PDA

View Full Version : Censorship



Fabrizio
September 5th, 2008, 09:07 PM
Earlier today I recieved the following PM:

"Dear Fabrizio, You have received an infraction at Wired New York Forum. Reason: Inappropriate Language"

"Please try to refrain from using coarse language in this forum. This infraction is worth 30 point(s) and may result in restricted access until it expires."

The so called coarse language was in this post of mine:

"And did you all see Cindy McCain last night? She really looked worn-out. What's with the sgraggly hair (very 2003) ...and she's got to tone down and shade the blonde hair color. She looked like a (rhymes with bitch)".

Of course it was a take-off on the famous line by Barbara Bush, when asked her opinion about Geraldine Ferraro: Barbara Bush replied, "it rhymes with witch".

So instead of saying that Cindy McCain, with her disheveled hair and upturned collar looked like a witch... I wrote: Cindy McCain looked like a (it rhymes with bitch).

I figured that the savvy here would appreciate the joke, the reference, and get a chuckle. And it was not slur. Reread the post: I called no one a "bitch". It was I think, a politically cultured reference.

But the word "bitch" ...IS it "coarse language"? My own personal litmus test for deciding if a word is "coarse", is the: "would-I-say-that-in-front-of-my-mother-test".

It never fails me.

The word "bitch" easily passes the test. Maybe it wouldn't have passed the test back when I was a kid, but it does today. No prob.

About the word "bitch", Wikipedia has this to say:

"Since the 1980s, the term "bitch" became more and more accepted and less offensive. After the word was widely used between rivals Krystle and Alexis on the drama Dynasty, it gained usage, in malicious contexts or otherwise, and is now very rarely censored on television broadcasts. Prior to the term's general acceptance, euphemism terms were often substituted... "

So while the word "bitch" is ok for daytime television, at WiredNY we have a moderator handing out infractions and censoring the word (I'm sure that the Barbara Bush reference went right over his head).

But the CRAZIEST thing about all of this is that the thread where I posted it, is entitled: "Sarah Palin: Genuine Mother I'd Like to F*CK".

Genuine Mother I'd Like To... WHAT?

"F*CK".

Yes I know, initials are used, but it is read, "Mother I'd Like to F*CK".

Now, does "Mother I'd Like to F*CK" pass the "would-I-say-that-in-front-of-my-mother test"?

Uh... not on your life.

But apparently, "Mother I'd like to F*CK" is A-OK ... you can even use it in a now prominent thread title... no prob... BUT the word "bitch", expressed in a cultured and comic way, is somehow considered "coarse language" and requires censorship.

And please note that the term "M-I-L-F" can rightly be considered highly offensive to women ...but again, for some reason, it is the word "bitch" that gets censored.

Go figure.

Even crazier is that, in the SAME thread as all of this, the monitor who took umbrage with my use of the word "bitch", uses, completely out of the blue, the word "barebacking": "Andrew Sullivan should stick to his HIV+ barebacking websites".

LOL. Would the word "barebacking" pass my "would-I-say-that-in-front-of-my-mother-test" ?

Well, If it's refering to riding horses, no problem ....but I'd prefer not to explain the slang meaning to her.

Yet, for this monitor "barebacking" is OK ...but the word "bitch" is considered "coarse lanquage"... and it is censored.

Again: go figure.

I can go on here, but I think I've explained enough. After watching those Republican campaign speeches and our own threads about their hypocrisy I just though I'd discuss the censorship issue going on here.

In the meantime, to the monitors, may I request this: that my infraction points be removed. And that my post be restored exactly as I wrote it. Under my post the editing is explained this way: Reason: Poor language choice. I would like that removed. No, it was not a poor language choice. It was the perfect language choice.

If this will not be done, then I think it should be explained to us why "Sarah Palin: Mother I'd Like to F*CK" and "Barebacking" are appropriate lanquage but the word bitch is considered coarse... and requires censorship.

I have nothing more to say except that, I really hope the Democrats win.

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

Let's dance:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wl6qgB5Neow&feature=related

Alonzo-ny
September 5th, 2008, 09:16 PM
Does seem a bit of a double standard, I agree with all you've said Fab.

scumonkey
September 5th, 2008, 09:32 PM
Me too;)

lofter1
September 5th, 2008, 10:05 PM
Make that three ( but you'll still never use my pool ;) ).

If this isn't a singular instance of a personal slap then posters need some general clarification.

The George Carlin list of Seven Dirty Words (http://www.erenkrantz.com/Humor/SevenDirtyWords.shtml) might be a good starting point.

At the risk of being a killjoy to the MILF fun, I must say: Remember that I was called out for an acronym which was declared to be coarse.

Mods: Please discuss amongst yourselves.

BrooklynRider
September 6th, 2008, 03:19 AM
I tend to agree with Fab on this one, although one is never entirely certain about what transpires in PM's.

Perhaps we can issue Forum Veterans something akin to five "get out of jail free" passes to play during the year.

At a certain point, forum members take on real personality traits. It becomes impossible and undesirable to scrub all posts free from these traits. It is also through these traits, be they rants, sarcasm, wit, or infinite arguing, that we find our friends and allies on different subjects.

Althought there are a handful of Moderators on here, we have a larger body of members who help us monitor the site for inappropriate posts. I think it is more important to keep the community cohesive, even in the face of disagreements.

That being said, I think Cindy McCain is a skank and, given a free shot, I would like to puch her square in the kisser. Sarah Palin is attractive to the eye, but ugly to the core. Her policies are incredible antiquated and her politics are mean-spirited. Perhaps, I can punch them both in the kisser.

ablarc
September 6th, 2008, 10:16 AM
Fabrizio, someone must have you in their gunsight. I'm with you; this should be no cause for moderator action.

Moderators ought to get things straight among themselves. If the forum turns prim, priggish and dainty, some folks will choose to walk rather than mince their words to suit some person's entirely debatable sense of propriety --and I suspect some of the forum's best contributors might be among them (look at those who have weighed in on this thread).

When did Wired New York turn into a kindergarten?

stache
September 6th, 2008, 10:35 AM
We've already lost MidtownGuy -

Edward
September 6th, 2008, 11:07 AM
Although there floated a suggestion to use "trollop" as a substitute for "bitch", trollop does not rhyme with witch (in fact, does not rhyme well at all), there is no way around this literary fact; so bitch is allowed for use.

