I believe that the moderation was done equivocally, without prejudice to the South African slang or my penchant for comparing people to small appliances.
At this point, I would like to see the matter dropped, as its a waste of valuable screen space.
Larry
Member for
22 years 9 months
Member for22 years10 months
Submitted by Ronald Winter on Tue, 2005-11-08 11:01
Some contributing members of this discussion thread seem to assume that if you are talking about censorship, then you are exempt from the rules of this organization concerning profanities and personal attacks. Let me assure you that this is not the case. No extra allowances are made here. This particular forum can and will be closed and deleted in its entirety if this sort of behavior continues. The participants causing this deletion may not be allowed to remain as members.
Member for
20 years
Member for20 years
Submitted by Larry Blankenship on Tue, 2005-11-08 10:23
According to Wikipedia (confirmed by a google search as well)
"Moffie is a derogatory word for homosexual used in South Africa. It literally means ’glove’ in Afrikaans, and originated from the idea that men who wore gloves were homosexual.
The term is considered as offensive in South Africa."
I apologize for the derisive tone I took in my most recent post. I momentarily lost my temper and resorted to the very tactics I have been criticizing.
My sincere apologies to the can openers as well. Some of them are quite well spoken.
..or perhaps, if the member acquired a total (cumulative) of say 5 posts edited by the moderator then the member will blocked automatically for a certain period.
Another option is to blocked the member from posting for a certain period of time, say a month for the first offense, 2 months for the 2nd, etc. To avoid any personal interest or abuse, only PP admin can do the blocking functions. Members will be the one to recommend, say if there are 10 recommendations then the member will be blocked.
This is just a suggestion.
Regards.
Sen
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Wed, 2005-08-03 15:26
It is interesting what is going on in the world, obviously you guys and the moderators are not following it.
I will shut up the day you are up to speed on all the issues, and will not be silenced by uneducated moderators, who do not have the decency to put their names to the deletions,
Obviously, I am open to attack, but that does not mean I am wrong.
Where is the justice, Juries consist of peers, normally more than ten of them, and not one dictator (Moderator) who is somebody who does not have to give his name or credentials. Maybe the moderator is one of those who flew over the Cuckoos nest, or just some plain idiot who got in at the right time?
Delete this at your peril:-)
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Sun, 2005-07-17 14:36
You which all agree, to back totalirinism, why are you not talking about Robert Mugabe for instance? You guys talk about disagreeing with me, and are all in agreement with dictatorshop, however you have been proven wrong by the world at large. You claim to be some of the important minds is the world, however you disregard the worlds problems. Think for yourselves and stand by your ideas, I am not a Maoist or some radical thinker, just plainly a democratic person. It is interesting to see the reactions I elicited. You guys need to think a bit, as it seems you dont.
Regards
Philip
Member for
20 years 10 months
Member for20 years10 months
Submitted by Andrew Flowerdew on Thu, 2005-07-14 08:12
I agree with the majority, an even and reasonable hand is used by the moderators for the benefit of all.
As for the case Philip quotes (protected job) - I think the moderators should send him his comments as his thoughts are not quite my recollection of the events.
Member for
21 years 5 months
Member for21 years5 months
Submitted by Chris Oggham on Thu, 2005-07-14 05:08
I agree completely with Vishwas and Shahzad. Any democracy has to have standards to indicate whether remarks or actions are acceptable or unacceptable. In society these are laws, in this forum they are the rules and guidelines.
The moderators who uphold these rules and guidelines have a pretty thankless task which, from what I have seen, they perform firmly without being heavy-handed, and impartially. I am extremely grateful to them for their hard work in a task which must at times be rather irksome and frustrating.
Chris Oggham
Member for
22 years 3 months
Member for22 years4 months
Submitted by Shahzad Munawar on Thu, 2005-07-14 04:54
I totally disagree with Philip. In contrast to what he has opinionated, I express my gratitude and appreciation in putting together a great web-site like this as follows -
1. By allowing a free discussion forum within the normal constraints of proffessionalism and decency, the Planning Planet team has set an example of righteous democracy. Also, by establishing a web-site such as this, all frontiers have been erased and, "Planning is just a Click away"!
