Please be more honest and quicker to deal with bad stuff

[otolith]

The decision to censor certain opinions will ultimately be a commercial one. The right to freedom of expression does not extend to posting on other people's websites. Similarly, the right not to be exposed to opinions you find obnoxious and the right not to be outnumbered by people who disagree with you don't exist at all.

Perhaps the old canard about not discussing religion or politics at all will be necessary. Better that, I think, that any attempt to arbitrarily define which opinions are acceptable.

[turbobloke]

Bill said:

trashbat said:

If you want to a see a fine example of much of the above, you need look no further than here - "Are the left wing less tolerant of the views of others?"

'

It's amazing, isn't it.

I raised similar concerns a couple of years ago looking for some direction from the (mostly now departed) HM team. They had more important things to deal with so what momentum we had was lost.

I'm not making any promises but the more feedback we get the better.

Lucas CAV said:

The whole thread is designed to gather similarly retarded views.

All the usual suspects are gathering...

Including your good self!

The thread in question involves a topic which is the subject of academic research and as worthy of debate as any other. In fact some of that research has been cited (by me) followed by personal abuse (from Lucas CAV) so from the above posts do we conclude that the latter is acceptable? I haven't clicked on Report and won't be doing so as it's best left on the thread as self-incrimination.

It would appear that multiple self-embedded ironies are prevalent in that thread and now this one.

It's miles away from racial hatred, any paralled drawn is pure hype.

[Lucas CAV]

turbobloke said:

Bill said:

trashbat said:

If you want to a see a fine example of much of the above, you need look no further than here - "Are the left wing less tolerant of the views of others?"

'

It's amazing, isn't it.

I raised similar concerns a couple of years ago looking for some direction from the (mostly now departed) HM team. They had more important things to deal with so what momentum we had was lost.

I'm not making any promises but the more feedback we get the better.

Lucas CAV said:

The whole thread is designed to gather similarly retarded views.

All the usual suspects are gathering...

Including your good self!

The thread in question involves a topic which is the subject of academic research and as worthy of debate as any other. In fact some of that research has been cited (by me) followed by personal abuse (from Lucas CAV). so from the above posts do we conclude that the latter is acceptable? I haven't clicked on Report and won't be doing so as it's best left on the thread as self-incrimination.

It would appear that multiple self-embedded ironies are prevalent in that thread and now this one.

It's miles away from racial hatred, any paralled drawn is pure hype.

As your online persona (I am sure you are nothing like this in real life - no one could be..) on here is usually one of rudeness, pedantry and condescension, I am strangely flattered that you see it as abuse.


That whole thread draws in a load of daft, half-baked, pseudo-intellectual opinions purely to get the usual suspects frothing over their Daily Mail/wipe clean picture of Nigel Farage/Climate change opinions -

I am just disappointed that you haven't managed to use the word "Nulabia" at any point yet!

[turbobloke]

Lucas CAV said:

turbobloke said:

Bill said:

trashbat said:

If you want to a see a fine example of much of the above, you need look no further than here - "Are the left wing less tolerant of the views of others?"

'

It's amazing, isn't it.

I raised similar concerns a couple of years ago looking for some direction from the (mostly now departed) HM team. They had more important things to deal with so what momentum we had was lost.

I'm not making any promises but the more feedback we get the better.

Lucas CAV said:

The whole thread is designed to gather similarly retarded views.

All the usual suspects are gathering...

Including your good self!

The thread in question involves a topic which is the subject of academic research and as worthy of debate as any other. In fact some of that research has been cited (by me) followed by personal abuse (from Lucas CAV). so from the above posts do we conclude that the latter is acceptable? I haven't clicked on Report and won't be doing so as it's best left on the thread as self-incrimination.

It would appear that multiple self-embedded ironies are prevalent in that thread and now this one.

It's miles away from racial hatred, any paralled drawn is pure hype.

As your online persona (I am sure you are nothing like this in real life - no one could be..) on here is usually one of rudeness, pedantry and condescension, I am strangely flattered that you see it as abuse.

You even managed another conbdescending personal angle in the above comment, nice work! You're entirely welcome to your biased view of me and it's not difficult to tolerate it when evidence of the opposite viewpoint is already available.

DuncanM said:

I'm uber left wing compared to most on here, and yet I find Turbobloke one of the most interesting and polite posters on the whole of PH.

People really shouldn't hate each other because of their political leanings.

You might wish to follow that principle: be tolerant, and avoid personal abuse. There are views other than yours, and we need to be tolerant surely

Lucas CAV said:

That whole thread draws in a load of daft, half-baked, pseudo-intellectual opinions purely to get the usual suspects frothing over their Daily Mail/wipe clean picture of Nigel Farage/Climate change opinions -

It may do in some places, if not excessively, but in terms of the person you're currently insulting, it also has citations of academic research.