ZippyTheChimp
September 6th, 2008, 11:28 AM
I don't know what went on here, but considering the context of the thread...

We all know what MILF means, right?

stache
September 6th, 2008, 11:30 AM
Is it Mother-in-law something?

Fabrizio
September 6th, 2008, 12:05 PM
Trollop?

I think the last time I heard the word "trollop" was in an old Laurel&Hardy film.

uh.... look.... with the last few posts I have this funny feeling my above effort was all for naught.

Since, in our efforts to dumb-down the forum, we have to actually consider stretching back to the 1930's for a euphemism for a the word "bitch", let's do it this way and I'll save you all a lot of worry:

"Cindy McCain looked like a (rhymes with doozy)"

Meaning of course that she looked like a floozy.

I hope that's OK.


(geeeeese....)

Alonzo-ny
September 6th, 2008, 12:52 PM
I agree this instance is a bit much. Fab wasn't even calling anyone a bitch. Ive seen people write 'shit' on the forum before with no **** and nothing happened to that post. Either Fab was targeted for something minor for a reason or the forum is getting to cutsie-poo.

Side note, trollop is still used fairly regularly in the UK, especially by cockneys.

Now Im not sure MTG has been totally lost but his absence of posting is bad enough due to undiplomatic moderating.

BrooklynRider
September 6th, 2008, 01:02 PM
Let's just agree that Cindy McCain will henceforth be referred to as "that skank" and Sarah Palin as the "hateful hypocrite bi-otch".

BrooklynRider
September 6th, 2008, 01:09 PM
Moderators ought to get things straight among themselves.

Moderators are also forum members with diverse personalities. Every issue does not generate a monolithic response. One of the best litmus tests for offensive posts or posts outside of the Forum Rules of Conduct would be the number of flags we get on a post.

Personally, I encourage every forum member, particularly our veterans, to use the "report post" feature. It would certainly indicate the posting parameters that the forum community feels are necessary.

So, how about that skank and the hateful hypocrite bi-otch?

lofter1
September 6th, 2008, 04:10 PM
Although there floated a suggestion to use "trollop" as a substitute for "bitch", trollop does not rhyme with witch (in fact, does not rhyme well at all), there is no way around this literary fact; so bitch is allowed for use.

Bravo, Edward.

Great to see that Fab's "offending" post (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=249782&postcount=21) has been restored.

Edward
September 6th, 2008, 05:35 PM
Trollop?

Fabrizio, you need to read the raw story (http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html) to fully appreciate my post.

stache
September 6th, 2008, 06:21 PM
A trollop is more like a slut or whore. There are good natured trollops.

lofter1
September 6th, 2008, 11:16 PM
but they usually wear too much rouge and perfume (http://www.kickette.com/index.php?/site/comments/fantasy_fragrances_trollop_tears_and_afterglow1/).

lofter1
September 6th, 2008, 11:27 PM
not to mention lipstick and eye shadow (http://www.njn.net/television/jerryherman/pressroom/images/DearWorld.jpg)

kliq6
September 8th, 2008, 11:49 AM
I find it funny that a site with so many so called progressive thinkers are mad about a little foul language.

ablarc
September 8th, 2008, 12:19 PM
^ Most of us aren't.

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 01:07 PM
It seems noone is.

Edward
September 8th, 2008, 01:13 PM
This site is moderated, not censored.

The use of word "bitch" clearly depends on the context; its indiscriminate use would not be appropriate.

The forum rules and policies are often worked out in the course of discussions in the Moderators Forum, so some responses could be adjusted.

I find that the moderator's effort if frequently under appreciated.

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 01:19 PM
After reading Kliqs post in the Sarah Palin thread Im wondering what peoples opinion is of their posts being edited by a moderator. I for one would prefer a complete deletion and a PM telling me why. I feel that if a post is edited it changes the meaning of your post but it is still under your name.

stache
September 8th, 2008, 01:33 PM
That would be difficult considering the number of forum members, plus it would be self defeating. The whole point of editing a post is so the general membership doesn't have to deal with poor postings from others.

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 01:45 PM
Yeah, do you think we have moderator-assistants to engage in dialogue with forum members over deleting a few words from their posts?

And track down and remove all the spam?

And answer PMs from forum members requesting we edit or delete the posts of other forum members?

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 01:55 PM
Im pretty sure I was asking the opinions of regular members what they thought of moderators editing their posts.

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 02:02 PM
And since we are the ones that have to do this work, we shouldn't respond?

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 02:07 PM
Well yes because i wanted to know how the general population of this forum felt about it.

Since you have responded we might as well discuss it. May I ask when moderators began to edit posts, Im pretty sure it wasnt done when I joined the forum (2004)

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 02:28 PM
Well yes because i wanted to know how the general population of this forum felt about it.

See above. The answer is the same.

You'll just have to filter out the moderator-responses from the general-population responses. :rolleyes:

stache
September 8th, 2008, 02:43 PM
I try to give an explanation to posters when I give an infraction, and even sometimes for edits, depending on the subject matter.

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 03:11 PM
See above. The answer is the same.

You'll just have to filter out the moderator-responses from the general-population responses. :rolleyes:

Ill have my assistant do that.

Any answer on when post-editing began?

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 03:15 PM
Don't know exactly, but it's been years.

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 03:20 PM
I can say definitely it wasnt done when I joined because I can remember noticing when it began. My point in bringing this up is that the moderators managed fine when posts couldnt be edited.

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 03:29 PM
^
No, what happened was that we referred all the problems to Edward, and he did all the editing , deleting, and banning.

The forum was much smaller back then. Do you think Edward should do it all himself?

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 03:35 PM
Interesting I didnt know that. I do remember when the message began appearing at the bottom of the post saying edited: blah blah blah. Which is when moderators obtained this ability I would guess.

No and I said nothing of the sort. If there is too much work for existing moderators then more should be recruited, the forum shouldnt suffer because there arent enough moderators.

pianoman11686
September 8th, 2008, 03:59 PM
So someone made a comment that used the term for "female dog" in describing another human being. Doesn't everyone hear/read/think this term at least once a day and NOT get offended?

kliq6
September 8th, 2008, 04:01 PM
^
No, what happened was that we referred all the problems to Edward, and he did all the editing , deleting, and banning.