2. The fundamental principles of Freedom of Speech / Expression is encouraged here. This does not mean the web-site users have the right to abuse the Freedom of Speech / Expression of others. The PP team understands this and has laid down certain norms or rules to aviod misuse or abuse. Also, knowledge and experiance sharing is allowed but not misused / abused.
3. Planning is surely for "Thninkers". But, thinking is not necessarily limited to planning. You cannot put whatever you think here in this forum.
4. All Moderators do have names. It would be appreciable if the PP Admin highlights how Moderators are elected / nominated.
5. And, if somebody is not satisfied with the proceedings of this planet, he / she has all right to refrain from any involvement here (democratically speaking).
6. PP, KEEP IT UP!
Rgds,
p.s. - Have I appreciated u guys too much?
Member for
20 years
Member for20 years
Submitted by Larry Blankenship on Sun, 2005-10-23 18:45
If you expect people to take you seriously, its helpful to comment on the content of what they said and either agree or disagree using logic.
Engaging in ad homeneim attacks (name calling) simply leads others to believe that you dont have the verbal or mental capacity to respond to the facts or logic of their argument. This is something I would expect on a primary or elementary school playground, but not in here.
As Ive said in another thread, if I want immature name calling, Ill visit UseNet.
Larry
Member for
22 years 11 months
Member for22 years11 months
Submitted by Bernard Ertl on Wed, 2005-07-13 17:12
Philip, any posts which are in violation of the forum rules may be edited or deleted as appropriate. If you are finding that your posts are being censored, I would suggest you consider how they violated the forum rules first.
The moderators (including the PP Admin) are saving and reviewing posts which are edited and/or deleted. I can assure you that there is no "cowboy" moderator with an agenda against you.
Im with pmkb on this one, people generally put others down on a continual basis out of a mistaken sense of self-importance or out of a genuine sense of inferiority.
Which do you suppose is the case here?
Larry
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Fri, 2005-10-21 15:46
At least we found out who Stacy is, please put me on your ignore list, and hope you succumb to boredom, or a simular problem like ignorance.
Regards
If you want to get in the boxing ring with Muhammed Ali, make sure you can duck well, or have a good punch. ie if you cant stand the heat get out of the kitchen
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Fri, 2005-10-21 15:38
As a matter of interest, Billy Conelly is Irish, he swears like a trooper, and grew up in Glascow. Maybe the capitol of Ireland is not Liverpool any more, but Glascow. My grandfather alway had this joke (by the way he was of scottish extraction),about the Irish giving the bagpipes to the scottish as a joke. He had another joke about why the thistle became the national flower of Scotland, but it is not suitable for the forum.
The first comment I always get when I refer to the movie "The boondock Saints), is that those Irish guys can swear. The norms we have to live to sometimes eludes us.
Regards
Member for
20 years
Member for20 years
Submitted by Larry Blankenship on Fri, 2005-10-21 11:23
good idea! Although that may render some completely irrelevant. Problem with that is, how would anyone know that the person learned to behave themselves?
Personally don’t fell da nead for a spell chequer.
By all means, make your own informed decisions on this "big issue". Perhaps a "name spell chequer" wood b more appropriate.
To me, some of your comments smack of steriotyping, which of course as an individual free person you can do, without anybodys permission. Suppose that is real democracy.
Each of us thinks we see ourselves as the world & others see us.
Each of us, also has a face or facade that we put on, or maintain for any give point in time or circumstance.
Deciding that perhaps "site people swear like troopers, because they have to get the job done" might be true of some "site people". The vast majority of "site people" that I deal with anyhow, swear very little to get the job done. Swearing gets no job done. Its work that gets a job done generally. And conversley some "office people" that I have had the pleasure of dealing with, would make you vomit violently, not only with their swearing (which doesnt bother me), but also with their diminituive (hope I spelt dat rite) attitude, towards the people around them, and the people actually doing some work "the sweary site people".
Also, the only time I really feel the need to swear generally, is when I am on planning planet, although their is no real f***ing point as the moderators tend to be on the ball. I am a site person, if only part time, but day to day don’t swear that much, but that is relative, because this is Ireland (see, more steriotyping).
The moderators I think are usually pretty fair, from what I have seen to date, but that is only my opinion, after all I think I have them in my pockt.
