricket.
Miss Take/misslead (sorry, I cannot reme ...[text shortened]... ompulsive offenders should lose posting rights for life.
Lets just all get along...
Bill
From what I have gathered as looking at the forums, although I must confess I have yet to really read all that much, I don't really see any problems. But then again I am a little in the dark about the proper behavior for this site.
So far I must admit that I really like the Chess Only forum. Some good things and alot of info there. This forum, tabbed as General, seems like a zoo.
The chatters will have fun, so let them.
Pretty much all I can say.
Jary
07 Mar 03
I'm a little worried about freedom of speech here. I mean, you're talking about deleting any post with a slur in it. Dr Brain and I are friends and we can take the p#&$$ out of each other without causing offence. What if I were to make some joke about Dr Brain being South African and therefore being unable to hit a cricket ball even if it were painted bright pink and he were to respond with some joke about Australians being so stupid they can't tell the difference between a diet pill and a banned substance. Would both of those posts be deleted even though they were in jest? Shouldn't you consider intent and whether anyone got hurt? If no one complained then what's the harm?
Ben
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by shougiI am offended.This was a very bad example,cricket is a very sensitive subject in South Africa at the moment.No wonder Australians often take six packs to church...........
I'm a little worried about freedom of speech here. I mean, you're talking about deleting any post with a slur in it. Dr Brain and I are friends and we can take the p#&$$ out of each other without causing offence. What if I were to make some joke about Dr Brain being South African and therefore being unable to hit a cricket ball even if it were painted brig ...[text shortened]... ou consider intent and whether anyone got hurt? If no one complained then what's the harm?
Ben
Anyway,I feel the moderators should work more closely if possible.I also suggest a democratic election(Bennett will probably pull me apart for this)Where all subscribers and original pawn stars nominate moderators and we then vote.This might prevent people from feeling left out.
I also feel stronger action should be taken against people out just to stir.Vulgar language is also not welcome,we dont want to chase away the kids.A forum for persons under 16 maybe?Not such a bad idea I think.
Offenders get their posting priviledges taken away.Repeat offenders get banned.
07 Mar 03
1 edit
I would also be in favour of bringing back the Rants forum. Anyone who takes comments marked as 'Rants' personally when they're written by people they've never met in real life has a lot to learn about the internet. 🙁 If it gives people an outlet for their frustrations, that's fine by me.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 599534
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by AcolyteI agree.There are a lot of people that still have a lot to learn about cyberspace. A rants forum also sounds like a great idea. Then the philosophers can have their space and selfish people like myself who are only here for entertainment can have theirs
What if the one person who finds it offensive has no good reason to find it offensive? For example, a religious fanatic might object to views being put forward that are contrary to his beliefs (eg if someone posted an argument in favour of abortion during some discussion thereof.) Is this sufficient grounds for censorship? Also, if such people are likely ...[text shortened]... 're written by people they've never met in real life has a lot to learn about the internet. 🙁
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by shougiThis is where reason has to take hold. Ribbing such as what you stated is fine. But, since you are from Japan, I will assume you are Japanese. If I used one of the common slurs associated with the Japanese during WWII, I think you might be offended. Correct? Now, if I told you that you can't hold your liquor and you suck at Karoke, well, you might laugh. do you see where I am coming from?
I'm a little worried about freedom of speech here. I mean, you're talking about deleting any post with a slur in it. Dr Brain and I are friends and we can take the p#&$$ out of each other without causing offence. What if I were to make some joke about Dr Brain being South African and therefore being unable to hit a cricket ball even if it were painted brig ...[text shortened]... ou consider intent and whether anyone got hurt? If no one complained then what's the harm?
Ben
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by willatkinsShougi is Australian,he lives in Japan.Australian people think Dom Perignon is a Mafia leader......🙄
This is where reason has to take hold. Ribbing such as what you stated is fine. But, since you are from Japan, I will assume you are Japanese. If I used one of the common slurs associated with the Japanese during WWII, I think you might be offended. Correct? Now, if I told you that you can't hold your liquor and you suck at Karoke, well, you might laugh. do you see where I am coming from?
This debate is getting really interesting.I think the guys should thicken their skins a bit.Bring back the Rants forum.
- Joined
- 20 Oct 02
- Moves
- 599534
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by Dr. Brain😉 Thank god there is a doctor in the house...........
Shougi is Australian,he lives in Japan.Australian people think Dom Perignon is a Mafia leader......🙄
This debate is getting really interesting.I think the guys should thicken their skins a bit.Bring back the Rants forum.
07 Mar 03
Originally posted by Dr. BrainVulgar language wouldn't chase away the kids directly, though it might worry their parents. I doubt many teenagers would be interested in an under-16s forum, while certain *unsavoury characters* might be. Minors are a whole new ball game because you have to consider a) will they be offended, and b) is the material discussed 'inappropriate'. To be honest I find most censorship relating to minors misguided and extremely patronising. In the UK, for example, I think you can legally have sex TWO YEARS before you are allowed to see it on film!
I also feel stronger action should be taken against people out just to stir.Vulgar language is also not welcome,we dont want to chase away the kids.A forum for persons under 16 maybe?Not such a bad idea I think.
Note: there is only one censorship system in existence which will stop your children seeing inappropriate material. That is to stop them ever using the internet unless someone responsible is watching them at the time. The automated systems that are around today are farcical, and simply increase the time it takes to find anything by blocking all sorts of different sites.