The forum was much smaller back then. Do you think Edward should do it all himself?

I dont think editing should happen at all actually. Id rather just have my posting deleted then edited as i dont want my words rearranged.

In my postings place id like a note as to why it was refused and id be cool with it since I was given a reason but to have my statement changed by someone I dont know, that i dont like.

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 04:21 PM
Well, maybe the forum needs more moderators, but you do realize that it would add more diverse opinions to what we have now.

I was going to post this in the other moderating incident with Kris and MidtownGuy, but the moderators don't usually get too involved in situations involving other moderators (except in private).

The main reason, in my opinion, is what has been overlooked in these discussions: the moderators have to sometimes act outside themselves.

I know who I am and I'm comfortable with that person, but I don't always know what Edward wants, or what everyone else wants. So while the general population can use their own experience to judge what's appropriate, I sometimes have to venture into unfamiliar, and uncomfortable, territory.

I'll use three recent examples to illustrate a point; I won't note them, just refer to them. In none of them would I have considered it a big deal (like I've never exchanged the word asshole with anyone.)

In the second and third incidents, personal remarks were made, and I posted a comment - to advise the offender, and send a message to others. In both cases, it was noted, in one the person edited his own post.

My response was somewhat influenced by an earlier incident. I came across an inappropriate remark, but it was made many posts earlier, and the conversation had moved on. I reasoned it had just died out, or been resolved by PM.

I posted on the thread about the main topic, and encountered hostility from the person who was the object of the insult. I thought it was about the thread topic, and after several of these replies, made it known to the poster. I received a PM stating, "And this is OK?" (the original insult).

So I'm supposed to know how people feel?

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

Directly relating to the incident that spawned this thread - I don't see the problem with the word bitch

But as to the topic itself - it's a lot more complicated.

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 04:35 PM
I dont think editing should happen at all actually. Id rather just have my posting deleted then edited as i dont want my words rearranged.Do you think everyone is in agreement with that? Because it would be easier for me to just nuke posts with objectionable material, but I've gotten some nice replies for doing that.

Quite a while ago in (I think) the London Projects thread, a poster would, on a weekly basis, post photos. Some of them were very large, so I edited them, correcting only those that were over the limit, which took some time. I left an explanation in the edit box. The same thing happened three times, and on the third edit, I sent a PM to the poster, advising him of the format rules, and since it was taking a lot of time to edit his long posts, I would delete them in the future.

I get a PM back, and now I'm Dr. Goebbels promoting fascism at WNY.

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

There are members here with thousands of posts for which I've not deleted or edited one. Why is that?

Maybe they consider before hitting SUBMIT.

Alonzo-ny
September 8th, 2008, 04:37 PM
I feel the same as Kliq, I dont want my words rearranged by someone else to be something other than I wanted it too. This point the is Id opinion like on moderator's.

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 04:49 PM
I'd have to know what the post was, and how it was edited.

I usually remove entire sentences. If it's central to the post, then all of it goes.

For me, calling a public figure an asshole is not a problem, but say it to a forum member, and you're going to hear about it.

That goes for a-hole, a$$hole, etc.

But I have to say that the words themselves can become a problem if they get too pervasive, or if the tone of one thread starts to influence others. A post that would have been borderline acceptable on the MILF thread was posted on the Race for the White House thread, where it was completely inappropriate. The poster is a veteran, and should have known better.

pianoman11686
September 8th, 2008, 05:02 PM
For me, calling a public figure an asshole is not a problem, but say it to a forum member, and you're going to hear about it.

I gather, from this, that the solution to censory ambiguity lies in making Sarah Palin an honorary member of the forum. Case closed. :)

stache
September 8th, 2008, 05:37 PM
Maybe we could make her our heartthrob/mascot.

ZippyTheChimp
September 8th, 2008, 05:41 PM
If things go badly on Nov 4th, we'll probably be shut down as a subversive website.

All that uppity talk about urban planning. Why, it sounds Commie, like community-organizer.

Fabrizio
September 8th, 2008, 06:47 PM
Man, I'd love to be her First Dude on the side.

lofter1
September 8th, 2008, 08:09 PM
Re: editing & notations

I often edit my own posts -- and don't fill in the "why" blank. I re-read what I post and then make changes quickly -- no one knows I've done it, because I don't explain the edit. I believe that if a Mod gets to a post within (I think) 5 minutes of the questionable language being posted and makes a change then most likely only the poster would be aware (as no italicized explanation will appear at the bottom of the post). That's just as it should be.

I bring this up because good editing is invisible. Some of our prior problems with editing here at WNY were because a Mod Went Wild [ :) ] and started re-formulating entire threads. That was unacceptable and everyone was up in arms. But it got taken care of.

I've done some writing where an Editor is in charge. Rarely am I thrilled when the Editor sees fit to "improve" my work. But that's part of the package and you just have to suck it up.

Self-policing is the best policy. But when folks forget to do that -- or don't care -- then they force another to clean up the "mess".

The WNY Forum is a class joint. Just imagine what a stinky place it would be if the Edward & the Mods [ :) ] weren't so diligent.

Pewwww ...

My hat's off to all ye Mods --

stache
September 8th, 2008, 08:51 PM
We're just human. I make my share of mistakes -

kliq6
September 9th, 2008, 08:40 AM
I feel the same as Kliq, I dont want my words rearranged by someone else to be something other than I wanted it too. This point the is Id opinion like on moderator's.

This is a case in point, now NY KNight did it for a joke I assume but I dont want my words changed around or edited down. I know a policy cant be made for just one person but Id rather my posts which are offensive just be taken down. Editing of ones writing is in my opinion unethical without that persons knowledge.

stache
September 9th, 2008, 09:12 AM
I will try to remember this to the best of my ability.

lofter1
September 9th, 2008, 10:11 AM
How is it unethical if an exsiting Rule of the Forum is that language judged detrimental to the Forum may be edited (i.e.: changed or removed)?

As has been pointed out before this is a Private Forum -- and, in essence, we are all guests.

The main adjustment would seem to be a consensus among the Mods regarding what is allowable and what is not.

But ultimately that ^ comes down to an individual judgment call in the moment. Folks can respond to editing and ask for a review & re-instatement (such as happened with Fabrizio in the case of the "bitch").

