Worried About Leaving My Cat Alone For...
Animals & Nature2 mins ago
What Can Be Done About Twitface?
221 Answers
https:/
I think the Home sec has done the right thing in condemning this awful abuse and supporting Mr Lammy but surely this cesspit needs a rocket up it's April.
I think the Home sec has done the right thing in condemning this awful abuse and supporting Mr Lammy but surely this cesspit needs a rocket up it's April.
Answers
ck1 - // So antisemitism
11:26 Wed 05th Aug 2020
jno: "sanmac's question was perfectly reasonable and would have been exactly the same without the "so": is it just the fact that Twitter is bigger than AB that means insults are okay on one but not on the other? " - no one said insults were ok on any platform, sanmac was being obtuse, the so rule highlights that. I said that AB is not comparable to twitface in size or operation, how does that lead to sanmac's wrong conclusion?
it's comparable in operation, but not in size.
Your own response, to which sanmac was replying, emphasised size: it's a SMALL site... none of us have MILLIONS OF FOLLOWERS... serious SCALE issue.
In that, you're perfectly correct. But it still raises the issue of just how many members you need to have before you're a problem. If Twitter was also a small site, would you still be wanting to rein it in? When did it become big enough to be an issue?
(It's not true that ABers just pose and answer questions under specific headings. It used to be, but the expansion of the News section and the introduction of CB means you can say anything about anything, the same as you can on Twitter. But AB is clearly more tightly moderated.)
Your own response, to which sanmac was replying, emphasised size: it's a SMALL site... none of us have MILLIONS OF FOLLOWERS... serious SCALE issue.
In that, you're perfectly correct. But it still raises the issue of just how many members you need to have before you're a problem. If Twitter was also a small site, would you still be wanting to rein it in? When did it become big enough to be an issue?
(It's not true that ABers just pose and answer questions under specific headings. It used to be, but the expansion of the News section and the introduction of CB means you can say anything about anything, the same as you can on Twitter. But AB is clearly more tightly moderated.)
"if it were true [the EDs review deleted posts] we would see the plethora of posts removed that don’t break rules popping back up again."
If you're saying the posts don't break the rules, that is only your opinion.
If you can find the time to read the posts you say don't break the rules, why can the EDs not find the same time to decide whether they do or no?
I have seen posts with offensive words, deleted and reappear later with the offensive words rephrased or replaced with asterisks.
If you're saying the posts don't break the rules, that is only your opinion.
If you can find the time to read the posts you say don't break the rules, why can the EDs not find the same time to decide whether they do or no?
I have seen posts with offensive words, deleted and reappear later with the offensive words rephrased or replaced with asterisks.
TCL, //If you can find the time to read the posts you say don't break the rules, why can the EDs not find the same time to decide whether they do or no?//
I don’t claim to read and assess all deleted posts.
//If you're saying the posts don't break the rules, that is only your opinion.//
Rules shouldn’t be a matter of opinion. Valid criticism breaks no rules.
I don’t claim to read and assess all deleted posts.
//If you're saying the posts don't break the rules, that is only your opinion.//
Rules shouldn’t be a matter of opinion. Valid criticism breaks no rules.
// "I don’t claim to read and assess all deleted posts."//
blimey I have no memory of a post that then shows as deleted
even if there is a clue in a later one like
" somehow I think that machine gunning and gassing all those immigrants at sea is a little over the top well not all of them anyway, altho I agree implied white supremacy rules the day! I mean they cd allow them to land first"
oops sozza - that wouldnt be deleted as it would come into the category of valid criticism
joke joke it was a joke - some people take AB too seriously ( another joke - ter daah !)
it sounded better in Latin ( another joke)
blimey I have no memory of a post that then shows as deleted
even if there is a clue in a later one like
" somehow I think that machine gunning and gassing all those immigrants at sea is a little over the top well not all of them anyway, altho I agree implied white supremacy rules the day! I mean they cd allow them to land first"
oops sozza - that wouldnt be deleted as it would come into the category of valid criticism
joke joke it was a joke - some people take AB too seriously ( another joke - ter daah !)
it sounded better in Latin ( another joke)
naomi -// AH, //unprovable accusations//
And there you have it. A finger on the zapper remedies all those embarrassing moments. Whoosh! And there they are …. gone! Just one snag with that though. I don’t lie. //
I have always had you down for an intelligent person who doesn't troll the same nonsense to wind people up, but it appears you may have missed the endless times I have pointed out how the system works - which you claim you understand, but on the basis of that observation, you clearly don't.
