attack on free speach right here in politics boards (link contained in thread)

Elevator

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055944299

I for one enjoy a good chat but most definately do not use perfect English when talking to anyone

I take serious offence at the above all for the lack of perfect English

are we all expected to speak like David Norris on here or basicly gtfo??

should this be allowed?

Iwasfrozen

Elevator wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055944299

I find it disgusting that this thread was locked due to the wording of the op

I for one do enjoy a good chat but most definately do not use perfect English when talking to anyone

I take serious offence at the above all for the lack of perfect English

are we all expected to speak like David Norris on here or basicly gtfo??

should this be allowed?

The thing is though that you aren't talking you are writing. And when you are writing you are expected to at least follow simple grammer rules.

Also this thread will be locked because you aren't allowed to disuss moderation on board. Please see the help desk for that.

Elevator

but my grammer is poor to medium and I still want to be able to come on here and join in on topics I have an opinion on

me English is poor so shoot me

that's just not right

Scofflaw

Iwasfrozen wrote: »

The thing is though that you aren't talking you are writing. And when you are writing you are expected to at least follow simple grammer rules.

Also this thread will be locked because you aren't allowed to disuss moderation on board. Please see the help desk for that.

Quite true - if you have a complaint about the moderation, you take it to the CMods (that's me and nesf), and if you get no joy there you can escalate it to the Help Desk.

moderately,
Scofflaw

sceptre

Hey Elevator.

Standard of english was nothing to do with the closure of the thread. It's a repetition of an earlier thread on the same topic with as little backup as there was the first time with the addition of a conspiracy theory as an excuse to start it again. Thread starters are reasonably expected to lay something for a reasonable discussion on the board and to be honest those standards aren't all that high. That's so that people can have a discussion.

Actually the standard of english in the thread was perfectly adequate by the standards of the board. While I'm sure it'd be nice if we could all express better than we can, as long as someone can say what they mean and have others understand them, that's all anyone needs to achieve to make their point well on this board. It wasn't a factor in the closure of that thread and I can't remember the last time it was a factor in the closure of a thread in the Politics section. I'm only a spelling and grammar nazi with regard to my own posts, not those of others. Actually as it happens, I don't look favourably on other people personalising a discussion by having a go at someone else's spelling, grammar or writing in preference to discussing what a thread is supposed to be about.

As you'll be aware from the Politics forum charter, we don't discuss moderation decisions on the board as there are other outlets for that. I'll happily discuss the rationale behind the thread closure or any other thread closure by PM. The Help Desk is available, though it's customary to try PM discussion with the moderator first, then with the category mods (for Soc those would be nesf and Scofflaw) if you're not happy with the mod response and then by raising it on the Help Desk with an admin if you're not happy with the response from either the mod or the c-mod. Alternatively, Feedback is available for a group chomping at the bit, ideally for a general discussion rather than a specific grievance about a specific thread. I'm a fan of any moderation action being explainable and justifiable and I'm quite happy to give a bit of time to do so.

Threads get locked for a variety of reasons and as mods we try to put enough information in the final post of a thread to explain why. In this case, I decided to be a little more diplomatic than "this is the same thing as last time with added conspiracy that belongs on the Conspiracy Theories board and it's a thinly veiled excuse for a hobby horse issue of the odd person or two (I don't have a problem with hobby horse issues from anyone but that thread adds nothing to the previous one), and it was a pretty awful discussion last time as people just interpreted the regulations to suit their own views despite the meaning of those regulations being as plain as day to anyone who bothered to read them properly, this will just be exactly the same thing all over again with nothing at all new added and everyone deserves better than that". That's what I was referring to with the "lack of standards" reason for closure.

If what you posted above in your first post is your normal standard of posting Elevator, I wouldn't worry about ever having a difficulty with coming here or anywhere else and putting forward your point of view if I were you. There's nothing wrong with it at all. Obviously the more clear you can make your point, the better, as it's always a factor in hammering home your case, but that's not a barrier in anyone being, er, "permitted" to put their views forward.

Now I'm going to lock this for the reason above - we don't discuss moderation decisions on the forum. But I'm completely happy with discussing any or all of them in public or in private (Help Desk (for anything specific), Feedback (if it's a general discussion), by PM, etc). Any of the Politics mods would be as happy to do so.

(edit: oops, or as Scofflaw has already locked it, re-lock it)