Perfect? Nope. But it seems to work to a great degree.

If one doesn't like how a post has been edited then one always has the option of going back and deleting one's own post.

kliq6
September 9th, 2008, 10:45 AM
ill stand corrected if that's true Lofter and ill be honest that the rules of this forum ive not looked at in many years. But its more a general point, can you honestly tell me you like that fact that strangers can just go in and rearrange, reword and do whatnot to your statements, including changing facts to fiction.

Im sorry but this is something that I truly feel is just not right and very un-American. The point of blogs and forums are to let people express opinions and ideas, not to have said opinions and ideas rewritten by someone else. Deletion of a offensive posts fair, rewording one is not.

After reading the forum rules if it does say clearly that a post can be reword ill post a correction then never post here again as this is a issue im very serious about and ill not be part of.

ZippyTheChimp
September 9th, 2008, 10:46 AM
^
Maybe we need a clarification by an expert on copyright law as it applies to internet forum posts.

As far as I know, there is an implied copyright for material posted that is already under copyright. That would include the intellectual property of the poster. However, for a well constructed post to be considered intellectual property, the identity of the author would have to be known, and copyright established.

I doubt that casual posts carry any copyright on a forum.

It came up on another thread about deleting accounts, that it would be easier than the person deleting their posts one-by-one. Actually, when you delete a post, it remains in the database, and can be retrieved and undeleted.

ZippyTheChimp
September 9th, 2008, 10:50 AM
ill stand corrected if that's true Lofter and ill be honest that the rules of this forum ive not looked at in many years. But its more a general point, can you honestly tell me you like that fact that strangers can just go in and rearrange, reword and do whatnot to your statements, including changing facts to fiction.Some of us, myself included, can't comment on this without knowing what was posted, and how it was rearranged, and changed from fact to fiction.

Post the original here.

kliq6
September 9th, 2008, 10:55 AM
its not about me or anyone of my posts. I don't like looking at the forum and seeing other people editing others posts, its just not right. Its happened to me a few times but enough is enough at this point, people have the right to say what they want as long as they are not preaching hate and violence towards anyone.

If this rule is in the forum guide, then im sorry I didn't know about it sooner because I wouldn't have stuck around this long.

stache
September 9th, 2008, 11:02 AM
kliq, regarding your post #52, what do you mean by 'strangers'? Most of us have been here for quite some time. IMO the strangers would be lurkers and newbies.

kliq6
September 9th, 2008, 11:05 AM
strangers in terms of I don't personally know you from Adam so I have a hard time with people I don't know particularly changing my words around. But in the end that's a wrong way for me to put it, I don't want anyone from my parents, to my wife to my friends being able to change what I say, my word is my truth to myself and it cant be edited.

Plus it has nothing to do with how long people have been around here, ive been on this site longer then most people including some moderators and I don't edit peoples posts, I respect what each person says even if I don't agree with it. Thats what free speech is!

Its simple to me, that's the forums rules and I respect that but it does not mean I have continue taking part in it.

stache
September 9th, 2008, 11:07 AM
Well maybe that's the end of that.

ZippyTheChimp
September 9th, 2008, 11:10 AM
So you have no basis, only speculation, that posts are being rearranged. To my knowledge, the only moderator that was doing that has been removed.


people have the right to say what they want as long as they are not preaching hate and violence towards anyone.So someone can post nude photos?


Its happened to me a few times but enough is enough at this point.What's happened to you? Give an example - what was changed to what?

You're speaking in ignorance, and you're keeping us in ignorance.

ZippyTheChimp
September 9th, 2008, 11:12 AM
I'll add that if anyone is not satisfied with the edit, they can delete the entire post themselves.

kliq6
September 9th, 2008, 11:14 AM
Well maybe that's the end of that.

Yes that's the end of this.

Ive enjoyed being on this forum since 2003, talking about real estate and politics(two of my passions in life) and also being able to debate people of different backgrounds, beliefs and places. Ive also had the chance to meet a few of you in person and have enjoyed that as well.

lofter1
September 9th, 2008, 11:18 AM
kliq6: I urge you to share with Zip or others the crux of the particular edit problem. Do it via a PM (if you like) to clear this up.

No one here wants content of posts to be altered without very good reason.

You're too valuable a forum member to lose over a misunderstanding.

infoshare
September 9th, 2008, 11:27 AM
........I respect what each person says even if I don't agree with it. Thats what free speech is!

Its simple to me, that's the forums rules and I respect that but it does not mean I have continue taking part in it.

Your continued contributions to this forum are highly valued; particularly since you have been posting here since the get-go.

Just for the record: as a mod I mainly spend my time here deleting spam, and never (intentionally) changed the wording or deleted the post of a forum member.

If there is some particular case where your "opinions and ideas" have been deleted or rewritten (http://www.wirednewyork.com/forum/showpost.php?p=250673&postcount=52); by all means, make your complaint known.

Since this is not Olympic Games in China we do not have the option of relegating you (http://blogs.wsj.com/chinajournal/2008/08/06/the-protest-games-begin/) to the 'official Protest Zone'. :rolleyes:

http://blogs.wsj.com/chinajournal/2008/08/06/the-protest-games-begin/

Edward
September 9th, 2008, 11:36 AM
Let's not be carried away and maintain a perspective on the whole issue. Kliq6, how many of your 2.5 thousand posts were changed or reworded by a moderator that you find unacceptable?

The purpose of this forum is a free discussion - within a certain framework of rules intended to make this free discussion civilized and effective.

I urge anyone who feels that their free expression was compromised by moderator actions to bring this to my attention.

And another point I would like to mention is that I find all forum rules to be reasonable and serving a useful purpose, and for the benefit of every forum member. I would prefer that forum members who are unhappy about some aspects of forum life participate in a discussion on how to improve the forum, instead of leaving.

ablarc
September 9th, 2008, 01:04 PM
I agree that moderators should not bowdlerize posts. Total deletion is better.

ZippyTheChimp
September 9th, 2008, 01:13 PM
^
The problem sometimes arises that the posts are long, and only one passage is objectionable; a moderator may not get to it until many responses are made, and deleting it would disrupt the flow of the thread.

