Censorship on the board

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 14 Mar 2004, 21:51

I have just had a post deleted from another topic and am opening this thread in order to discuss censorship on the forum whilst remaining on-topic.

It's a shame that I'm having to do this, especially as the administrator deleted one of my posts in a thread where he stated that he believed in free speech!

In order for this to be a community forum, all must be treated equally. This poses the questions -

1) Who is to judge whether a forum administrator has misinterpreted the rules or indeed abused them ?

2) Who is to delete offensive or off-topic posts by the forum administrator him/herself ?

Post by **administrator** » 14 Mar 2004, 22:44

As I have explained to you, your last two messages on the 'Flyposting' thread have been deleted as they are off-topic. I would like to add that if you had directed this level of personal attack against any other forum member I would have banned you by now. You were skating on very thin ice on the 'John Street' topic for a while before you backed down.

Banning you, of course, would be playing into your hands so I shall resist that temptation for the time being but, having encountered your type before, I'm quite sure that you will continue to act in a manner that will make that inevitable in the near future. A pity, since when you are not being thoroughly unpleasant you are often quite amusing.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 14 Mar 2004, 23:14

I am not voting as I did't see the posts -- but I thought your earlier posts were a little personal, Sir.

Just my 2 cents.

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 14 Mar 2004, 23:33

Yeah, well, I spoke to my wife and guess what.....

.......*she* thinks I was wrong too!!!

(takes sleeping bag, pipe and slippers down to dog house)

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 14 Mar 2004, 23:39

Then let us give thanks for the wisdom of wives. Hallelujah, and amen I hope!

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 14 Mar 2004, 23:46

Bah and humbug more like !!!!

Epykat · Post by **Epykat** » 16 Mar 2004, 22:56

You're wife's quite a rational person then?................

(and somehow, I just can't envisage you with a pipe and slippers)

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 16 Mar 2004, 23:41

Ahh, the lovely Mrs Surrealist. Ying to my yang, she is.

Ask her the time, and she'll tell you.

Ask me the time and I'll tell you how to build a watch.

--------------------------

Beach Babe · Post by **Beach Babe** » 17 Mar 2004, 00:09

well all I can say Surrealist is that your wife must be one tolerant lady

Cynthia · Post by **Cynthia** » 17 Mar 2004, 22:43

what happened to the Poll was that censored too? or just embarrassing to one side or t'other? more importantly, when something gets censored, don't you just want to know what it was??! I don't mind censorship of sexist, racist,or personal insults! etc , as they should be, but I hope it wasn't political....(because I don't think people's political views, providing not 'personally' prejudiced, should be censored)

I am going to put a political forum on soon unless the Administrator manages to put other political parties on his list of groups....but see Surrealist has done us proud in bringing up some of David Blunkett's worst thoughts - marginally better than others DB's had, .....

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 17 Mar 2004, 23:33

Carla

what happened to the Poll was that censored too?

Err, no. Feel free to vote at:

http://www.porty.org.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=199

I am going to put a political forum on soon unless the Administrator manages to put other political parties on his list of groups

I refer you to my previous posting, which I assume you have overlooked, about half way down the page at:

http://www.porty.org.uk/phpBB2/viewtopi ... c&start=20

Brian McCrow · Post by **Brian McCrow** » 22 Mar 2004, 14:41

For the Surrealist

I would have suggested a Hostel for the homeless in John Street as being more comfortable than the garden shed.

Then I remembered that we managed to have the planning permission refused.

Sorry

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 22 Mar 2004, 19:47

Heh - Brian - I wasn't in the doghouse for long

My slippers are back next to the fire, Mrs Surrealist has been allowing me to bring her cups of tea, and the cat has been allowing me to bring it slices of ham.

I'll be keeping my nose clean from now on. I know my place.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 31 Mar 2004, 22:59

Err... Just to make clear. I'm being ironic.

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 30 Jun 2004, 23:29

Personally, I didn't think we'd finished discussing "JustAttackThem"'s shenanigans.

Bob has deleted the entire thread, but luckily I have kept my posts.

Here they are :

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 30 Jun 2004, 23:30

Administrator is talking with his shirt and needs to declare publicly if he is a Labour supporter before we can view his decision to remove JustAttackThem's post as truly objective.

We know that Administrator is very loyal to Gav, Larry, Maureen and Susan and it's not surprising that, when push comes to shove, he sides with them.

The site in question, "getifu.com", is actually quite funny and it would have been very different if the libel had been posted on this forum - then it's Administrator's right to remove it.