Lucas CAV said:

I am just disappointed that you haven't managed to use the word "Nulabia" at any point yet!

Righto

Your sustained personal attack seems ok with the Mods so you're free carry on. However it would surely be preferable to get back to the wider scope of Zod's OP.

[Zod]

This thread has gone on rather longer than I expected and moved well away from its point, which was that PH needs to deal with bad threads and posts more quickly. They tell us they understand. Not entirely sure why this is still running.

[turbobloke]

Zod said:

This thread has gone on rather longer than I expected and moved well away from its point, which was that PH needs to deal with bad threads and posts more quickly. They tell us they understand. Not entirely sure why this is still running.

TBH it's not entirely clear that any message has got anywhere.

The thread still has a role even if it's to allow others to parody its valid sentiment by way of unwitting endorsement.

[Bill]

Zod said:

This thread has gone on rather longer than I expected and moved well away from its point, which was that PH needs to deal with bad threads and posts more quickly. They tell us they understand. Not entirely sure why this is still running.

Because it has highlighted a bigger issue that still needs some consideration.

[otolith]

Be careful what you wish for - excessively heavy handed moderation kills forums quicker than anything else, and trying to rush moderation decisions inevitably leads to heavy handedness.

[turbobloke]

otolith said:

Be careful what you wish for - excessively heavy handed moderation kills forums quicker than anything else, and trying to rush moderation decisions inevitably leads to heavy handedness.

Also the idea that a certain and inevitably arbitrary number of Reports would get a post or posts deleted and a PHer binned or banned is easily corrupted by those acting in cliques seeking to silence views they don't like, the precise opposite of tolerance and free speech. Each case must surely be considered on its merits and demerits, not by Report quotas from metoos and cliques.

[Lucas CAV]

otolith said:

Be careful what you wish for - excessively heavy handed moderation kills forums quicker than anything else, and trying to rush moderation decisions inevitably leads to heavy handedness.

Agree but there needs to be some middle ground between that and the perceived current model of "do nothing for too long."

[rohrl]

Zod said:

It was not just one poster that alerted you to the utterly disgraceful stuff being posted in the Calais thread. I'm glad you've acted, but you should have acted at least 24 hours earlier.

It certainly wasn't just one poster. I reported that "Prince Philip" who was posting naked racism and I'm still astonished at how long he remained able to post after the infamous "Hitler" post.

There are certain posters, and one in particular, who effectively kill any thread they appear in by their "Blitzkrieg" posting style, aggressively and rudely posting an excessive number of posts and making themselves the centre of the discussion. If I see the poster I'm thinking of appear in a discussion I'm interested in I now go straight to "My Stuff" and click the "Ignore" button. It's a bit of a shame that one person can ruin so many threads with such tedious pedantry.

[funkyrobot]

And they don't even pay road tax!

[smn159]

Lucas CAV said:

SpeckledJim said:

LeePH said:

Thanks for the feedback. Yes we should have acted faster on this iissue.

There are an incredible 39m posts in the community from PHers and I am sure you will agree the vast majority are informative, useful and banter positive, abiding to posting rules.

Please be assured we are on it and your feedback has been fully and seriously noted.

Lee PH

I certainly would not agree. This thread could be a lightning rod for the disaffected.

I would not dream of admitting to reading or contributing to PH in unfamiliar company. It is my guilty, shameful secret, yet I do not subscribe to the tone of the place at all any more.

As or when I find a forum that is like PH was, you would not see me for dust.

12.5 years, more browsing hours than I can bring myself to estimate, and the decline is now fast and getting faster.

I honestly think a tipping-point is close.

Agree 100%

The quantity of aggressive loonies on the News, Politics and Racism forum, in particular, is getting daft.

Certain key trigger things bring them out.....

Climate change, UKIP, refugees, Daily Mail, Tube workers, unions -

The same old nutters again and again - "PC gone mad...", "Nulabia", "Guardianista", "socialists", "leftists",

I'd agree with the sentiments in both of these replies. There's some great stuff on PH, but it does seem to be becoming a home for racism, misogyny, xenophobia and right wing nutcase conspiracy theories. Old, Daily Mail reading, white, entitled men against the world.

Maybe that's the new target demographic, but it's not one that I'm comfortable in being associated with.

[turbobloke]

smn159 said:

Lucas CAV said:

SpeckledJim said:

LeePH said:

Thanks for the feedback. Yes we should have acted faster on this iissue.