Regards,
Darrell
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Wed, 2005-10-19 14:45
In my experience, flaming is a very polite way of using the [Deleted by Moderator] word. We can go to internet dictionaries and try and find the root of words, but at the end of the day, the vernacular (the way language is spoken, is important), and herein lies the answer.
If 60% of the people is site related, 20% is design office related, and the balance belongs to the client or other parties, what is the chances of the moderators getting it right. People speak different languages for several reasons. The site related people swear like troopers, because they have to, to get the job done. The design people speak very politely, because they work in a normal environment. The rest uses a different vernacular, suited to their needs, ie a claims person would be very polite and use words like "your honour" which is totally out of the scope of the site person.
The point being is that planning spans all these disciplines, within planning, and as such you have to understand them all before you try and moderate, or censor.
I suggest that there is very few people within the PP society, who fully understand the full scope, and as such very few has the right to moderate, maybe moderation should be a comitee thing, and any "offenders" should be brought to task and disciplined in this way, not by the whim of an individual moderator.
By the way PPadmin, I still think a spell checker is a good option [Deleted by Moderator. Offense taken.]
Regards
Member for
20 years 4 months
Member for20 years5 months
Submitted by Raja Izat Raja… on Wed, 2005-10-19 13:49
Have been moderated upon (see below), and don’t even remember why.
Typical "Demontarianism" in action.
A democratic moderator exorcising totalitaranism control.
Probably not allowed to say that either?
A way 2 get round dis.
On sum radio shows in Ireland, DJs will often read out texts or mails that they have recieved throught the day.
Not unusually, in Ireland, people use swear words etc.
So to get round not getting the sack, DJs are allowed to paraphrase or quote others. Manys the time Ive had a near death experience, creased up with laughter in the car.
As they quote others messages about, all manner of subject matters, and topical events of the day.
Its [Deleted by Moderator] and harms nobody.
Best wishes,
Darrell
Member for
22 years 11 months
Member for22 years11 months
Submitted by Bernard Ertl on Wed, 2005-10-19 13:32
Flaming is the act of posting messages that are deliberately hostile and insulting, usually in the social context of a discussion board (usually on the Internet). Such messages are called flames, and are sometimes posted in response to flamebait. Flaming is one of a class of economic problems known as The Tragedy of the Commons, when a group holds a resource (in this case, communal attention), but each of the individual members has an incentive to overuse it.
In Internet terminology, a troll is a person who posts inflammatory messages on the internet, such as on online discussion forums, to disrupt the discussion or to upset its participants. The word, or its derivative, "trolling", is also used to describe such messages or the act of posting them.
I think we are all agreeing here. The film analogy Philip used is a good one I feel because films are prone to active censorship.
They are also classified so that people can know what they are likely to be subjected to. This means that a commonly held notion of what is and is not appropriate is held. As Larry points out this can often be implicit as well as stated.
In the case of a forum like this the stated understanding would be the site rules that we agree to. The implicit is a mixture of common courtesy and the fact that as planners we are all vaguely like minded, plus I would imagine that this is an environment that is unlikely to attract much trolling.
Where moderation becomes too harsh it usually painfully apparant IMHO. If this were to happen here I am sure the moderator(s) would rapidly be made aware that all was not well. I really do not see it as much of a problem here.
Andy
Member for
20 years 11 months
Member for20 years11 months
Submitted by Philip Jonker on Tue, 2005-10-18 16:37
Censorship and moderation are all in the eye of the beholder and the community.
A community agrees to a certain set of behavioral norms that will allow that community to function most effectively.
Sometimes these norms are spelled out explicitly (i.e. the Forum Rules) and other times, they are spelled out implicitly, (i.e. traditions, beliefs, corporate cultures)
To the extent that they are laid out explicitly, people who want to participate in that community should be aware of those rules, and the moderators should be allowed to take action as needed to see that all participants comply.
To the extent that the rules are inmplicit, and require time and experience to learn, the moderators should wait for the person to learn the rules and other members of the group should be so kind as to educate the newbies.
For example, I was in one forum where the term coworker was often misstyped as cow orker. I made the error of making a joke about orking cows. There was no explicit rule saying I couldnt do that. However, one of the other members let me know that the cow orking joke had been done to death and wasnt necessarily appreciated. Thats an example of an implicit rule that gets learned informally.
