Thanks mate. His charting skills are also pretty good along with those of SevenFX.Nicks said:Nice to know you agree with me that most times they get it right.
I guess your opinion of whom the best moderator is depends on whom you are. MB doesn't agree with you. So far I have had good experiences with moderators and think they do a good job, as without this website would be full of junk, eg I think Kennas did a good job on the DYL thread today.
Unfortunately I missed the Paris Hilton stuff!!!
There has been an increasing viciousness recently in some 'discussions' where there is little evidence of genuine exchange of views, and rather a petty, nit picking, point-scoring display of quasi solipsistic sophistry.
I may be wrong and this might be the stuff of successful forums, but personally I find it nasty and counter-productive. It's the reason several good people no longer post here, people who used to make thoughtful and genuine contributions.
Someone will make an insulting remark about someone else, put words in someone else's mouth or otherwise make an unjustified personal attack on another participant in the discussion and from that point forward the chances of a constructive, useful debate occurring become virtually nil.
You may say all the right words about insults, personal attacks and abuse you like but without follow up sanctions they will continue regardless of what you say.
I have not seen such lax moderation where all this carry on is allowed on any forums I have visited. Professional this one is not.
Quite frankly Joe, the problem on this forum is that the abuse, denigration and the obviously intended bad language is allowed here. Having moderated a number of forums, I am surprised at the apparent intent by the moderators here to allow people to carry on in a way which is simply not acceptable anywhere else.
You may say all the right words about insults, personal attacks and abuse you like but without follow up sanctions they will continue regardless of what you say.
I have not seen such lax moderation where all this carry on is allowed on any forums I have visited. Professional this one is not.
Country Lad
Quite frankly Joe, the problem on this forum is that the abuse, denigration and the obviously intended bad language is allowed here. Having moderated a number of forums, I am surprised at the apparent intent by the moderators here to allow people to carry on in a way which is simply not acceptable anywhere else.
You may say all the right words about insults, personal attacks and abuse you like but without follow up sanctions they will continue regardless of what you say.
I have not seen such lax moderation where all this carry on is allowed on any forums I have visited. Professional this one is not.
Country Lad
Don't visit any sports related forums then, they are 10 times worse
I've been on a number of forums and the moderation here is tighter than any of them
It wasn't by the moderators as much as by fellow members. After digesting the rebuffs, I realised the forum self regulated the outrageous posters.
basilio: Jonathan Dyles hoax with Whitehaven Coal raises the question of how far should citizens go in challenging what they see as corrupt or illegal behaviors particularly by business interests. The Yes men are 2 activists who have created a series of hoaxes to highlight particular issues. In 2009 they created a Press Conferance as representatives of the American Chamber of Commerce and announced a reversal of the Chambers position on Climate Change. (interestingly enough 2 weeks after the hoax the Chamber actually did reverse its position...) In 2004 the impersonated a spokesman from DOW chemicals to take full responsibility for the Biphol chemical disaster. They fooled the BBC into running that interview. What do you think of their actions ? Check out the you tube clips.
Calliope: Jonathan Moylan, whom basilio (for reasons known only to him) has alternately rechristened Doyle, Doyles and Dyles has been elevated to hero status by your party for his gallant efforts to reduce the heat wave and bushfires by harassing coal producers and their shareholders.
basilio: The topic is not specifically about Jonathan Moylan. It is the question of how activists can effectively highlight corrupt or antisocial business practices.
white_goodman: love to see that coksmoker go to jail
basilio: Is there any possible chance that people can stop kicking Jonathan Moylon to death on a thread that is specifically about other people and bigger issues ?
Julia: You want to judge what may be posted now? Perhaps set out some guidelines so that we do not OFFEND you, something that will apparently become an offence if Roxon's legislation to that effect is passed. The translation will be: No one with any views right of centre may say anything against anyone with views left of centre because it will ipso facto cause offence.
basilio: Nuh !! Just trying to get the discussion back to the topic Julia. I specifically introduced a quite different range of material for comment and discussion. Yours was the third successive comment that decided having a free kick at Jonathan was easier thinking about the bigger picture. And I was a bit surprised that it came from you. Any other thoughts on the Yes Men ?