Edward
September 9th, 2008, 02:29 PM
I would like to make some clarifications about the "freedom of expression" phrase thrown around lately.

There are some who insist that moderators should not infringe on the sanctity of a post, and absolutely no moderation should be done. What that would mean for this forum? Should we allow spam posts in order not to infringe on spammers freedom of speech? Should we allow members insult other members in order not to repress personal freedoms? Should we allow posting soft-porn pictures just because some might enjoy them? Should we allow trolling, incoherent posts, threads in wrong sections, disregard for spelling and grammar - does anyone seriously thinks that your experience would be better if this is allowed? Calling this freedom of expression seriously cheapens the meaning of freedom.

NYatKNIGHT
September 9th, 2008, 02:30 PM
Last time I deleted something was an unrelated, unnecessary, offensive remark added at the end of an otherwise extensive and cohesive post, just to prod someone else. Without that one sentence, his point was made, the thread didn't spiral downward in petty arguments and it remained on topic. I sent a PM telling that member what I deleted and why. He had no objection and apologized. Had I deleted the entire post it would have put a strange gap in the conversation and brought attention where it wasn't needed. So every case is different, and no, you shouldn't make a general rule either way.

kliq6
September 9th, 2008, 03:09 PM
I would like to make some clarifications about the "freedom of expression" phrase thrown around lately.

There are some who insist that moderators should not infringe on the sanctity of a post, and absolutely no moderation should be done. What that would mean for this forum? Should we allow spam posts in order not to infringe on spammers freedom of speech? Should we allow members insult other members in order not to repress personal freedoms? Should we allow posting soft-porn pictures just because some might enjoy them? Should we allow trolling, incoherent posts, threads in wrong sections, disregard for spelling and grammar - does anyone seriously thinks that your experience would be better if this is allowed? Calling this freedom of expression seriously cheapens the meaning of freedom.

This posting is just to compelling not to respond to.

Should we allow spam posts in order not to infringe on spammers freedom of speech? YES, if at that point you dont want them ban that member since your moderators.

Should we allow members insult other members in order not to repress personal freedoms? YES, as long as its not hateful, racist, threatening, or provoking violence.

Should we allow posting soft-porn pictures just because some might enjoy them? YES, we are all adults here correct????

Should we allow trolling, incoherent posts, threads in wrong sections, disregard for spelling and grammar - YES, why care if someone misspells or makes him or herself look stupid, its on them not you to worry about.

scumonkey
September 9th, 2008, 04:05 PM
I have no problem with the system the way it is now.
I for one don't come to this site to look at porn, spam,
or to wade through pages of irrelevant off topic bickering-
but that's just me.
The moderators job is a thankless one, and as long as it's not abused, appreciated by this poster.;)

we are all adults here correct????
Not necessarily

Ninjahedge
September 9th, 2008, 05:48 PM
So long as you can bring it to the attension of the board and the people here, I see no real problem.

Deletion of posts does not work well either, as evidenced by our own resident (still?) Anglophobe. Deletion of his outright insulting condescending posts only brought more. Exception? Probably not.

As for line-editing, that is tricky, replacing some words with euphamisms, "crap" or even **** might be appropriate in some contexts, and deletion of any line if its sole purpose was to start a fight:

"But I wouldn't expect anything intelligent from you, so lets just leave it as it is...."

Etc etc, have NO place here.

Where it goes borderline is where we have posts about artistic opinion, or political positions where one poster inferrs the others lack of knowledge, taste, or other qualities that not only refute their position, but insult them and infer a lack of qualification for any further rejoinder.

Is this calling them stupid outright? No. But you see shades of it throught almost any forum, and through many threads here.



I suggest that any further line editing done by moderators be noted and have the OP notified with the exact text that was removed/changed. Depending on the severity, there should be a courtesy delay/lag between announcement and actual deletion, and the original should always be kept (JIC).

If the OP wants to remove the post after being told what is up and it has been confirmed by the other mods, then they have the right to.

It is all a matter of making sure that peopel get some respect and some time to be able to correct their transgressions themselves.

I think that will do more than many of the all-or-nothing permutations that are being bandied about.

100% satisfaction? Never, but hopefully this will keep a few more people from feeling too dominated, demeaned and or disrespected.

D!

lofter1
September 9th, 2008, 06:22 PM
Sounds like NinjaH might offering up services to become a MOD :cool:

ZippyTheChimp
September 9th, 2008, 07:07 PM
Geez. Way too complicated.



As for line-editing, that is tricky, replacing some words with euphamisms, "crap" or even **** might be appropriate in some contexts, and deletion of any line if its sole purpose was to start a fight:I don't advise replacing words or phrases under any circumstances. I'm not about to get into someone's head and figure out what they might have said. Besides, it's too much work.

If the entire post is objectionable, I delete the post.

If there is a stand alone sentence that if removed, doesn't interfere with the post, I delete the sentence.

If it's a word embedded in in a sentence that can't be removed, I'll post a reply warning the poster. If he wants, he can edit it himself.

Sometimes I leave the objectionable passage in with a warning, if I think that an argument is getting too heated. It serves to calm things down.


Where it goes borderline is where we have posts about artistic opinion, or political positions where one poster inferrs the others lack of knowledge, taste, or other qualities that not only refute their position, but insult them and infer a lack of qualification for any further rejoinder.

Is this calling them stupid outright? No. But you see shades of it throught almost any forum, and through many threads here.No editing is ever needed in "borderline" posts. A PM is sufficient.

Most of my edits are for post structure.

Ninjahedge
September 10th, 2008, 09:49 AM
Zip, I am not talking about you specifically, but in general.

I am just trying to find a middle ground. If you think that that is too much, you can continue to be less imposing, but the thing is sometimes some mods go further (for whatever reason).

I am pretty much just skipping a stone across the water to see where the ripples go. If anything jives with what you agree with, then maybe that is something we (meaning all of youse mugz) should persue.


I think the key here is also making sure that ANY moderation is removed from personal interest. I think this has been pretty good so far. But if someone like GT comes in and starts calling a mod a fascist idiot for deleting one of his hateful OT posts, it may be good for that (known) mod to hand off to someone a little less in constant contact with the person. Get a bit less risk of an emotional connection.

But then again, maybe not. Someone not familiar with Fab or political taglines did not recognise his reversed line that this whole thread got started about. So... I don't know.


