Site Rules Query

[Chinajan]

Earlier today a moderator posted:

'...I can ban him, but not just for saying what he chooses to believe...'

'...he can't be banned just for saying what he chooses to believe. If you don't like it don't read it.'

Are we to understand that if we state that what we post is what we believe, no matter whether those beliefs are homophobic, sexist, racist or anyother-ist that is against the Site Rules, that such posts should be allowed to stand/that the contributor should face no sanction?

TIA

[THECORBYLOON]

'Simply put a post that says - "I think all back people are criminals ... " is likely to stay, even though it is a racist viewpoint'

If you believe the post is racist and you're a Mod why would you not delete it?

[jim360]

I do agree with andy that we should leave the matter to his, and other mods', common sense and judgement as opposed to laying down rules that can never possibly be exhaustive enough to cover all situations. Different mods will presumably have different judgements, but, ultimately, any mod whose judgement consistently goes against that of the editorial team would not last long as a mod.

[Mamyalynne]

I can totally understand where a certain poster was coming from and gave rise to your query Chinajan.

It can be gobsmacking what some see as acceptable and I too lose hope often.

[Old_Geezer]

It's easy isn't it ? If it's deleted it ain't allowed; if it remains it's within limits.

[royfromaus]

Simply put a post that says - "I think all back people are criminals ... " is likely to stay, even though it is a racist viewpoint, but a post that says "I think all *** deserve to be hung ..." is likely to be deleted on site.

The deleted word rhymes with diggers - I hope that explanation is allowed, in order to make a point.
_______________________


OMG

[jno]

if they're never rescinded, that would be because the Ed agrees with whatever the action was. But banned posters seem to be back under new names quite quickly, and only the sharper ABers like ummmm and jth spot them (I don't).

But if it's overnight - that's what Mods are for, I think. Remember when the site used to be knee deep in swill on Friday nights and it never got cleaned up till the Ed got back on Monday morning.

[Chinajan]

// I can totally understand where a certain poster was coming from and gave rise to your query Chinajan.

It can be gobsmacking what some see as acceptable and I too lose hope often. //

Word

[andy-hughes]

Corby - // 'Simply put a post that says - "I think all back people are criminals ... " is likely to stay, even though it is a racist viewpoint'

If you believe the post is racist and you're a Mod why would you not delete it? //

It's really hard to give a suitable example - I dashed that one off as i thought of it - maybe it doesn't actually stand up to scrutiny.

But I think it's a matter of instinct and common sense, use of both guides you as to what to do in terms of deletion or not.

[THECORBYLOON]

One of the reporting categories states,

"The User has posted content deemed to be Racist, Intolerant or Bigoted."

If you believe a comment is racist, report it or if a Mod, delete it, surely?

[emmie]

Spare Ed may not be on site when said offender has transgressed, some of these posts as far as i can see happen early hours of the morning or late at night. That is not to say that posts don't get blipped, because they do. Perhaps tougher moderator rules are needed but that is up to Ed. Spare ed to implement

[jim360]

// jim - // The issue is the sentiment. //

I disagree - I think the expression is the issue, there are ways of saying contentious things without outraging any sensible person reading it. //

Perhaps I should clarify that the issue there, as I saw it, was that sentiment. A thing is not contentious just because a racist, or a sexist, or an anti-Semite, believes it sincerely. They are just wrong, and just bigoted, and no amount of good manners can cloak that, nor should it be allowed to give the bigot some sense of undeserved legitimacy.

[andy-hughes]

emmie - // Perhaps tougher moderator rules are needed but that is up to Ed. Spare ed to implement //

I'm unsure what 'tougher' rules there could be for Mods - the sanction of post removal, suspension or banning seem pretty tough to me!

[THECORBYLOON]

That's fine ANDY, I was concerned some folk might have seen that example and your viewpoint as a green light for similar comments.

[Sqad]

LOL...Corby, I agree, but in my post i intimated that in the majority of cases it is a matter " of content interpretation. "
That is the system on AB.....identify like it,but there it remains.

[andy-hughes]

jim - // // jim - // The issue is the sentiment. //

I disagree - I think the expression is the issue, there are ways of saying contentious things without outraging any sensible person reading it. //

Perhaps I should clarify that the issue there, as I saw it, was that sentiment. A thing is not contentious just because a racist, or a sexist, or an anti-Semite, believes it sincerely. They are just wrong, and just bigoted, and no amount of good manners can cloak that, nor should it be allowed to give the bigot some sense of undeserved legitimacy. //

I absolutely take your point - but Moderators have to be wary of trampling over free speech, which is censorship and that is not our remit at all.

I can only repeat - it's a matter of instinct and thought and each Mod is an individual, and some may delete where others would not.

I have had plenty of posts deleted - obviously by definition I think they are OK because I wrote them, but one of my colleagues disagreed, and the same as everyone else, I have no idea who deleted, or why - but that's the system.

It's not faultless, but it's the best we have.

[emmie]

Then the mod should have zapped them, i don't know why they don't

[andy-hughes]

Sqad - // LOL...Corby, I agree, but in my post i intimated that in the majority of cases it is a matter " of content interpretation. "
That is the system on AB.....identify like it,but there it remains. //

It's the Answerbank, not the Court Of Appeal!!!

You have individuals who care enough about the site to keep an eye open and try to keep it running smoothly, for no pay, and previous little appreciation.

Mostly they do a good job, sometimes they get it wrong. That's just the way it is.

[THECORBYLOON]

The problem is that unless folk report posts that break the rules when they see them, if a Mod's not seen it either, it will stay.

I have no idea how many Mods there are but they can't be about all the time reading every thread just in case of transgressions.

If a post breaks the rules, report it, don't assume the Mods have seen it.

[Sqad]

A-H.....yes, I agree.

[emmie]

as what i said about ED spare Ed, they aren't on site all time. And moderators can't read through every post surely