There are an incredible 39m posts in the community from PHers and I am sure you will agree the vast majority are informative, useful and banter positive, abiding to posting rules.

Please be assured we are on it and your feedback has been fully and seriously noted.

Lee PH

I certainly would not agree. This thread could be a lightning rod for the disaffected.

I would not dream of admitting to reading or contributing to PH in unfamiliar company. It is my guilty, shameful secret, yet I do not subscribe to the tone of the place at all any more.

As or when I find a forum that is like PH was, you would not see me for dust.

12.5 years, more browsing hours than I can bring myself to estimate, and the decline is now fast and getting faster.

I honestly think a tipping-point is close.

Agree 100%

The quantity of aggressive loonies on the News, Politics and Racism forum, in particular, is getting daft.

Certain key trigger things bring them out.....

Climate change, UKIP, refugees, Daily Mail, Tube workers, unions -

The same old nutters again and again - "PC gone mad...", "Nulabia", "Guardianista", "socialists", "leftists",

I'd agree with the sentiments in both of these replies. There's some great stuff on PH, but it does seem to be becoming a home for racism, misogyny, xenophobia and right wing nutcase conspiracy theories. Old, Daily Mail reading, white, entitled men against the world.

Maybe that's the new target demographic, but it's not one that I'm comfortable in being associated with.

This was once a thread on website feedback looking at implications from moderation of a recently deceased thread.

It's turning into a left-wing sponsored witch hunt aimed at those who don't espouse left-wing views, complete with partisan generalisations and barnum statements, and if continued would be better merged with the intolerance thread as an example in support of the OP.

All political views should be welcome here, without the stereotyping attempted above including from any and all political directions.

- if somebody has a view on UKIP there are UKIP bashing threads elsewhere
- if somebody has a view on climate change there are at least two threads
- if somebody has a view on the other inverted comma topics there are other threads
- if those on the political left want yes-yes-yes to anything there's CIF

What hope this thread gets back to the useful role it could have; not much apparently.

[WinstonWolf]

smn159 said:

Lucas CAV said:

SpeckledJim said:

LeePH said:

Thanks for the feedback. Yes we should have acted faster on this iissue.

There are an incredible 39m posts in the community from PHers and I am sure you will agree the vast majority are informative, useful and banter positive, abiding to posting rules.

Please be assured we are on it and your feedback has been fully and seriously noted.

Lee PH

I certainly would not agree. This thread could be a lightning rod for the disaffected.

I would not dream of admitting to reading or contributing to PH in unfamiliar company. It is my guilty, shameful secret, yet I do not subscribe to the tone of the place at all any more.

As or when I find a forum that is like PH was, you would not see me for dust.

12.5 years, more browsing hours than I can bring myself to estimate, and the decline is now fast and getting faster.

I honestly think a tipping-point is close.

Agree 100%

The quantity of aggressive loonies on the News, Politics and Racism forum, in particular, is getting daft.

Certain key trigger things bring them out.....

Climate change, UKIP, refugees, Daily Mail, Tube workers, unions -

The same old nutters again and again - "PC gone mad...", "Nulabia", "Guardianista", "socialists", "leftists",

I'd agree with the sentiments in both of these replies. There's some great stuff on PH, but it does seem to be becoming a home for racism, misogyny, xenophobia and right wing nutcase conspiracy theories. Old, Daily Mail reading, white, entitled men against the world.

Maybe that's the new target demographic, but it's not one that I'm comfortable in being associated with.

So it's ok for you to be intolerant of older white men?

What if it was a home to young black men, could I complain about that?

Tolerance is a two way street.

[Lucas CAV]

turbobloke said:

Lucas CAV said:

turbobloke said:

Bill said:

trashbat said:

If you want to a see a fine example of much of the above, you need look no further than here - "Are the left wing less tolerant of the views of others?"

'

It's amazing, isn't it.

I raised similar concerns a couple of years ago looking for some direction from the (mostly now departed) HM team. They had more important things to deal with so what momentum we had was lost.

I'm not making any promises but the more feedback we get the better.

Lucas CAV said:

The whole thread is designed to gather similarly retarded views.

All the usual suspects are gathering...

Including your good self!

The thread in question involves a topic which is the subject of academic research and as worthy of debate as any other. In fact some of that research has been cited (by me) followed by personal abuse (from Lucas CAV). so from the above posts do we conclude that the latter is acceptable? I haven't clicked on Report and won't be doing so as it's best left on the thread as self-incrimination.

It would appear that multiple self-embedded ironies are prevalent in that thread and now this one.

It's miles away from racial hatred, any paralled drawn is pure hype.