I find this whole discussion rather fascinating, in part because Totalitarianism and Democracy both enforce rules on the community. The difference is that in a Democracy, all members of the community have an opportunity to have some influence, however small, on the rules, and agree to live under those rules as a condition of belonging to the community. In a totalitarian society, only a small group of the community set the rules for everyone else and living under those rules is an enforce condition rather than a voluntary condition.
This is a democracy, in that if you dont like what the moderators do, you are perfectly able to find a different forum. If, on the other hand, you were not allowed to join any other forums and had no input to this forums rules, then it would be totalitarianism.
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Clive,
Be my guest.....but ask a "good" opening question.
And see if you can get people to stick to da pint.
All the best,
Darrell
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Yep,
It has all gotten side tracked quite a bit.
Why not drop it now, and start up a fresh thread?
What say, - "Democracy vs Totalitaranism 2" ?????
All the best,
Darrell
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
I believe that the moderation was done equivocally, without prejudice to the South African slang or my penchant for comparing people to small appliances.
At this point, I would like to see the matter dropped, as its a waste of valuable screen space.
Larry
Member for
22 years 9 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Some contributing members of this discussion thread seem to assume that if you are talking about censorship, then you are exempt from the rules of this organization concerning profanities and personal attacks. Let me assure you that this is not the case. No extra allowances are made here. This particular forum can and will be closed and deleted in its entirety if this sort of behavior continues. The participants causing this deletion may not be allowed to remain as members.
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
According to Wikipedia (confirmed by a google search as well)
"Moffie is a derogatory word for homosexual used in South Africa. It literally means ’glove’ in Afrikaans, and originated from the idea that men who wore gloves were homosexual.
The term is considered as offensive in South Africa."
I apologize for the derisive tone I took in my most recent post. I momentarily lost my temper and resorted to the very tactics I have been criticizing.
My sincere apologies to the can openers as well. Some of them are quite well spoken.
Larry
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
oooh philip if only my gramar would allow me to be likened to a can opener
oh dear dear
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
[Deleted by Moderator.]
As far as eschewing obfuscation, if expressing myself at a level above 3rd grade insults and blather is obfuscation, then I proudly plead guilty.
Now go away, the adults are having a conversation.
Larry
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
[Deleted by Moderator.]
As a matter of interest, you claim I was name calling, what did I say?
Regards
Philip
Member for
20 years 2 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
..or perhaps, if the member acquired a total (cumulative) of say 5 posts edited by the moderator then the member will blocked automatically for a certain period.
Member for
20 years 2 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Stacey/Larry,
Another option is to blocked the member from posting for a certain period of time, say a month for the first offense, 2 months for the 2nd, etc. To avoid any personal interest or abuse, only PP admin can do the blocking functions. Members will be the one to recommend, say if there are 10 recommendations then the member will be blocked.
This is just a suggestion.
Regards.
Sen
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
It is interesting what is going on in the world, obviously you guys and the moderators are not following it.
I will shut up the day you are up to speed on all the issues, and will not be silenced by uneducated moderators, who do not have the decency to put their names to the deletions,
Obviously, I am open to attack, but that does not mean I am wrong.
Where is the justice, Juries consist of peers, normally more than ten of them, and not one dictator (Moderator) who is somebody who does not have to give his name or credentials. Maybe the moderator is one of those who flew over the Cuckoos nest, or just some plain idiot who got in at the right time?
Delete this at your peril:-)
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
As for you Bernhardt,
[edited by moderator]
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
As for you Ogham,
[edited by moderator]
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
As for you Andrew,
[edited by moderator]
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi Vishwas,
[edited by moderator]
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi guys,
You which all agree, to back totalirinism, why are you not talking about Robert Mugabe for instance? You guys talk about disagreeing with me, and are all in agreement with dictatorshop, however you have been proven wrong by the world at large. You claim to be some of the important minds is the world, however you disregard the worlds problems. Think for yourselves and stand by your ideas, I am not a Maoist or some radical thinker, just plainly a democratic person. It is interesting to see the reactions I elicited. You guys need to think a bit, as it seems you dont.