Saying that something has been removed because it links to something that Admin thinks is libellous is a very poor excuse indeed - it's much more likely that there was a strong element of Party loyalty in his actions.

There is genuine anger at the moment in Portobello at elected politicians - getifu.com is a charming symptom of that anger. To restrict our access to it is to attempt to limit our understanding of the complete picture. In my mind, Admin's cutting off of "JustAttackThem"'s voice is a worse statement than anything he/she had to say about political corruption.

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 30 Jun 2004, 23:34

The other thing that I said which was deleted, and which wangi replied to (how rude of you to cut off an unfinished discussion, Bob!) was the issue of how it's only up to Admin to decide what is or isn't libellous.

I posed the question (not only unanswered, but censored itself) to Admin of whether he would censor a link to Private Eye magazine, given its history of libel?

I also suggested that instead of simply deleting stuff which he judged libellous, Admin post a warning next to the link and let individual board members decide for themselves.

Post by **wangi** » 01 Jul 2004, 09:53

And of course my colourful use of some language for effect in the "Don't you just hate" thread has been replaced too... I would argue that "piss off" is acceptable to use, in the same category as "bloody hell" etc...

Post by **administrator** » 01 Jul 2004, 18:06

I'm not going to waste much time on this. I want to make it crystal clear that as moderator I will not allow juvenile personal attacks of this nature on anyone. Nor will I allow anyone to post links to this type of material or promote it in any way.

The word filter is there to prevent anyone from using foul or abusive language. It is very rarely required because most mature adults are able to argue their point without recourse to swearing. Portobello Online is open to local people of all ages and I think we should bear that in mind.

Party loyalty? I have nothing to add to what I have already said in relation to this very silly and boring accusation.

I'm not prepared to enter into a debate about the deletion of the thread in question, or my banning of the person in question and as moderator I'm not going to justify every decision I make. If you don't like this arrangement I'm sure you will find many other forums out there that are less censorious, or you could even start your own, where you can be as abusive and unpleasant as you wish.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 01 Jul 2004, 18:37

administrator wrote:I'm not going to waste much time on this.

I don't imagine you will. Surely you must have a "I'm losing face, DELETE shortcut" for nuisance threads?

administrator wrote:I want to make it crystal clear that as moderator I will not allow juvenile personal attacks of this nature on anyone.

You are a testament to fairness and reason.

Surrealist · Post by **Surrealist** » 01 Jul 2004, 19:29

Wahahaha

So, can we post links to websites which aren't themselves libellous but which carry links to libellous sites?

Sort of libel proxy servers, as it were?

If I were to post a link to the banned site on my own site - does that mean you'll ban links to my site too?

For example, edinburgh-east-ssp.org is carrying a link to the banned site. (As far as I know, though, there is nothing libellous on edinburgh-east-ssp.org except for something attacking Robert Kiljoy-Smith.)

Does this mean it is banned too ?

Post by **wangi** » 01 Jul 2004, 20:41

Ok, an attempt to move this forward in a more constructive manner... First off I'd like to say I'm sure we all appreciate Bob's time and effort put into this site. Also IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d just like to point out that I couldnÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t care less about the original post (Any libel is the councillor in questions problem, nobody else), it the later censorship thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s got me worked up.

Word Filter
Yes, I get the jist of not allowing profanities, but are you seriously arguing that getifu (g-e-t-i-f-u) is such. It's not.

Moderation
Next time round can you follow a more even handed approach? Censor individual portions of messages if need be, but donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t just delete them wholesale. Likewise "lock" a thread rather than deleting it (especially when it contained an ongoing, interesting discussion).

Both of these are standard practice on internet message boards and are less reminiscent of the "Chinese approach" currently in use!

Start You ownÃ¢â‚¬Â¦
IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m sure you want to see this site prosper and become an important resource to the local community, in order to allow that youÃ¢â‚¬â„¢re going to have to be bigger than yourself. Lively, and often against your point-of-view, discussion is key to that. Additionally I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t think that the posts in these threads by Surrealist, Alex, Porty, Gemini, and I (reads like the top posters list) have been abusive and unpleasant in any way.

L.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » 02 Jul 2004, 06:51

All good points Wangi, but the nerves are a little raw just now. Let's just leave it for a week or two, and return to the debate when we have a better perspective on it.

Talk Porty ~ Portobello

Censorship on the board

Censorship on the board

What about...

censorship on the board

yawn - censorship again