General
31 May 04
31 May 04
8 edits
Originally posted by The Slow Pawnthis is nowhere close to the reality. there are plenty of heated and controversial threads that are active right now so the notion that the mods don't allow them to 'get going' by modding them out is completely absurd.
But why is it, that every-time a thread gets heated or controversial, it gets closed by T1000 - I would really be interested in knowing what the criteria for these decisions are, as it feels not right to me closing threads...
the issue is not one of controversiality or even how many people are offended, but of whether there is a violation of the TOS.
the reason T1000 closed it is because he is a damn good moderator as is flash (i'm sure the others are as well, but i haven't had the pleasure of meeting them). T1000 demonstrates his damn good moderation, by
1) explaining clearly what was happening in the thread
2) why it was closed
3) that there were specific complaints (justifiable via the TOS)
furthermore, he has courteously suggested that moderation questions such as yours be directed to the moderators rather than be posted in this blatant fashion in order to express one's annoyance.
i am not so courteous.
moderators should never, ever be hassled publically. they are doing their job and it is a most important one, because it upholds the integrity of this site. under no circumstances should any moderator be singled out publically because someone is 'unhappy' with his/her action.
if one really has a problem, go to the moderator directly.if that doesn't do it, go to another moderator. if that doesn't do it, go to russ. if that doesn't do it, just go ... and play chess or something - no one said this site was a personal democracy.
the "freedom of speech !!!" ejaculation is a bunch of nonsense. we are all free to speak what we want to, but we need to take responsibility for our actions. again the guiding principles are laid out clearly in the TOS. we have perfect freedom of speech so long as the TOS isn't violated.
ok - i've stopped being discourteous now and will be otherwise.
1) it is good that you have expressed your appreciation for the work T1000 and other mods do.
2) your request for moderation criteria is an excellent one (even though it is common sense, it would not hurt to have it elaborated)
the basic premise was laid out by chrismo very clearly just before the debates threads were started. simply,
1) you can attack the view stated, but not the person stating the view
2) don't use naughty words
add to this from the TOS things about racism, sexism etc and i think we have a pretty good basis.
perhaps it needs to be spelled out again. perhaps we all need to read it carefully.
this is still a great place, so let's work with our moderators to keep it that way.
in friendship,
prad
31 May 04
Originally posted by wucky3Hi wucky.
yes..i was contacted by someone who told me why this had happened with my post but was still pretty baffled to how something that published in the weekend guardian could be moderated on rhp because one person took offence to a light hearted comment rather than debate about it which i thought was the point of the debates forum. hell, if i reported everything i didn't agree with in the debate forum you mods would be sick to death of me.
Not sure who you would like to have read The Guardian, but I sure won't want my 13 year old kid to read it should I ever have children. Freedom of speech is fine, and you can go to the street corner and say anything you like...
Just keep in mind if you say the wrong thing, someone might pop you in the mouth if they don't like it. That isn’t right either, but can happen. If you are cursing on the corner, a cop might come and take you in for public obscenities.
RHP is a public place, but it is also a private site that we are all members of. I find it amazing that people can't figure out what might get removed, and what might not here in the forums.
All you had to do was paraphrase rather than type a blatantly foul curse filled sexual act in your post. I remember the sentence, and I can’t type it here, as it is foul, and offensive to other members of this site.
Like TGrand said... not everyone can be happy, but someone was happy when that was taken down; and as I told you I understand it was a good topic, but some people just didn't want to hear that stuff.
Not everything that has been alerted is removed, it is rather rare we remove something or close a thread. Some people do alert too many things, and I am glad you are not one of them.
I'd also prefer you guys didn't know I am a moderator, but I can't leave TGrand out here alone to flap in the wind. The moderators work together, T1000 does not work alone.
P-
31 May 04
1 edit
T1000,
Good post your last post - Although not agreeing with moderation in any form (freedom of speech),
I appreciate your honesty towards this, and will try in future not to cause (by my posts) a thread to be closed. Moderation, if felt by Russ and Chrismo as necessary here, is only a tiny part of RHP and although personally against it, I still love this site 99.99% for all the great work these guys (and everyone else I don't know of) are doing.