Regards
Philip
Member for
20 years 10 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
I agree with the majority, an even and reasonable hand is used by the moderators for the benefit of all.
As for the case Philip quotes (protected job) - I think the moderators should send him his comments as his thoughts are not quite my recollection of the events.
Member for
21 years 5 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi Guys,
I agree completely with Vishwas and Shahzad. Any democracy has to have standards to indicate whether remarks or actions are acceptable or unacceptable. In society these are laws, in this forum they are the rules and guidelines.
The moderators who uphold these rules and guidelines have a pretty thankless task which, from what I have seen, they perform firmly without being heavy-handed, and impartially. I am extremely grateful to them for their hard work in a task which must at times be rather irksome and frustrating.
Chris Oggham
Member for
22 years 3 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
This sentence is comprehensive in its meanings:
"if somebody is not satisfied with the proceedings of this planet, he / she has all right to refrain from any involvement here."
So no further comments.
Member for
21 years 6 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
I totally disagree with Philip. In contrast to what he has opinionated, I express my gratitude and appreciation in putting together a great web-site like this as follows -
1. By allowing a free discussion forum within the normal constraints of proffessionalism and decency, the Planning Planet team has set an example of righteous democracy. Also, by establishing a web-site such as this, all frontiers have been erased and, "Planning is just a Click away"!
2. The fundamental principles of Freedom of Speech / Expression is encouraged here. This does not mean the web-site users have the right to abuse the Freedom of Speech / Expression of others. The PP team understands this and has laid down certain norms or rules to aviod misuse or abuse. Also, knowledge and experiance sharing is allowed but not misused / abused.
3. Planning is surely for "Thninkers". But, thinking is not necessarily limited to planning. You cannot put whatever you think here in this forum.
4. All Moderators do have names. It would be appreciable if the PP Admin highlights how Moderators are elected / nominated.
5. And, if somebody is not satisfied with the proceedings of this planet, he / she has all right to refrain from any involvement here (democratically speaking).
6. PP, KEEP IT UP!
Rgds,
p.s. - Have I appreciated u guys too much?
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Philip,
If you expect people to take you seriously, its helpful to comment on the content of what they said and either agree or disagree using logic.
Engaging in ad homeneim attacks (name calling) simply leads others to believe that you dont have the verbal or mental capacity to respond to the facts or logic of their argument. This is something I would expect on a primary or elementary school playground, but not in here.
As Ive said in another thread, if I want immature name calling, Ill visit UseNet.
Larry
Member for
22 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Philip, any posts which are in violation of the forum rules may be edited or deleted as appropriate. If you are finding that your posts are being censored, I would suggest you consider how they violated the forum rules first.
The moderators (including the PP Admin) are saving and reviewing posts which are edited and/or deleted. I can assure you that there is no "cowboy" moderator with an agenda against you.
Bernard Ertl
eTaskMaker Project Planning Software
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi Larry,
[Slur deleted by Moderator.]
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Im with pmkb on this one, people generally put others down on a continual basis out of a mistaken sense of self-importance or out of a genuine sense of inferiority.
Which do you suppose is the case here?
Larry
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi Pmkb,
At least we found out who Stacy is, please put me on your ignore list, and hope you succumb to boredom, or a simular problem like ignorance.
Regards
If you want to get in the boxing ring with Muhammed Ali, make sure you can duck well, or have a good punch. ie if you cant stand the heat get out of the kitchen
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi Darrell,
As a matter of interest, Billy Conelly is Irish, he swears like a trooper, and grew up in Glascow. Maybe the capitol of Ireland is not Liverpool any more, but Glascow. My grandfather alway had this joke (by the way he was of scottish extraction),about the Irish giving the bagpipes to the scottish as a joke. He had another joke about why the thistle became the national flower of Scotland, but it is not suitable for the forum.
The first comment I always get when I refer to the movie "The boondock Saints), is that those Irish guys can swear. The norms we have to live to sometimes eludes us.
Regards
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
good idea! Although that may render some completely irrelevant. Problem with that is, how would anyone know that the person learned to behave themselves?
Larry
Member for
20 years 1 monthRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Perhaps the PP can implement an "ignore list" like we have at the PMKB. Members can then block out posts from members that they dont fancy.