No moderator would ever remove a post because it is 'embarrassing' - posts and threads are removed if they contravene Site Rules, and for no other reason. If you know how things work, as you claim to do, then you know that the idea of any moderator using their delete facility for personal interest, such as removing any posts pertinent to them, do not occur. If any Moderator was seen doing that, their tenure in the position would be a short one.
And there you have it. A finger on the zapper remedies all those embarrassing moments. Whoosh! And there they are …. gone! Just one snag with that though. I don’t lie. //
I have always had you down for an intelligent person who doesn't troll the same nonsense to wind people up, but it appears you may have missed the endless times I have pointed out how the system works - which you claim you understand, but on the basis of that observation, you clearly don't.
No moderator would ever remove a post because it is 'embarrassing' - posts and threads are removed if they contravene Site Rules, and for no other reason. If you know how things work, as you claim to do, then you know that the idea of any moderator using their delete facility for personal interest, such as removing any posts pertinent to them, do not occur. If any Moderator was seen doing that, their tenure in the position would be a short one.
naomi - // That said, I know of one mod who has carte blanche to ‘preside’ over the Science section to ensure that opinions posted there do not contradict the ‘scientific model’. For example, he will remove posts postulating theories that oppose mainstream science on climate change. Quality control he calls it. I call it stifling discussion and an assault on freedom of speech, and it’s the reason that I, personally, no longer post there. //
Where in the name of sanity are you getting this stuff from ?????
Are on on the AB board, and attending summit meetings? That's the only way you could know who all the Moderators are, much less what they are or are not given 'carte blanche' to preside over, as you have dreamed up from your fevered imagination - is it the heat getting to you?
Where in the name of sanity are you getting this stuff from ?????
Are on on the AB board, and attending summit meetings? That's the only way you could know who all the Moderators are, much less what they are or are not given 'carte blanche' to preside over, as you have dreamed up from your fevered imagination - is it the heat getting to you?
naomi - // The Eds certainly investigate complaints, but as for them automatically examining all deleted posts in order to ascertain the validity of the removal, the notion works to protect mods from criticism - passing the buck so to speak - but if it were true we would see the plethora of posts removed that don’t break rules popping back up again. That doesn’t happen - and frankly I think the Eds would need more hours than there are in a day to make it happen. //
I'm sure the Eds do investigate complaints, but your assertion that their investigation is based on saving Mods from embarrassment is once again a figment of your imagination - unless you are privy to what the Eds do, and I seriously doubt that for one moment.
I'm sure the Eds do investigate complaints, but your assertion that their investigation is based on saving Mods from embarrassment is once again a figment of your imagination - unless you are privy to what the Eds do, and I seriously doubt that for one moment.
naomi - // I don’t claim to read and assess all deleted posts. //
Good - because how could you?
I am on this site far more often and for longer periods than you any day of the week, and I could not begin to keep track of any posts, mucgh less deleted ones, since once they are deleted, you, or anyone else except the Ed and team, cannot access them, so how you can say you don't assess them when they are not available to you is a mystery - once again I wonder if the heat is getting to you.
Naomi, as far as I am aware you are not a Moderator - you would not be as relentlessly critical of those who are if you were one of them.
I have been a Moderator on here as long as there have been Moderators, and if Moderators had access to deleted posts in the way that you infer that you do, then I would have it too, and I don't, because I don't believe any Moderators do, so why you are making up this nonsense I have no idea.
As for your paranoid delusion that one moderator has 'carte blanche' over an entire section - again, if that was available, I would have been given it first on the basis of experience in doing the job - but I wasn't - because no-body was outside your imagination!!!
I don't know why you persist in this delusional fantasy, but it does not good for your existing credibility as a regular and informed thoughtful contributor.