Regards
Boris
PS: I only used T1000 as the threads closed (I participated) say this thread is closed by T1000, hence I assumed that he is the only moderator - I didn't mean to personally attack you here mate, was just curious about the whole thing and the posts here have explained the issue in sufficient detail to me - thanks
31 May 04
Originally posted by The Slow Pawngreat post, boris!
I didn't mean to personally attack you here mate, was just curious about the whole thing
i think though that it would be a good idea if there were a follow-up to your excellent idea of setting out the criteria that moderators use because
1) it would bring greater consistency - something that is difficult to achieve since moderation is to a certain extent subjective
2) it would cause us to filter our own posts by a reasonable standard
3) it would provide a common ground upon which questions could be settled
perhaps, the moderators could consider this at some point.
in friendship,
prad
31 May 04
Originally posted by pradtfGood ideas put forward - maybe the guys (girls?) could add a section such as FAQ's where one could read about the moderation criteria ...
great post, boris!
i think though that it would be a good idea if there were a follow-up to your excellent idea of setting out the criteria that moderators use because
1) it would bring greater consistency - something that is difficult to achieve since moderation is to a certain extent subjective
2) it would cause us to filter our own posts by a reaso ...[text shortened]... be settled
perhaps, the moderators could consider this at some point.
in friendship,
prad
Just a notion
Regards
The Freedom Pawn 😉
31 May 04
Dear Boris,I crossed swords in the forum a few times about this and I know how you feel. Its an arbitrary thing with no criterium (except for veryvery offensive posts)
I had some troubles defending the right to see drivel threads (and I said drivel,not offensive),because mods think that also drivel threads should be closed instead of letting it drop.
this has been raised some time ago,check out this http://www.redhotpawn.com/board/showthread.php?id=9539
01 Jun 04
Originally posted by pradtfI agree. Freedom of Speech applies specificly to governments controlling speech. RHP has every right to moderate or delete posts as they see fit. They have made the rules clear, and that's all we can ask of them.
the "freedom of speech !!!" ejaculation is a bunch of nonsense. we are all free to speak what we want to, but we need to take responsibility for our actions. again the guiding principles are laid out clearly in the TOS. we have perfect freedom of speech so long as the TOS isn't violated.
...
in friendship,
prad
I appreciate that they do delete profane of sexually explicit posts. I don't think they add to the quality of any discussions here. I you want more smut, there are plenty of places you can go to read and post it.
And they do allow many insults to be posted, I've delivered a few myself. But if the object of those insults took offence enough to complained to the moderator, I have not basis to object if they felt fit to delete my post. It's their prerogative.
Keep up the good work T1000! 😀
PS. In fact, I wouldn't complain if they deleted a few of the boring threads except that it would be a violation of their own rules. Maybe move them to a Boring Forum. Or maybe they could do a little creative editing. 🙂
01 Jun 04
Originally posted by PhlabibitHi Phlabibit...I wasn't singling T1000 out by any means...I am not aware of who moderates on RHP but am also conscious of the fact that someone must. Like I have previously stated the post was never meant to upset anyone...maybe I was irresponsible to quote what I did and I certainly think twice before posting now, I (again I think I have said this to you before) was deeply hurt that I offended anyone and was quite willing to post an apology to that person (s). I enjoy the community on rhp and obviously don't wish to be associated with posting Quote "blatantly foul curse filled sexual acts" ( a little harsh i think ) I agree that personal attacks of other people should be moderated on rhp but still argue that the reason for the post was for a debate nothing more, nothing less.
Hi wucky.
Not sure who you would like to have read The Guardian, but I sure won't want my 13 year old kid to read it should I ever have children. Freedom of speech is fine, and you can go to the street corner and say anything you like...
Just keep in mind if you say the wrong thing, someone might pop you in the mouth if they don't like it. That i ...[text shortened]... here alone to flap in the wind. The moderators work together, T1000 does not work alone.
P-
Joanna