Blocker
87 posts
Apr 09, 2011
7:11 PM
|
Folks just responding to a couple of requests from MrVlun and Honkin on Bobo about locked threads. We though we might try removing inappropriate comments and reopening locked treads where possible, so as not to impact on those posters who were doing the right thing on a previously interesting thread. Obviously this need to be on a case by case basis.
Consequently I have reopened the Crossroads Legend thread that was locked a short while ago.
|
Hobostubs Ashlock
1485 posts
Apr 09, 2011
7:22 PM
|
thats a cool idea,you guys are doing great;-)
----------
Hobostubs
|
pharpo
557 posts
Apr 09, 2011
7:43 PM
|
I was wondering how that one popped back up.
----------
Procrastinator Emeritus
|
KingoBad
677 posts
Apr 09, 2011
9:56 PM
|
Ok, I could live with this, but it is stinky censorship. Perhaps you could mark th comments as inappropriate by the moderators, but how are we to maintain the workings of the community if noone can see what was said? The offense is part of the workings of the community. I don't think you should just blot them out, let them stand as good examples of bad examples.
Last Edited by on Apr 09, 2011 9:58 PM
|
Hobostubs Ashlock
1487 posts
Apr 09, 2011
10:06 PM
|
interesting concept I can see where it would be less confusing reading a old thread,exspecially for the 1st time
----------
Hobostubs
|
Blocker
88 posts
Apr 09, 2011
10:42 PM
|
KingoBad I hear what you are saying and you are right it is stinky censorship. This idea was my suggestion that we discussed and agreed to try as something of a compromise to keep threads open.
The problem is of course that once someone says something inappropriate, it hijacks the thread and people continue to comment or argue so it ends up locked and this punishes everyone.
I don't think it would work for all occasions, but thankfully blowups are few and far between these days so this would be a rare occurrence and it would only really apply where there are flagrant (and usually repeated despite warnings) breeches of the forum creed.
None of the Admins are on power trips and want to apply any of this stuff, so I don't see it being used very often.
Last Edited by on Apr 09, 2011 10:55 PM
|
apskarp
444 posts
Apr 10, 2011
12:24 AM
|
There's censorship everywhere. So what? It's better to tolerate the censorship and be able to continue the discussions than tolerate the locking of the thread + censorship without the possibilities to continue the discussions itself.
This is just a discussion forum, there are hundreds of thousands of other discussions groups in the web to talk about non-harp related things.
----------
Youtube
Hoodoo Sauna
Blog
|
gene
728 posts
Apr 10, 2011
1:24 AM
|
Censorship isn't a thing that is inherently bad. Censorship can be good and it can be be bad. If it censors out somebody spewing out adhominim, off-topic offensive remarks that can serve no real purpose and can cause everybody to get pissed and cause somebody to leave the forum, I don't see how censorship can be a bad thing in that case.
Last Edited by on Apr 10, 2011 1:24 AM
|
Jeffrey van Kippersl
22 posts
Apr 10, 2011
3:46 AM
|
Censorship is bad,
When you take that word one on one, its certain directions of thinking are mot allowed, this isnt what the mods are doing.
When opinions go to a personal level, there is no place for that here.
It aint that difficult, however managing a line between opnions and personal preferences is a very hard thing to do. Lets help them a bit by not responding to certain statement, or just remove that specific statement?
Thanks again, guys, good job....
|
KingoBad
678 posts
Apr 10, 2011
8:27 AM
|
I want to make it clear that I am not against this move, I would not want my threads hijacked by some troll, and I fully support the moderators. I simply think there is value in leaving the offense there so that future participants can't learn what is not acceptable here.
Would you have us burn books with offensive material? I know I am stretching the point, but you can see what holes it leaves in our understanding of something when you start removing the context and ideas surrounding it.
Again, not against this for infrequent extreme offense, just warning of the downside...
|
dougharps
62 posts
Apr 10, 2011
8:52 AM
|
My understanding was and is that this is a modern blues harmonica site, not a social values political debate/argument site. Obviously from time to time social values may come up.
People who frequent the site have varied opinions, and will vary in their life views. In the past, members often have voiced strong opinions that then increased in intensity and became personal attacks. Some have voiced their prejudice. Tempers flare when politics, sexual orientation, and religion are discussed, which is why they are topics that can't be politely discussed in many social contexts, and why they are avoided in the cause of maintaining peace.
The repeated flaming that went on in the past before the improved moderation almost led to my stopping reading this forum, and at that time I hesitated to join the forum.
The change in moderation of the forum has improved the content.
It isn't that I can't accept that people have varied opinions, as you can't live very long without learning that there are many perspectives, and our preconceptions shape our view of what is true. It is that problem of how the rancor would escalate and the focus on modern blues harmonica would be lost.
It is a tough job for a moderator to judge when to warn members, when to lock a thread, and when to remove members from the forum. I value the effort they put into being fair.
None of us will have identical boundaries as to when someone's post has gone too far, though some of the posts have been obvious in being out of line.
I have seen fair warnings ignored, leading to removal. However, there has been fair warning.
It is not censorship to stop someone from provoking others with personal attacks or life values criticism. It is an action that preserves the mission of the forum. There are other forums at which people can discuss, or rant, at each other about values.
I would prefer that any given offending thread stay locked if it has gone that far, and if the topic has value regarding harmonica/blues/performance then it will resurface in a civil more focused conversation.
If you reopen the offending thread with portions deleted, we then end up discussing the issue of censorship and values, and not modern blues harmonica.
That said, some "meta discussion" seems OK with me, unless this conversation escalates, and needs to be locked because we can't handle "meta discussion."
----------
Doug S.
|
BlueDoc
44 posts
Apr 10, 2011
4:29 PM
|
I agree with dougharps:
"I would prefer that any given offending thread stay locked if it has gone that far, and if the topic has value regarding harmonica/blues/performance then it will resurface in a civil more focused conversation.
If you reopen the offending thread with portions deleted, we then end up discussing the issue of censorship and values, and not modern blues harmonica."
|