Stacy
Participate in the Project Management Knowledge Base!
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi Darrell,
Very well put, but do not group me with the moderators.
You must read things from the perspective they are written, and I like pulling your [Deleted by Moderator.]
Regards
Philip
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Moderators / Philip
Personally don’t fell da nead for a spell chequer.
By all means, make your own informed decisions on this "big issue". Perhaps a "name spell chequer" wood b more appropriate.
To me, some of your comments smack of steriotyping, which of course as an individual free person you can do, without anybodys permission. Suppose that is real democracy.
Each of us thinks we see ourselves as the world & others see us.
Each of us, also has a face or facade that we put on, or maintain for any give point in time or circumstance.
Deciding that perhaps "site people swear like troopers, because they have to get the job done" might be true of some "site people". The vast majority of "site people" that I deal with anyhow, swear very little to get the job done. Swearing gets no job done. Its work that gets a job done generally. And conversley some "office people" that I have had the pleasure of dealing with, would make you vomit violently, not only with their swearing (which doesnt bother me), but also with their diminituive (hope I spelt dat rite) attitude, towards the people around them, and the people actually doing some work "the sweary site people".
Also, the only time I really feel the need to swear generally, is when I am on planning planet, although their is no real f***ing point as the moderators tend to be on the ball. I am a site person, if only part time, but day to day don’t swear that much, but that is relative, because this is Ireland (see, more steriotyping).
The moderators I think are usually pretty fair, from what I have seen to date, but that is only my opinion, after all I think I have them in my pockt.
Regards,
Darrell
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi guys,
In my experience, flaming is a very polite way of using the [Deleted by Moderator] word. We can go to internet dictionaries and try and find the root of words, but at the end of the day, the vernacular (the way language is spoken, is important), and herein lies the answer.
If 60% of the people is site related, 20% is design office related, and the balance belongs to the client or other parties, what is the chances of the moderators getting it right. People speak different languages for several reasons. The site related people swear like troopers, because they have to, to get the job done. The design people speak very politely, because they work in a normal environment. The rest uses a different vernacular, suited to their needs, ie a claims person would be very polite and use words like "your honour" which is totally out of the scope of the site person.
The point being is that planning spans all these disciplines, within planning, and as such you have to understand them all before you try and moderate, or censor.
I suggest that there is very few people within the PP society, who fully understand the full scope, and as such very few has the right to moderate, maybe moderation should be a comitee thing, and any "offenders" should be brought to task and disciplined in this way, not by the whim of an individual moderator.
By the way PPadmin, I still think a spell checker is a good option [Deleted by Moderator. Offense taken.]
Regards
Member for
20 years 4 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi edgar,
I think he over excited cause getting new PC machine... as u recommended
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Bernard,
A bit like Gerrymandering......?
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Folks,
Perhaps the plot was lost a long time ago.
Werent we discussing Democracy & Totalitaranism?
Just a note, for those interested.
Have been moderated upon (see below), and don’t even remember why.
Typical "Demontarianism" in action.
A democratic moderator exorcising totalitaranism control.
Probably not allowed to say that either?
A way 2 get round dis.
On sum radio shows in Ireland, DJs will often read out texts or mails that they have recieved throught the day.
Not unusually, in Ireland, people use swear words etc.
So to get round not getting the sack, DJs are allowed to paraphrase or quote others. Manys the time Ive had a near death experience, creased up with laughter in the car.
As they quote others messages about, all manner of subject matters, and topical events of the day.
Its [Deleted by Moderator] and harms nobody.
Best wishes,
Darrell
Member for
22 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
flaming
trolls
You may also find the troll subtypes identified in this thesis paper of interest: A Psycho-Sociological Discourse on Internet Trolls
Bernard Ertl
InterPlan Systems
Member for
20 years 3 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
hes risen from the dead....hes immortal...but he is not Irish
Member for
20 years 4 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Edgar
Dont worry
I think OSCAR become WILDEEEEEE?
Why? I dont know.
but I think its his nature is to become aggresive at the spot.
Be cool
Member for
20 years 3 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
feelings....nothing more than feelings...trying to forget my feelings of ....(do machines have it?)
What are you planning to do here?
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Oscar,
I believe flaming refers to personnel attacks on other forum members.