I am getting all feklempt.

Tawlk amongst yeselves.....

Here's a topic for you: Indian food and its impact on the National Debt.

Discuss.....

;)

ZippyTheChimp
September 10th, 2008, 10:21 AM
Actually, I was speaking for all moderators.

We shouldn't be rearranging any posts for any reason except formatting [pictures too big, fixing broken links, etc]. There should be little ambiguity; the violation should be clearly evident, and easily edited [removal only].

As for moderators getting too personally involved with a particular situation, we do ask each other for opinion and guidance.

In my opinion, the incident that generated this thread was a moderation mistake, and has been resolved.

As for the second discussion about freedom of speech in this forum, I reject the opinions expressed in post #69. When everybody yells, no one can speak.

BrooklynRider
September 10th, 2008, 11:14 PM
...can you honestly tell me you like that fact that strangers can just go in and rearrange, reword and do whatnot to your statements, including changing facts to fiction...

Kliq, honey, after all this time, you still consider us "strangers"? My heart is breaking. I need to lie down.

BrooklynRider
September 10th, 2008, 11:26 PM
Strangers in terms of: I don't personally know you from Adam, so I have a hard time with people I don't know; particularly changing my words around. But in the end, that's a wrong way for me to put it. I don't want anyone, from my parents to my wife to my friends, being able to change what I say. My word is my truth to myself and it can't be edited.

Plus, it has nothing to do with how long people have been around here. I've been on this site longer then most people, including some moderators, and I don't edit people's posts. I respect what each person says, even if I don't agree with it. That's what free speech is!

It's simple to me. That's the forum's rules and I respect that, but it does not mean I have continue taking part in it.

Edited by BrooklynRider ;)

BrooklynRider
September 10th, 2008, 11:30 PM
I agree that moderators should not bowdlerize posts. Total deletion is better.


That a triple score word!!! Ablarc you win the WiredNewYork Scrabble award. Check you Private Messages daily for your prize. :)

BrooklynRider
September 10th, 2008, 11:48 PM
All joking aside...

The moderators here do communicate amongst themselves and discuss moderation or questionable activity. We have many different perspectives within the ranks and, as argumentative and heated as some public threads get, it happens behind the scenes too. The difference, in my opinion, is that we all are know that we must set the example here. It's hard for a moderator to get away with being a jerk and then admonish someone else for similar behavior. Civility, courtesy, and proper grammar should be a no-brainer on a forum that is both anonymous and has a full set of editing tools.

The other thing I wanted to mention is in regards to deleting "spam", "porn", "advertising", etc. Until I became a Moderator I had no appreciation for the amount of crap and spam that flows threw this site. On this site, it is removed almost immediately AND Edward and some of the moderators make the extra effort of researching IP addresses to assure those posters cannot come back. There is only one we reason it is being done: to make this site a pleasant and high quiality forum for the members.

I especially appreciate that a discussion thread like this can roll along uninterrupted and open to everyone. I think everyone understands what Kliq is saying. However, I think many other people posting in this thread can attest to the fact that the moderators are available and very responsive to PM's about moderating issue or problems in threads.

The Forum Veterans are valued here and given great leaway, in my opinion. We have all developed WNY personas and those personalities color the threas and drive the discussions. For instance, Ninjahedge is probably getting ready to respond to this post line by line with a contrary argument to every point. Do I care? NO! I have the power to go in and edit anything he writes. :p

Merry
September 11th, 2008, 06:06 AM
All joking aside...

The moderators here do communicate amongst themselves and discuss moderation or questionable activity. We have many different perspectives within the ranks and, as argumentative and heated as some public threads get, it happens behind the scenes too. The difference, in my opinion, is that we all are know that we must set the example here. It's hard for a moderator to get away with being a jerk and then admonish someone else for similar behavior. Civility, courtesy, and proper grammar should be a no-brainer on a forum that is both anonymous and has a full set of editing tools.

The other thing I wanted to mention is in regards to deleting "spam", "porn", "advertising", etc. Until I became a Moderator I had no appreciation for the amount of crap and spam that flows threw through this site. On this site, it is removed almost immediately AND Edward and some of the moderators make the extra effort of researching IP addresses to assure ensure those posters cannot come back. There is only one we reason it is being done: to make this site a pleasant and high quiality forum for the members.

I especially appreciate that a discussion thread like this can roll along uninterrupted and open to everyone. I think everyone understands what Kliq is saying. However, I think many other people posting in this thread can attest to the fact that the moderators are available and very responsive to PM's about moderating issue or problems in threads.

The Forum Veterans are valued here and given great leaway leeway, in my opinion. We have all developed WNY personas and those personalities color the threads and drive the discussions. For instance, Ninjahedge is probably getting ready to respond to this post line by line with a contrary argument to every point. Do I care? NO!

Well, in the spirit of things :) following post #77, there you go...red for original word/s (delete), blue for suggested correction...we need a strikethrough option in the editing tools :D


I have the power to go in and edit anything he writes. :pAnd this just proves that we all can to a certain extent, except that it's more transparent ;). Would we really need or want to most of the time? Probably and hopefully not.

IMO, on the subject of expletives or derogatory terms, I don't think they should be disallowed, disguised (e.g. s**t) or edited out unless they constitute a deliberate personal attack on another forum member. I think most of us wouldn't abuse the privilege by using such words to excess.

stache
September 11th, 2008, 07:20 AM
We had a forum member post a photo of poop in order to illustrate a point.

BrooklynRider
September 11th, 2008, 09:43 AM
Argh! Merry, do I get extra credit for posting at 2:00AM and making any sense at all?

dtolman
September 11th, 2008, 10:46 AM
Whats this about midtownguy leaving???

stache
September 11th, 2008, 10:57 AM
The current situation is he has decided to stop posting. I'm hoping he will return at some point as he was one of our best forum members imo.

dtolman
September 11th, 2008, 11:09 AM
Just saw the thread in question... <sigh> sometimes I wish that this site didn't have a chit-chat/news area. Then the only angry arguments we would have would be on more germane topics - architectural preferences, etc

ZippyTheChimp
September 11th, 2008, 11:29 AM
Was that tongue-in-cheek?