Garpal Gumnut: His actions though have caused many ordinary people to suffer. So it is valid to discuss him given the context of your original post.
Calliope: You can't deny that it was the "heroic" actions of Moylan (Dyles?) that inspired you to start the thread. You can't complain that posters have taken you up on the absurdity of your Green movement installing this nasty piece of work into their hall of fame. He has also given you and other radical posters a lift in wavering spirits.
Julia: Basilio, you may take pixel's remarks as speaking for me also. Imo he should be up for a considerably greater 'kicking' than the few words that have been thus far offered on this forum.
cynic: The harmful and misguided actions of these self deluded individuals poses a definite threat to the fabric of our society. As such, I believe it is in our best interests to take protective measures against such activism. To this end, I am of the opinion that these activists require professional assistance/guidance in addressing their innermost fears and insecurities. Failing this, society will need to give serious consideration to incarceration in an appropriate mental health care/rehabilitation facility. Anything less will likely result in further atrocities being perpetrated against innocent entities (individual and corporate) courtesy of these mindless and self ingratiating psychopathic primates.
Some Dude: And unfortunately this is where we start to part ways and highlight what I find a dilemma with the precedent being suggested. Let's compare this to a related problem on a number of levels with current events. ACGW.
Julia: Oh god, may we please not turn this into yet another thread on global warming!
Take that argument to one of the existing threads.
Garpal Gumnut: +1
Calliope: +2. There is even one that caters for those suffering GW hysteria.
cynic: +3 ... After reading a number of recent posts from other ASFers, I can see that I am not alone in my sentiments.
Calliope: Keep up the good work cynic.
pixel: +1
The problem that can emerge there is that it can then become a popularity contest. An example where the popularity mindset is demonstrated when it comes to potentially off topic posts. I would ask that people set aside whether they agree with the argument content, this is not a rerun of the argument. Excerpts from within the thread and posts, not full sequence of thread or post content so read the thread for full context.
Disagreeing with the majority mindset here can be a significant challenge. I applaud Joe Blow for both the platform and the level of moderation and don't think that it should be changed. But I do ask people to ponder the situation for the person with the differing mindset when applying self regulation process.
Joe you are doing fine. I like my forums like I like my government, the less intervention the better.
Posters are grown ass adults and should be able to self moderate without forum boss telling them what is appropriate.
At the same time, some of you are good comedy value when you blow up at each other.
I hear what you are saying and there will be issues that the majority dissagree with.
However, as your post shows, there isn't a lot of spite in the posts. Just robust arguement and point scoring.IMO
Now there was poster! Outrageous, at times highly amusing, but in the end went too far, and was collared. Fair enough.I haven't been a member of many forums, but I must say, I was slapped down when I stood up for nunthewiser....
Just for the record, pixel is not the moderator of the debate. He is a moderator of the forum.
On re-reading my posts, I do find one statement where I slipped up. The reference to whinges about freedom of speech could have been worded and targeted better. I apologise, especially to you, bintang, if it caused offense.
Unfortunately, to discontinue completely is playing right into the hands of the politically correct, apologists for Islam who want to silence people like me.
If I had a choice, I'd lock this thread because nothing new is likely to be added. But that would only give more ammunition to additional repetitive whinges in the "no more freedom of speech" thread.
Now the paranoia starts.
Is there anything that you have posted here (providing that it complies with the rules of the forum) that has been deleted or amended in any way ?
Just because people have a variety of opinions and disagree with you DOES NOT mean that they want to silence you, they are just utilising THEIR right to oppose what you have said.
You see this countless times on forums. People get really narked when others disagree and they cry censorship.
It's really disappointing, because in other respects you make some good points.
Bintang, I hope you'll not decide to cease posting. Your comments have sparked interesting and healthy debate and it would be a shame for that not to continue.It is not paranoia at all. Pixel clearly stated a desire to lock the thread. To me that means shut-down debate.
But when you say above that pixel 'clearly stated a desire to 'lock the thread", he didn't actually do that, ie close down the thread, something I expect it would be within his authority as moderator to do. I read it as an expression of his own personal feeling, his genuine unhappiness at some of the direction some of the posts were taking.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?