Regards,
James
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Sorry
Forum rules rule 2
also postings are to be in English
So we best stop now
Oscar
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Darrell read the posting rules
Oscar
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
No. You have lost me now, & that is easy to do.
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Darrell
When we post we agree not to flame so what is flaming
Oscar
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Oscar,
Did I rite "flaming", if I did watt was the context?
Like, could it be that "the flaming ting wont work"?
[Deleted by Moderator]
And as far as agreeing when u dont understand, makes no flaming difference to me anyroad nohow.
Gudluck,
Darrell
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
So Darrell what is flaming
Is it still ok if i dont understand the words when i agree to them
not english law here please
osacr
Member for
23 years 8 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Oscar,
"Hell hat no furry"
Suppose my opinion wood be that, perhaps den dere is no difference between "Democracy & Totalitaranism"?
Because both impose sensorship & control.
All dependant upon the leadersip, to what extent this is extended.
Good pint doh.
Darrell
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
So
Censorship or self censorship
Imagine you are in China do you criticise
or do you tow the line
If you can criticise you should even if this offends
If you cant then you live in a poor society and maybe you cant change it
Free speech whether agreed or not is ok
Nipples in some places are banned but people photographed dying in road accidents are acceptable who says so
Free speech is absolutly free if you dont like it dont read it BUT DONT CENSOR IT
If you think somebody talks BS you stop reading
As for killingh people where did that come from
[Deleted by Moderator]
I hate Politicians
[Deleted by Moderator]
But I would not think that they should be constrained
Hitler Mao Stalin and every other dictator survived by limiting free speech either by bullying or killing
FREE SPEECH A HUMAN RIGHT
NO TO CENSORSHIP MODERATION OR CONTROL
as for flaming what ever is that???
I only speak english???
I ghave no computer dictionary.
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Philip/Larry
I think we are all agreeing here. The film analogy Philip used is a good one I feel because films are prone to active censorship.
They are also classified so that people can know what they are likely to be subjected to. This means that a commonly held notion of what is and is not appropriate is held. As Larry points out this can often be implicit as well as stated.
In the case of a forum like this the stated understanding would be the site rules that we agree to. The implicit is a mixture of common courtesy and the fact that as planners we are all vaguely like minded, plus I would imagine that this is an environment that is unlikely to attract much trolling.
Where moderation becomes too harsh it usually painfully apparant IMHO. If this were to happen here I am sure the moderator(s) would rapidly be made aware that all was not well. I really do not see it as much of a problem here.
Andy
Member for
20 years 11 monthsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Hi Larry,
You are totally right. Stay within the rules, but, when the rules are wrong fix them
Member for
20 yearsRE: Democracy vs Totalitaranism
Censorship and moderation are all in the eye of the beholder and the community.
A community agrees to a certain set of behavioral norms that will allow that community to function most effectively.
Sometimes these norms are spelled out explicitly (i.e. the Forum Rules) and other times, they are spelled out implicitly, (i.e. traditions, beliefs, corporate cultures)
To the extent that they are laid out explicitly, people who want to participate in that community should be aware of those rules, and the moderators should be allowed to take action as needed to see that all participants comply.
To the extent that the rules are inmplicit, and require time and experience to learn, the moderators should wait for the person to learn the rules and other members of the group should be so kind as to educate the newbies.
For example, I was in one forum where the term coworker was often misstyped as cow orker. I made the error of making a joke about orking cows. There was no explicit rule saying I couldnt do that. However, one of the other members let me know that the cow orking joke had been done to death and wasnt necessarily appreciated. Thats an example of an implicit rule that gets learned informally.
I find this whole discussion rather fascinating, in part because Totalitarianism and Democracy both enforce rules on the community. The difference is that in a Democracy, all members of the community have an opportunity to have some influence, however small, on the rules, and agree to live under those rules as a condition of belonging to the community. In a totalitarian society, only a small group of the community set the rules for everyone else and living under those rules is an enforce condition rather than a voluntary condition.
This is a democracy, in that if you dont like what the moderators do, you are perfectly able to find a different forum. If, on the other hand, you were not allowed to join any other forums and had no input to this forums rules, then it would be totalitarianism.
Philosophically yours,
Larry