I post on this reflector in the full knowledge that it is moderated.
As was pointed out to me in one post ‘Its like TV if you don’t like it change channel’ (not a dig Lee - fair comment). If people post after the moderator has said no more then can they really complain if their posts are deleted?
Perhaps yes! on most forums/ reflectors (call them what you will) there is a mechanism whereby no further posts CAN be made on a thread when the moderator calls time.
Perhaps Brian and co could look into this to avoid future occurrences of todays fiasco when some posts with very valid points and mentioning no callsigns or particular activations were instantaneously removed and yet some are still arriving and remaining extant after more than an hour.
Perhaps Brian and co could look into this to avoid future occurrences
of todays fiasco when some posts with very valid points and mentioning
no callsigns or particular activations were instantaneously removed
and yet some are still arriving and remaining extant after more than
an hour.
Roger G4OWG (Confused of Rawdon)
Very elegantly put Roger, that’s what I was trying to get across when I ended up as Motor Mouth again hi.
It has to be one rule for all, otherwise we will hear cries of favouritism.
How it can be implemented, who knows? Brian can’t be expected to sit watching his PC 24/7, he needs help, maybe more moderators?
In reply to G4OWG:
In the thread refered to Brian posted three times after he said and I quote “This thread is at an end.”, yet he kept posting… so clearly two sets of rules in operation.
73
Steve
The problem with more moderators is that they have different thresholds to abuse. What ends up then is that someone says something unpleasant and gets chopped by moderator A and someone says something similar and it doesn’t get chopped as moderator B is OK with. Then someone shouts “favouritism” and it escalates.
The heavier the moderation the less responsive the forum. Push it too far and you end waiting for a moderator to approve your post before it appears in the forum.
Here’s an idea for everyone. Why not try and post stuff that doesn’t need moderating? Is it so hard to not be offensive?
In reply to MM0FMF:
In one case posts were being deleted because they were critical, not offensive so I understand. They should never have been moderated.
73
Steve
In reply to 2E0KPO:
why ?
why a sota-reflector needs a moderation / censorship ???
its only a HOBBY !
with different hams who take part.
censorship is not needed,so long no one is insulted by another one …
A very valid point about different moderators, different levels of moderation.
You say Don’t post anything offensive, biiiiiiig problem there Andy. How do we define offensive?
I have broad shoulders and I’m not easily offended, but what person A sees as offensive, person B will laugh his socks off at.
Offensive statements come from all quarters, ask any German ham if they found MT’s statement regarding the removal of hundreds of their wonderful summits offensive, you can bet your house on it that they did!
As SOTA participants, we come from all walks of life, many different nationalities, with many differing cultures. Even across the UK I think people think differently from North to those in the south, so where do we draw the line, how do we define offensive.
In reply to 2E0KPO:
No. Posts were and are being deleted because they keep appearing. Its as simple as that.
There has been a delay in deletions just as there has been a delay in replying to this thread because of a severe thunderstorm: the primary function of my computer is SSTV, it is linked to my rig and adjacent to it, for safety I had to disconnect and isolate everything. No sooner did the storm pass and everything get connected up than the internet link went down. A frustrating evening, no radio, no internet and the usual rubbish on the box!
I appreciate the need for an automatic lock-down and will be looking into it.
Now. Perhaps you would like to expound on your theme of “two sets of rules”? Are you attempting to be offensive or do you have a genuine point to make?
In reply to G8ADD:
No intention of being offensive, its quite clear to me that there seem to be two sets of rules often in favour of the MT and what suits them at the time.
73
Steve
PS. I could see that it could be taken as offensive Mike but this is a discussion!
Well without going that far away from this thread, quote, "Now. Perhaps you would like to expound on your theme of “two sets of rules”? Are you attempting to be offensive or do you have a genuine point to make?"
This could be considered as offensive to some and not others, so let’s no state rules of posting unless you plan to abide by them!
73 Steve
In reply to 2E0KPO:
Nice try, Steve, but no coconut!
If we postulate that there are indeed two sets of rules, then your comment is not offensive.
If, on the other hand, we postulate that there is not two sets of rules, then your comment is offensive.
It follows that if I find your comment offensive because I am not aware of the two sets of rules that you refer to, then my finding your comment offensive can not in itself be offensive. But let us not chop logic. You are stating that the MT, singly or as a group, is manipulating the rules of SOTA for their own benefit. You must have examples of this in mind or you would not have posted your comment. Having gone so far, why not go the rest of the way and tell us what these examples are?
“Post by G8ADD on 27th July 2008 at 20:48 In reply to M0LMP:
As it is an apology I have allowed this post to stand. Let this be the end of the matter.
Let us be clear, no acrimonious or discourteous postings will be allowed to stay on this reflector, and anybody making such postings will lose their posting privileges.
This thread is at an end.
73
Brian G8ADD”
And then allowed yourself to post 4 more times
After you said…
“Post by G8ADD on 27th July 2008 at 16:06 In reply to thread:
Guys, this topic should now be put to bed. It is getting unedifying again, so stop now before somebody goes too far.
All further comments will be erased.
73
Brian G8ADD”
Two rules in my eyes…
There is another example in the last few days Brian… if you plan to make rules stick to them please and set an example.
You’re right about definitions of offensive. But the easiest thing is to consider how the law defines things. Take the Protection from Harassment Act 1997. It defines harassment very losely, it was really designed as a piece of anti-stalking law. But the words used are interesting as it says
“(1) A person must not pursue a course of conduct—
(a) which amounts to harassment of another, and
(b) which he knows or ought to know amounts to harassment of the other.”
It’s the wording in section (b) “ought to know” that I think is relevant. Being offensive is no different to harassment in that we ought to know what is offensive. Is Frankie Boyle’s humour offensive? Yes, he has no limits to how low he will go and he knows it. (It’s painfully funny too). Is Billy Conolly’s humour offensive? No. It’s usually foul-mouthed and based on sex or bodily functions. But it’s observation of what people do. Both are crude yet one has a deliberate aim to offend.
You say you’re broad shouldered. But would you like some of the things said of the MT to be said about you? Or about your mother or children? “Mike’s wife treats us like mushrooms… keep us in the dark and feed us on …”, “I wouldn’t trust Mike’s mother to accurately count the emails in a survey”. Would you be happy for that to be published and available for 1.1billion people on the net to read? If the answer is no then there’s a strong chance it’s offensive.
Adults ought to know what is offensive. Likewise claiming you didn’t know it was offensive is not really an execuse. If you disagree with someone, attack the premise of their argument and don’t attack the man.
Yes, it’s sometimes difficult to decide. So err on the side of caution. We’re rational adults capable of thought and reasoning. So perhaps we should demonstrate that at all times?
I have deided to try and help the censorship problem, look at it this way…
There are two meeting places, in one you must wear collar and tie and act accordingly, the other meeting place is smart but casual again act accordingly, which one do you think there will be the most unrest in ?
For that very reason I have been persuaded by many, via email and phone calls to resurrect the sotaforum, I am currently re-installing the software on the server and with a little luck it will be up and running by this time next week, as I am of to LD land from wednesday for a weeks summit bagging, I may activate a couple it all depends on how I feel, but when I get back the site www.sotaforum.co.uk will be up and running again.m No censorship at all 100% guaranteed !!
Regards
Lee
PS For you Roger, no offence taken, and you made some valid points
