Moderator approvals/actions. Some answers here. Otherwise it's not up for discussion.

Status
Not open for further replies.
It's how lefties gain and retain power. Get in, corrupt from within then control admission.

Mostly because nobody would ever welcome them in if it was done openly.
lol, lefties don’t have any power in this country. The righties should be worried, the bet is closing in on Trumpf, which can only adversely affect his chief British fan boi
 
Deleted

Educate yourself. Read the Rules.

Particularly, do not post about what you think of someone else.

If it's easier to delete all your posts than wade through your rhetoric, that's what can happen.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I run a small forum and early on I upset a few. Needs to be a line.
I do sometimes think about starting another forum and calling it the wild west. See what happens although I'd probably get a knock at the door because there are rules in the UK.
Forum owner's are bound by the law.
However.
If you want to talk politics post on a political forum.
If you want to talk about religion bla bla.

Problem is forums do get friendly and are interesting and I believe we all get interested in what others think, but it can turn nasty real quick.
I come here for amusement and to help people, but if I wanted to I could go talk about politics and other difficult subjects with the Mrs and have a fight. I not keen on that Idea though
 
It's a difficult balance. Every poster could be polite and respectful. But the forum would be pretty boring.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes, so we let quite a lot go, but persistent worst offenders get banned eventually
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Not a view you consistently hold...






;)

The thing is we all think the Mods are doing a great job when we agree with them, and that they are rubber-truncheon wielding oppressors when we don't.

It's not quite a thankless job - you've thanked them here, I prefer to do it privately, but I don't think they help themselves by assuming the mantle of complete unaccountability. We can't have arguments dragged out in public, but if a post is to be removed, or a ban imposed, they ought to be able to point to a specific thing(s) written and show how it contravenes a rule, not just delete and ban because of some nebulous undefined "offence" of posting crap/trolling/ad-hominem attacks. That creates an understandable impression that the Mod concerned, who will also be a normal member, is using his powers for personal reasons.

Perhaps there should be a separate group of Mods, recruited from the people in other forums who don't visit GD, to run some sort of appeal process. To be banned from topics before making one post as "punishment", to be told in response to reporting something "Shut up. Now we'll have to find more threads to bar you from" doesn't exactly look like fair, even-handed moderation.

Better, or even some-where-now-there-are-none, definitions in the rules would help people stay on track, I think.

is all well and good, but being told "don't troll" or "don't post ad-hominem attacks" aren't much use without knowing what is considered "trolling" here (because it doesn't seem to be the same as the definition used outside the forum), or what is considered "ad-hom" here (ditto).
I am not the one moaning, get a grip of yourself, as the mods have said..If you don't like their rules then find another forum. I am with the mods on that. It's their site and their rules, abide by them or do as they say. Quit your whining. I wish the mods a happy new year.
 
I've never had any of my posts moderated for using the word genocide.

Topic dependent?

Poster dependent?

Poster generally in "special measures" in a particular topic?

IHNI what pre-emptive tools the Mods have at their disposal. The problem with anything like that though, just like with auto-censors, is the lack of context. I had a post once held for approval because it contained the word "stupid". It wasn't an "ad-hom", I wasn't calling anybody here stupid, it was just a comment relating to something in the world in general.

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

This is not a subject we allow for discussion. Read the Rules
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Through the "Contact us" option, on the homepage?
Try contacting them. See if you ever get a reply.,

------------------------------------------------------------
Rarely, . Do not expect a reply, except "read the Rules"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Topic dependent?

Poster dependent?

Poster generally in "special measures" in a particular topic?

IHNI what pre-emptive tools the Mods have at their disposal. The problem with anything like that though, just like with auto-censors, is the lack of context. I had a post once held for approval because it contained the word "stupid". It wasn't an "ad-hom", I wasn't calling anybody here stupid, it was just a comment relating to something in the world in general.

It could be because certain posters are engaged in an ongoing spat. Other posters have mentioned that their posts are sometimes moderated when they reply to a particular poster.
 
#8 would be my guess.
So, the same word as in the post I quoted in my reply? Are you saying those with a certain view can use a certain word but those with a different view can’t? Try searching for 'that word' and see just how many hits you get. It’s in wide use on this forum.
 
Deleted
Not an appropriate subject for discussion.
If we bar you from all the current threads and any new ones you post, that's quicker than dealing with you post by post. See?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top