As your online persona (I am sure you are nothing like this in real life - no one could be..) on here is usually one of rudeness, pedantry and condescension, I am strangely flattered that you see it as abuse.

You even managed another conbdescending personal angle in the above comment, nice work! You're entirely welcome to your biased view of me and it's not difficult to tolerate it when evidence of the opposite viewpoint is already available.

DuncanM said:

[b]I'm uber left wing compared to most on here, and yet I find Turbobloke one of the most interesting and polite posters on the whole of PH.

People really shouldn't hate each other because of their political leanings. [/b]

You might wish to follow that principle: be tolerant, and avoid personal abuse. There are views other than yours, and we need to be tolerant surely

Lucas CAV said:

That whole thread draws in a load of daft, half-baked, pseudo-intellectual opinions purely to get the usual suspects frothing over their Daily Mail/wipe clean picture of Nigel Farage/Climate change opinions -

It may do in some places, if not excessively, but in terms of the person you're currently insulting, it also has citations of academic research.

Lucas CAV said:

I am just disappointed that you haven't managed to use the word "Nulabia" at any point yet!

Righto

Your sustained personal attack seems ok with the Mods so you're free carry on. However it would surely be preferable to get back to the wider scope of Zod's OP.

Sorry TB, I missed your reply - WTF! - who is DuncanM and why should it matter if he likes you!?

Either way your political persuasion is irrelevant to me -



Back to the evolved subject... the thread mentioned above continues to give --- the "gays" are now being most unreasonable!

[greygoose]

rohrl said:

There are certain posters, and one in particular, who effectively kill any thread they appear in by their "Blitzkrieg" posting style, aggressively and rudely posting an excessive number of posts and making themselves the centre of the discussion. If I see the poster I'm thinking of appear in a discussion I'm interested in I now go straight to "My Stuff" and click the "Ignore" button. It's a bit of a shame that one person can ruin so many threads with such tedious pedantry.

I feel the same to be honest.

[otolith]

smn159 said:

I'd agree with the sentiments in both of these replies. There's some great stuff on PH, but it does seem to be becoming a home for racism, misogyny, xenophobia and right wing nutcase conspiracy theories. Old, Daily Mail reading, white, entitled men against the world.

Maybe that's the new target demographic, but it's not one that I'm comfortable in being associated with.

From the year you joined PH;

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing//topic.asp?h=0&...

Do you think anyone could post that now without being called out for it? I think you would see far more posts now objecting to that being posted.

PH was once a forum for TVR owners - do you think that the membership demographic was younger, poorer and more ethnically diverse back then?

[turbobloke]

Lucas CAV said:

Sorry TB, I missed your reply - WTF! - who is DuncanM and why should it matter if he likes you!?

That wasn't what was posted. It was about politeness. Not like or dislike.

Is that in the correct thread? No matter either way. Still hoping the thread can get back on topic, there's a chance still.

otolith said:

smn159 said:

I'd agree with the sentiments in both of these replies. There's some great stuff on PH, but it does seem to be becoming a home for racism, misogyny, xenophobia and right wing nutcase conspiracy theories. Old, Daily Mail reading, white, entitled men against the world.

Maybe that's the new target demographic, but it's not one that I'm comfortable in being associated with.

From the year you joined PH;

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing//topic.asp?h=0&...

Do you think anyone could post that now without being called out for it? I think you would see far more posts now objecting to that being posted.

PH was once a forum for TVR owners - do you (smn159) think that the membership demographic was younger, poorer and more ethnically diverse back then?

Good point; when this was Sheriff Ted territory and his valiant Deputies were on patrol (some still are) moderation tended to be more laissez-faire.

A more mass-market forum is bound to have different characteristics and it's natural that moderation will evolve.

[FiF]

turbobloke said:

This was once a thread on website feedback looking at implications from moderation of a recently deceased thread.

It's turning into a left-wing sponsored witch hunt aimed at those who don't espouse left-wing views, complete with partisan generalisations and barnum statements, and if continued would be better merged with the intolerance thread as an example in support of the OP.

All political views should be welcome here, without the stereotyping attempted above including from any and all political directions.

- if somebody has a view on UKIP there are UKIP bashing threads elsewhere
- if somebody has a view on climate change there are at least two threads
- if somebody has a view on the other inverted comma topics there are other threads
- if those on the political left want yes-yes-yes to anything there's CIF

What hope this thread gets back to the useful role it could have; not much apparently.

Quite, no chance really. One has to note that the thread referenced also has a mod ripping off the odd one liner into the fray.

The job as they say is stuffed.

Regardless of the fact that we don't see eye to eye on some topics TB yet agree on others will just be more evidence of coordinated attack dogs pack hunting the poor little lambs.