The fiercest arguments occur in the architecture threads.

dtolman
September 11th, 2008, 11:42 AM
Was that tongue-in-cheek?

The fiercest arguments occur in the architecture threads.

Entirely. But at least then its about SOMETHING relevant to the site. Certainly more substantive. Leaving about this seems... I lack the proper words today... tragic and pointless? Like leaving a cooking forum over a sports argument?

I find most political threads are more about gut and emotion than actual policy - making this seem even worse. In the end, it was pretty much started over nothing.

lofter1
September 11th, 2008, 11:50 AM
We had a forum member post a photo of poop in order to illustrate a point.


You are mistaken. That was the design for a new Gene Kaufman building.

ZippyTheChimp
September 11th, 2008, 11:55 AM
Well, the site is about New York, not specifically architecture. And nothing has more impact on New York (or any city) than politics.

The arguments that usually explode in Politics are between veterans and newcomers. In Architecture, it seems to be more between veterans. Contrary newcomers are more easily dismissed. I don't know why that is.

The thread(s) in question were indeed blown up out of proportion, but that stuff is generic to the entire forum.

There's a proto-argument developing in Architecture involving the word moron. I hope the combatants have the good sense to let it drop. :)

stache
September 11th, 2008, 01:48 PM
LOL lofter #88!

Ninjahedge
September 11th, 2008, 01:54 PM
All joking aside...

The moderators here do communicate amongst themselves and discuss moderation or questionable activity. We have many different perspectives within the ranks and, as argumentative and heated as some public threads get, it happens behind the scenes too. The difference, in my opinion, is that we all are know that we must set the example here. It's hard for a moderator to get away with being a jerk and then admonish someone else for similar behavior. Civility, courtesy, and proper grammar should be a no-brainer on a forum that is both anonymous and has a full set of editing tools.

That is good. The thing is, people forget or are unaware of what they never see......

I am not saying you should SHOW us, but sometimes "we" forget this.


The other thing I wanted to mention is in regards to deleting "spam", "porn", "advertising", etc. Until I became a Moderator I had no appreciation for the amount of crap and spam that flows threw this site. On this site, it is removed almost immediately AND Edward and some of the moderators make the extra effort of researching IP addresses to assure those posters cannot come back. There is only one we reason it is being done: to make this site a pleasant and high quiality forum for the members.

The lack of both that AND commercial endorsements all over make this one of the sites I am almost not afraid to be seen surfing at work!!! ;)


Almost....


I especially appreciate that a discussion thread like this can roll along uninterrupted and open to everyone. I think everyone understands what Kliq is saying. However, I think many other people posting in this thread can attest to the fact that the moderators are available and very responsive to PM's about moderating issue or problems in threads.

Yep.


The Forum Veterans are valued here and given great leaway, in my opinion. We have all developed WNY personas and those personalities color the threas and drive the discussions. For instance, Ninjahedge is probably getting ready to respond to this post line by line with a contrary argument to every point. Do I care? NO! I have the power to go in and edit anything he writes. :p

You know, I would not have done it if you had not said anything!!! ;)

(I just could not resist after that!)

:D

Ninjahedge
September 11th, 2008, 01:56 PM
You are mistaken. That was the design for a new Gene Kaufman building.

I thought it was inflatable art... :confused:

KenNYC
September 11th, 2008, 05:47 PM
Can't say I'm a fan of the censorship here either, having received a warning / infraction for saying sh.tty in a context, but hey, it's a private forum and they're free to set whatever rules they want.

I guess it's just my very liberal Europeanism that finds the over-sensitivity "over here" kinda hard to adjust to...


How is it unethical if an exsiting Rule of the Forum is that language judged detrimental to the Forum may be edited (i.e.: changed or removed)?Well, editing a post that is presented as written by someone else raises questions both in ethical and legal aspects, even on a forum, it's a rather unfortunate practice. It would in all respects be better to delete the offensive post.


As for the second discussion about freedom of speech in this forum, I reject the opinions expressed in post #69. When everybody yells, no one can speak.
Expecting freedom of speech on a private forum (or hell, just in public on the streets for that matter) isn't realistic, nor would it be a good thing. The fact that moderators keep the forums clean and organized is a great thing, and I know very well that it isn't a very fun activity either, so props for the work in that regard.

Merry
September 12th, 2008, 06:24 AM
Argh! Merry, do I get extra credit for posting at 2:00AM and making any sense at all?

BR, your posts are always of the highest quality, no matter when you write them, and they always make perfect sense :). Four gold stars and an elephant stamp for #77 :D.

Gregory Tenenbaum
September 12th, 2008, 12:41 PM
But if someone like GT comes in and starts calling a mod a fascist idiot for deleting one of his hateful OT posts...
Discuss.....

Ninja, give me some credit.

Hateful? No. Shaking my virtual fist against the Injustice of Lost Luggage for Those Who See New York as Their Bargain Bin in the Most High Airport in the Centre of the Universe? Maybe....

A sense of humor is always a good thing.

If there's a thread about a potential VP being a MILF, which clearly contains a vulgarism, then no expletive should be prohibited. But if thats the worst thing on the forum, then its not much to worry about.

A long established contributor like you know who leaving, however, makes me teary.

Ninjahedge
September 12th, 2008, 04:29 PM
Actually GT, I did give you credit. I took the chance and hit "view post". I fugured it was safe on a post that had nothing to do with England!

As for you-know-who, you can say MTG if you want.

I think he might come back eventually, but guys like that you have to let cool off for a good long while first. This board is not like most others when it comes to rivalry. One board I got so fed up with I left years ago and have not really been tempted to go back.

I was tempted 6 months or so after I left though. the only thing keeping me away was the real lack of any real substance AND my bad memories.

I think 6 months may make MTG itch enough to come back. There IS stuff he is missing by not being here. More than just conversation and the like, and I hope he remembers that!

ZippyTheChimp
September 12th, 2008, 05:06 PM
^
You could have made your point without naming anyone.

Is it something in the ether lately, an excess of negative ions?

Has Palin made everyone horny, even the gay people?

BrooklynRider
September 13th, 2008, 01:41 PM
As a matter of transparancy and disclosure, I should let it be known that I do occasionally change thread titles to more clearly identify buildings by adding addresses (for those not necessarily familr with buildings by name). I also change titles to help poster get information they need.