Looking forward to normal service being resumed, either when the heat dies down, or the imposter who has hijacked your identity and is posting rubbish under your name, hands back control to you - whichever comes first!
Good - because how could you?
I am on this site far more often and for longer periods than you any day of the week, and I could not begin to keep track of any posts, mucgh less deleted ones, since once they are deleted, you, or anyone else except the Ed and team, cannot access them, so how you can say you don't assess them when they are not available to you is a mystery - once again I wonder if the heat is getting to you.
Naomi, as far as I am aware you are not a Moderator - you would not be as relentlessly critical of those who are if you were one of them.
I have been a Moderator on here as long as there have been Moderators, and if Moderators had access to deleted posts in the way that you infer that you do, then I would have it too, and I don't, because I don't believe any Moderators do, so why you are making up this nonsense I have no idea.
As for your paranoid delusion that one moderator has 'carte blanche' over an entire section - again, if that was available, I would have been given it first on the basis of experience in doing the job - but I wasn't - because no-body was outside your imagination!!!
I don't know why you persist in this delusional fantasy, but it does not good for your existing credibility as a regular and informed thoughtful contributor.
Looking forward to normal service being resumed, either when the heat dies down, or the imposter who has hijacked your identity and is posting rubbish under your name, hands back control to you - whichever comes first!
NAOMI claimed there are a plethora of deleted posts that would have been re-instated had the EDs actually reviewed them.
She doubts they do but could another reason not be that they actually AGREED with a Mod that a post broke the Site Rules?
She doubts they do but could another reason not be that they actually AGREED with a Mod that a post broke the Site Rules?
Corby - // NAOMI claimed there are a plethora of deleted posts that would have been re-instated had the EDs actually reviewed them.
She doubts they do but could another reason not be that they actually AGREED with a Mod that a post broke the Site Rules? //
Interesting.
You'd need to be all over a thread twenty-four seven to spot a deleted post, and it would have to be on the page you were on, and frankly the chances of anyone picking up an action like that is infinitesimal - with any one post, much less a 'plethora' as naomi seems to think she observes being shot down like so many enemy missiles.
And as you point out - if there was a 'plethora' of deleted posts that deserved reinstatement, then one or more Moderators are not working correctly, and would be removed.
But more likely, here on Planet Earth, is your perfectly sane suggestion that the Ed and team back deletions because they are done for correct reasons, which don't include 'embarrassment to one or more Moderators' - a notion naomi has cooked up from heaven alone knows where.
She doubts they do but could another reason not be that they actually AGREED with a Mod that a post broke the Site Rules? //
Interesting.
You'd need to be all over a thread twenty-four seven to spot a deleted post, and it would have to be on the page you were on, and frankly the chances of anyone picking up an action like that is infinitesimal - with any one post, much less a 'plethora' as naomi seems to think she observes being shot down like so many enemy missiles.
And as you point out - if there was a 'plethora' of deleted posts that deserved reinstatement, then one or more Moderators are not working correctly, and would be removed.
But more likely, here on Planet Earth, is your perfectly sane suggestion that the Ed and team back deletions because they are done for correct reasons, which don't include 'embarrassment to one or more Moderators' - a notion naomi has cooked up from heaven alone knows where.
// you know that the idea of any moderator using their delete facility for personal interest, such as removing any posts pertinent to them, does not occur. //
yes i have witnessed N ( bless !) abusing moderators who have reacted with the patience of saints
= very patient for you godless lot
PS whenever I swig veeno now ( crisp white chablis please )
I think - oh this is andy's tipple and it will make me big and strong!
PS2 the emperor of russia used to gargle with wine called Lacrima Christi
just in case anyone is doing Trivial pursuit this evg
yes i have witnessed N ( bless !) abusing moderators who have reacted with the patience of saints
= very patient for you godless lot
PS whenever I swig veeno now ( crisp white chablis please )
I think - oh this is andy's tipple and it will make me big and strong!
PS2 the emperor of russia used to gargle with wine called Lacrima Christi
just in case anyone is doing Trivial pursuit this evg
Latest Posts
News5 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles36 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles43 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles49 mins ago
ChatterBank120 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.