Why the censorship?

weisses

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Are you still claiming the thread about the drowned child was a "positive" thread about refugees despite the reams of negativity allowed on it? It was neither positive nor negative - views from both sides were accommodated.

The threads were closed because they were just going around in circles and becoming a mess. This always happens, with any topic.

I think the momentum of this issue would have allowed for this thread to remain open with constant news and political updates regarding this crisis

MH 17 happened more then a year ago but somehow that thread is still open and there are plenty more examples

Cold War Kid

But that doesn't have all the sniping and getting personal (which both sides are guilty of) as well as some pretty horrendous things being said about people suffering terribly.

Bongalongherb

As Larry Grayson once said... Shut That Door. Close the thread and shut the door behind you.

weisses

Cold War Kid wrote: »

But that doesn't have all the sniping and getting personal (which both sides are guilty of) as well as some pretty horrendous things being said about people suffering terribly.

Then my suggestion would be to read that thread

Bongalongherb

Oddly enough, I haven't noticed any censorship at all. Everyone got the chance to sputter out their comment so I can't see a problem with the closing of a huge thread, as all good things have to come to an end eventually.

Cold War Kid

weisses wrote: »

Then my suggestion would be not to read that thread

I thought we were discussing "censorship", not what I think of the thread content.

My point was, those kinds of comments sneering and jeering at people in genuinely terrible circumstances are also what lead to thread closures, so maybe if people took responsibility themselves and didn't stoop to such levels and just put their points across sensibly, it would help their cause - but no, it's censorship because they're not able to get a dig in at refugees for the 20th time.

Believe me, I mostly do avoid reading those threads. I'd like to post in them but there's just no point. The shouting down by the anti refugees crowd (ironically the ones complaining now about non existent censorship) isn't worth it. Also the shouting down by far-left zealots to those of us somewhere in the middle compounds it.

weisses

Cold War Kid wrote: »

I thought we were discussing "censorship", not what I think of the thread content.

My point was, those kinds of comments sneering and jeering at people in genuinely terrible circumstances are also what lead to thread closures, so maybe if people took responsibility themselves and didn't stoop to such levels and just put their points across sensibly, it would help their cause - but no, it's censorship because they're not able to get a dig in at refugees for the 20th time.

Believe me, I mostly do avoid reading those threads. I'd like to post in them but there's just no point. The shouting down by the anti refugees crowd (ironically the ones complaining now about non existent censorship) isn't worth it. Also the shouting down by far-left zealots to those of us somewhere in the middle compounds it.

You claimed there was no sniping and sneering going on in that thread ... I merely suggested you read that thread so you could conclude you were wrong

I think part of the discussion was/is if the claim they are refugees is a valid one but somehow AH was a to prominent place for this kind of discussion and the mod decided to move it to humanities where there is way less exposure
Like I said earlier it's very inconsistent but that's the way they run things here apperantly

Tom Dunne

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Even on the thread there now, there is more talk about the mods joining with the Illuminati to control the masses and how we will be all Muslim by Friday afternoon.

Well said.

Bongalongherb

LOL. Taking no prisoners today

KomradeBishop

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

Some people rather try and make themselves the victim instead of discussing the issue. Hence you see claims of censorship when they are just told to take it to another forum as there would be multiple threads related to each other on the front page of AH. Other forums tend to expect a higher quality of posting than is allowed in AH so I would imagine that would be a problem for the usual people with their conspiracy theories. Even on the thread there now, there is more talk about the mods joining with the Illuminati to control the masses and how we will be all Muslim by Friday afternoon. Add in some stuff about how the media are in on it and the thread is probably more at home in conspiracy theories than it is in humanities or AH.

In fairness, it's fairly 'convenient' how pushing certain topics away from a forum, kills discussion on those topics - i.e. sending off topics to die on a near-empty forum - or, by happy accident, moving-topics/reorganizing-forums restricts certain posters from those topics, that they previously had free reign in...

There is explicit censorship on certain topics on Boards (that's pretty much been directly said to me by mods before) - I don't know if that's the case here (doubt it, I'd just say it's a pain in the hole topic for mods) - but there is definite political censorship.

Cold War Kid

What topics KB?

I don't think Boards is perfect but it genuinely seems to me any topic is fair game once it's not an obvious attempt to inflame (rather than discuss) and that it's more about how the topic is discussed rather than the topic in and of itself.

KomradeBishop

Well, ironically, I can't mention the topic in mind as it would go against Feedback charter rules - will PM.

Mark Tapley

SSLguru posting like a rabid sociopath in Humanities. It will be interesting to see how that goes.

Cold War Kid

Mark Tapley wrote: »

SSLguru posting like a rabid sociopath in Humanities. It will be interesting to see how that goes.

But but... how is that possible when Boards is censoring people with views like his?

weisses

Mark Tapley wrote: »

SSLguru posting like a rabid sociopath in Humanities. It will be interesting to see how that goes.

That kind of crap should be dealt with quickly on any forum

weisses

Cold War Kid wrote: »

But but... how is that possible when Boards is censoring people with views like his?

Do you wanna make a bet how long he lasts ?

Cold War Kid

Foggy_lad's comments are worse, especially about that family whose boys drowned. And yet, I'm seeing no censorship of him.

The claim by the OP is just looking weaker and weaker.

weisses

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Foggy_lad's comments are worse, especially about that family whose boys drowned. And yet, I'm seeing no censorship of him.

The claim by the OP is just looking weaker and weaker.

This is a massive developing story and yet debate is being stifled and moved to a section of the site rarely visited (humanities).

Is this a false statement ? don't think so

Bongalongherb

Everyone is complaining all over the place here when they should be in Humanities discussing the migrant crisis. Stuck in a loop here.

The Backwards Man

Bongalongherb wrote: »

Everyone is complaining all over the place here when they should be in Humanities discussing the migrant crisis. Stuck in a loop here.

The thread in Humanities is the same clusterfcuk as the one in AH was. Like my granny used to often say about me, you can dress them up but you can take them nowhere.

Bongalongherb

The Backwards Man wrote: »

The thread in Humanities is the same clusterfcuk as the one in AH was. Like my granny used to often say about me, you can dress them up but you can take them nowhere.

I just looked through it all there, it is indeed banjaxed.

The whole world is banjaxed. Time to make a new thread in after-hours on this migrant crisis, and a separate one for the refugee section so that if one gets censored we can march over to the refugee one.









Only joking mods

Cold War Kid

The Backwards Man wrote: »

The thread in Humanities is the same clusterfcuk as the one in AH was. Like my granny used to often say about me, you can dress them up but you can take them nowhere.

Aye, so much unconstructive stuff not conducive to discussion by both sides.
It IS possible to discuss concerns about migration without resorting to such vitriol.

Menas

Cold War Kid wrote: »

It IS possible to discuss concerns about migration without resorting to such vitriol.

It certainly should be but without a "Cop-on assessment" before been allowed to post then sadly we are going to see this muppetry continue.

RDM_83 again

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

If it is an ongoing pattern, maybe. One thread on its own which could have remained open until the mods figured out how they were going to treat the topic? I doubt it.

The mission statement could just say "Yes, the mods are out to get you" so everyone can feel equally targeted.

Decided to actually look at this and see was I imagining it, so I wasted 45 minutes of my saturday afternoon by running through the last 12 or so pages of After Hours (this brings us back to 24-08-2015 21:54 ).
And look at the threads and see how they are treated.

Going to call them either Pro (indicating pro a more relaxed asylum/immigration regime)

Neutral

Or Anti ( indicating highlighting issues with current asylum/immigration regime or calling for it too be restricted)

This is an assessment of the OP, And I also noted if they were closed quickly or left open for a while, and the reason for closure.

What I saw was that of threads that are:

Pro, both threads were left open for a decent amount of time.

Neutral, three threads, one open for a long time, one left open (but forgotten about), one closed

Anti, Four threads, all closed with minutes to hours.

So Yes I do see a consistent bias in what threads are left open and which are quickly closed

Here is the list, I may have missed one or two but don't think so.


Ireland to assist in migrant crisis in the Med.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057429500&page=279
Neutral
Extremely LONG running thread that was closed on 30th
Reason: MOD: Since you just want to use the thread to insult other users, there's no reason to keep it open




Irish Navy ferrying migrants Libya to Italy, no vetting whatsoever
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057485989
Anti
CLOSED QUICKLY due to other thread being “a mess of of topic fighting”

Calais 'migrants' - stop using that word
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057471835
Neutral, well sort of confused about the English language.
Left Open with the last post on the 27th, actually curious if the thread will be locked if a new reply occurs

Would you take in a refugee?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057486884&page=8

Pro to Neutral
Left open for 2 days, closed on the 2nd , Reason: links to politics café and Humanities

Where are we going to put the refugees?
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057488305
Anti
Closed within 2 hours, Reason: link to Drowned thread and humanities.

Haunting Image Of Drowned Boy Sums Up Consequences Of 'The Syrian War
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057487274
Pro
Left open for 2 days, Closed for reason : Mod Between sweeping generalisations, off topic posts, xenophobic posts, etc. etc the thread is well and truley done.

Arab Gulf Countries are Hippocrates
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057487813
Anti
Closed within hour: Reason: link to humanities.

Migrant crisis 2015 superthread
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057487616
Neutral:
Closed quickly: referred to politics cafe

Refugees acting like spoiled children
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057488540
Anti
Closed quickly:
Reason: post in Humanities.

Cold War Kid

Weren't the others closed after the really long ones were closed? Clearly it's because they are too much of a pain to moderate. Negativity has been allowed over and over and over towards migrants.

Cabaal

KomradeBishop wrote: »

There is explicit censorship on certain topics on Boards...................- but there is definite political censorship.

There's also a huge amount of tin foil wearing posters on boards that love to come up with crazy conspiracy's about censorship,

I was accused by several posters on the broadbasnd forum of censoring topics on three mobile and I was told I was working for three mobile several years ago, the posters were so paranoid and got so disruptive on the forum that DeVore eventually stepped in to warn them that if they continued they d be site banned. That ended it.

These paranoid accusations where completely baseless in every way, but that didn't stop them from claiming censorship and utter such nonsense.

Sometimes people only see what they want to see, they ignore the reality and prefer to create conspiracys....

RDM_83 again

Cold War Kid wrote: »

Weren't the others closed after the really long ones were closed? Clearly it's because they are too much of a pain to moderate. Negativity has been allowed over and over and over towards migrants.

Nope some of the anti ones were closed while the Drowned Boy thread was open or before (some after).


"Haunting Image Of Drowned Boy Sums Up Consequences Of 'The Syrian War'"

and "Would you take in a refugee?"

were both left open for a reasonable amount of time (eg over a day) after being started on the 1st and 2nd.
Whereas
"Irish Navy ferrying migrants Libya to Italy, no vetting whatsoever"
was started before and closed instantly.

Basically every thread apart from the initial mega thread type one (which started out neutral) was closed quickly apart from those with a more pro refugee/migration message in the OP

Will check the dates and times properly in a bit if I don;t go out but since the agenda posting of the Drowned Boy thread was left open after other threads were closed I think its pretty clear that certain threads are more welcome than other.

If you've a problem with my thinking that I've linked to each of the threads I can find and you can see if my assessment of moderator bias is fair.

Cold War Kid

RDM, wouldn't it make sense to close other threads started while the long one was ongoing, instead of having more than one at a time?

"Would you take in a refugee?" isn't a title with a positive spin on migration; it's a neutral title.

I don't mean to be so argumentative with you as you're a reasonable poster, but I honestly think you're reading into this the wrong way. The reason I'm arguing with you actually is because you're a reasonable poster, I wouldn't even bother otherwise. I just don't think there is censorship when hundreds and hundreds (possibly thousands) of posts being utterly scathing towards migrants were allowed, and can still be read (they'd be deleted if it was censorship). So what if the title and opening post were more positive towards migrants? That wasn't long falling by the wayside.
You've got to see the bigger picture too - it's not just the mods deciding "Right, we'll close the thread", it's about the style of posting that has led to this decision (including by those who are favourable towards this migration). Posters have a responsibility in how a thread turns out too. Threads that will inevitably descend into digs at each other, personal abuse, and vitriol towards genuine refugees... who'd want to keep those open?

K-9

We seem to be having a relatively civil discussion on the European Union forum, though advertising that probably defeats the purpose.

Cold War Kid

K-9 wrote: »

We seem to be having a relatively civil discussion on the European Union forum

Yup, it can be done, by both sides. The people talking about "censorship" are actually referring to not being able to be as inflammatory as they like.