For example, I changed alucobond+glass+steel bldgs NY to Alucobond, Glass, and Steel Buildings in NYC - Can you help me find buildings?

Considering that the thread posted a question, this seemed a title more likely to get the guy what he wants.

In this case, I changed a poster's words, but is it anything objectionable?

KenNYC
September 14th, 2008, 03:31 PM
Not really, no

Ninjahedge
September 15th, 2008, 03:30 PM
^
You could have made your point without naming anyone.

Is it something in the ether lately, an excess of negative ions?

Has Palin made everyone horny, even the gay people?

I know, but when everyone knows the name, it is no use dancing around the elephant in the room and denying not only its presence, but its lack of taste in evening wear. :cool:

ZippyTheChimp
September 15th, 2008, 04:51 PM
I know, but when everyone knows the nameSo now you speak for everyone?

Gregory Tenenbaum
September 16th, 2008, 08:15 AM
Without being rude, I find the debates here somewhat restrictive.

If you want to see some intelligent discussions, moderates but with excellent well thought out posts, you simply cannot go past the Guardian Unlimited "Comment is Free".

Yes, its an English paper.

Some comments are removed, and unless you have read them before that happens, you have no idea what they were.

Overall, Comment is Free has a level of debate that is up there with high level academic discussions. Hats off to the contributors.

We should do the same here.

Ninjahedge
September 16th, 2008, 09:31 AM
So now you speak for everyone?

No.

Do you? :rolleyes:

ZippyTheChimp
September 16th, 2008, 10:29 AM
No, but when you insult someone on the open forum, the moderators have to get involved, and speak for the forum community.

I'd just as soon stay out of it, but I can't. You have the choice. You're not required to comment on everything, so shut up once in a while.

Ninjahedge
September 16th, 2008, 11:31 AM
Well since you asked so nicely.

:rolleyes:

And wow, I guess someone who I won't mention here because that would hurt his/her sensibilities is giving you PM flak.

What a load.

ZippyTheChimp
September 16th, 2008, 11:38 AM
Don't base your response on speculation. I've not received any PMs from anyone.

This is me talking to you. If you have a problem with it, take it to Edward.

directone12
September 16th, 2008, 11:50 AM
1

Ninjahedge
September 16th, 2008, 11:55 AM
Don't base your response on speculation. I've not received any PMs from anyone.

This is me talking to you. If you have a problem with it, take it to Edward.

You expect someone who is told, in public, to "shut up" is going to take it kindly.

No, they aren't. Follow your own advice sometimes Zip.

Even if it was meant kindly, text does not transfer that very well sometimes. It didn't this time.

Ninjahedge
September 16th, 2008, 11:56 AM
Funny, i agree. A person psoting as a chimp telling people what to do! Funny

DT12, it had nothing really to do with that.

1, He is a mod.
2, the "chimp" is making fun of Gulianni, not trying to really represent the poster himself.


To someone not familiar with the regulars here it might seem a bit ironic, but that passes quickly!

ZippyTheChimp
September 16th, 2008, 11:57 AM
^
I told you kindly several posts ago, but you wouldn't listen.

Instead, you assumed that a certain someone contacted me, which wasn't the case.

directone12
September 16th, 2008, 11:58 AM
1

ZippyTheChimp
September 16th, 2008, 12:03 PM
Yeah im learning the ropes.Why are you still here, kliq6?

Last I heard from you...

my word is my truth to myself and it cant be edited.I guess your word doesn't apply to the rest of your identity.

How did you ever manage to climb down from that horse?

Ninjahedge
September 16th, 2008, 12:05 PM
So now you speak for everyone?


Oh, PS.

Please find someone out there that did not know who was being hinted at, but who would also know them by their initials? ;)

Ironic that the people most likely to take umbrage against this are the ones that would know them by their initials!

It was only after the initialled came in that the "secret" was truly revealed!


Hair splitting, I know, but whatever. >sigh<


I guess you get what you pay for.

As for "Taking it up with Edward", what crawled up your baseball cap Rudy? Do you want me to hit that little "!" icon for telling me to shut up? I know you do not like people disagreeing with you, but come on.

"Lighten up Francis". :cool:

Ninjahedge
September 16th, 2008, 12:06 PM
^
I told you kindly several posts ago, but you wouldn't listen.

Instead, you assumed that a certain someone contacted me, which wasn't the case.

I assumed that someone would have to have contacted you to force you to be insulting.


Was I wrong?

ZippyTheChimp
September 16th, 2008, 12:17 PM
I'm allowed to be proactive.

Obviously, you were wrong.

Ninjahedge
September 16th, 2008, 12:32 PM
I'm allowed to be proactive.

Obviously, you were wrong.

Fine.

directone12
September 16th, 2008, 01:26 PM
1

ZippyTheChimp
September 16th, 2008, 01:39 PM
^
I know who you are. Don't make it worse with denials.

You can continue to post as kliq6, but multiple IDs are not permitted.

BrooklynRider
September 16th, 2008, 01:40 PM
It seems worth noting that, throughout this thread, no one was censored.

nycla3
September 20th, 2008, 10:25 AM
I don't know what this is about, but between today's Poo-Diddy/Bailout New York Post cover AND reading this thread, I've laughed so hard I spit my Major Dickason's Blend on the paper AND my keyboard.



Sorry....carry on.

Fahzee
September 22nd, 2008, 04:20 PM
^ Peets! nice!

nycla3
September 23rd, 2008, 07:35 PM
^ Peets! nice!

As a hallowed member of the "Customer of the Week–Santa Monica, CA Main Street Division" circa 1998, I always take the time to pimp Peets when I can.

TheFivePoints
September 26th, 2008, 05:21 PM
People stop fighting it will lead to war...a war you both can;t win

Fahzee
September 29th, 2008, 04:26 PM
I'd argue that nycla3 and I are in complete harmony on the great Peet's debate.

Ninjahedge
September 29th, 2008, 05:00 PM
No You're Not!!!!!


:d

Zephyr
January 5th, 2009, 05:15 PM
Perhaps the censorship that some members would be quick to render here, is far more fearful than any we have seen to date.

infoshare
January 5th, 2009, 06:31 PM
Now sure what that means Z: can you state that another way. I might just be me: got a slight case on info-fatigue this eve....:mad: