Boards a bit rediculous on censorship?

acri

I'm referring to the locking of the "Suicide?" thread. Most of the people in there were just having a discussion. Well, more of a chat. I think if people find it offensive, they shouldn't read it. And it by no means undermined the very serious threads in the Personal Issues thread, or took from their credibility. The fact of the matter is, some people, such as myself, were harmlessly, y'know, chatting. I find it an interesting subject and, if it's there, will add to such a thread. Nobody was taking it seriously. Apart from the few that are overly-PC. This really really irritates me. Most would find hunting most inhumane. Hell, I do. Yet this is an accepted topic of conversation. It's unfair, and I don't think such topics should be locked. Unless, of course, if they're blatently wrong. Such as pro-suicide posts etc.

Sparky

i think the poll attached to it may of done it, but in saying a disscussion about these issues will happen.

StupidLikeAFox

Boards a bit rediculous on censorship?

So what if it is, if its too much of a problem you know where to go etc etc

acri

ColHol wrote:

Boards a bit rediculous on censorship?

So what if it is, if its too much of a problem you know where to go etc etc

I enjoy Boards, but it gets to me when such a thread is indiscriminatley banned.

aidan_walsh

There was no discussion. A discussion might have gone along the lines of "What do you think might be the contributing factors to the high suicide level in Ireland today?" as opposed to "How wuld yoo top urself?!!1!1 I r teh funnay!" - an attitude that the OP continued on down along the thread, especially when he began troll baiting with "Heh. Looks like we have an argument on our hands. Woooot!". It was plain and simply making light of a serious situation in Ireland today.

FYI...

acri

aidan_walsh wrote:

There was no discussion. A discussion might have gone along the lines of "What do you think might be the contributing factors to the high suicide level in Ireland today?" as opposed to "How wuld yoo top urself?!!1!1 I r teh funnay!" - an attitude that the OP continued on down along the thread, especially when he began troll baiting with "Heh. Looks like we have an argument on our hands. Woooot!". It was plain and simply making light of a serious situation in Ireland today.

FYI...

Admittedly his admirable qualities were less than prevelant, but do you really think the intellect of the OP is grounds for a locking? And not every thread on Boards is a discussion.

aidan_walsh

acri wrote:

Admittedly his admiral qualities were less than prevelant, but do you really think the intellect of the OP is grounds for a locking?

Thats something that can only be judged on a thread by thread basis. In this case, IMO, the OP was very much a contributing factor in the threads direction - nowhere. The decision to close was the right one.

acri wrote:

And not every thread on Boards is a discussion.

Well, the Humour forum wouldn't be a lot of fun if it was, would it?

Endurance Man

U should try some other forums, they are a joke :eek: . I think they have good standards here. I posted on a forum a few days, the post had a link to another forum where the guys avatar was a pic of some chick in a swimsuit. It was closed and i was told that it contained porn :rolleyes: . You would see worse on mtv.

Gazza22

There is plenty of suicide threads that have been allowed on PI over the years though when a thread starts to get out of control, what do you expect a mod to do?

Any trolling or dialogue insensitive to the PI and especially a suicide thread is just not on e.g as mentioned above

"How wuld yoo top urself?

Neuro

acri wrote:

Admittedly his admiral qualities were less than prevelant....

The OP is in the navy? Cool...

sterculelum

I'm the admiral OP, btw.

acri wrote:

I'm referring to the locking of the "Suicide?" thread. Most of the people in there were just having a discussion. Well, more of a chat. I think if people find it offensive, they shouldn't read it. And it by no means undermined the very serious threads in the Personal Issues thread, or took from their credibility. The fact of the matter is, some people, such as myself, were harmlessly, y'know, chatting. I find it an interesting subject and, if it's there, will add to such a thread. Nobody was taking it seriously. Apart from the few that are overly-PC. This really really irritates me. Most would find hunting most inhumane. Hell, I do. Yet this is an accepted topic of conversation. It's unfair, and I don't think such topics should be locked. Unless, of course, if they're blatently wrong. Such as pro-suicide posts etc.

Hear hear.

How wuld yoo top urself?

I never actually said this, so please stop misquoting.

I admit this: "I r teh funnay" dubbed thread may have been out of line and misjudged. But I don't think the "Wooot!" was a big deal.

The tone of the thread was obviously a bit flippant, but I wouldn't say in bad taste. I wasn't laughing at ppl who commit suicide. I still don't think it should have been locked; there were as many ppl for it as against it. I don't think it ever got out of control, and I seriously doubt anybody was offended by it. The reactions were, as someone said, completely overly-PC and it shouldn't have been taken as seriously as it was. I don't think there is anything to apologise for and I think my "admiral qualities" were quite on show.

acri

Neuro wrote:

The OP is in the navy? Cool...

Apologies, I meant admirable. Mistake noted and corrected.

CrimE

I was one of the one who was'nt impressed by the thread.

I would have no problem with a discussion about suicide and think it could be very interesting but the poll and people having a laugh about suicide is what I did'nt like. I definitely dont mind having a laugh but I just dont think its a topic that is ok to take lightly.

sterculelum

CrimE wrote:

I was one of the one who was'nt impressed by the thread.

I would have no problem with a discussion about suicide and think it could be very interesting but the poll and people having a laugh about suicide is what I did'nt like. I definitely dont mind having a laugh but I just dont think its a topic that is ok to take lightly.

Oh, I remember you, 2Pac.

CrimE

Haha yeah well done for clicking the link in my sig. Legendary song.

seamus

Everyone else here has pretty much said it. A discussion about suicide - its causes, its aftermath, etc, I've no problem with. I left that thread go for quite a while in the hopes that something decent may come out of it, but ultimately it was a started with a poll asking "How (in theory) would you kill yourself?".

What kind of topic is that? If anyone is willing to answer that question seriously, then you need psychiatric help.

sterculelum

seamus wrote:

Everyone else here has pretty much said it. A discussion about suicide - its causes, its aftermath, etc, I've no problem with. I left that thread go for quite a while in the hopes that something decent may come out of it, but ultimately it was a started with a poll asking "How (in theory) would you kill yourself?".

What kind of topic is that? If anyone is willing to answer that question seriously, then you need psychiatric help.

But that's just it; no one was answering the question seriously. It wasn't a serious thread.

seamus

So it was pointless? It went for long enough. There's a fine line between tastelessness and offensiveness, and while I'm not here to be a moral guardian, there are certain things you don't make a joke out of.

sterculelum

But it's like playing Cluedo and saying that making fun of murder is insensitive, etc, etc.

seamus

Entirely different, and you know why.

The fact of the matter is, the thread was becoming more hassle than it was worth, so I locked it.

Gazza22

sterculelum wrote:

It wasn't a serious thread.

Yeah the mods kinda got that, thats why it was locked. PI is not a playground for muppets it is for serious issues and a place people can find help.

From the PI charter:

Remember being a Personal Issues board the contents of some threads may be very close to people's hearts

Now do you think somebody who has experience with suicide would appreciate that nonesense?

seamus

Actually, to respond to the OP:

Most would find hunting most inhumane. Hell, I do. Yet this is an accepted topic of conversation.

Not necessarily. If someone posted a thread "What is the best way to skin a cat?" with a few options, I would lock it. If someone posted a thread discussing the rights and wrongs of skinning cats, no problem.

sterculelum

gazza22 wrote:

Yeah the mods kinda got that, thats why it was locked. PI is not a playground for muppets it is for serious issues and a place people can find help.

From the PI charter:


Now do you think somebody who has experience with suicide would appreciate that nonesense?

Well it wasn't actually in the PI section, so the charter means, pretty much, sweet **** all. Obviously PI is not a playground, no one is saying it is, and no one posted any distasteful comments there.

Gazza22

sterculelum wrote:

Well it wasn't actually in the PI section, so the charter means, pretty much, sweet **** all. Obviously PI is not a playground, no one is saying it is, and no one posted any distasteful comments there.

sorry, for some reason when i posted that i thought i was in PI...i have been switching alot from AH and PI today...just got !

Well now i'm just thinking should i make any amendments to my op......nah i won't it was a still a tasteless thread. Btw, even though that quote came from PI, my question to you was

Now do you think somebody who has experience with suicide would appreciate that nonesense?

so i think it should apply. If you had, then you wouldn't be very happy seeing the topic being portrayed like that would you?

WhiteWashMan

acri wrote:

I I think if people find it offensive, they shouldn't read it..

and if you have an issue with boards as it is, perhaps you dont need to visit?

i dop not see why boards.ie should change its stance on things, just because you object.

i mean, you can always just go away and never come back?

sterculelum

WhiteWashMan wrote:

and if you have an issue with boards as it is, perhaps you dont need to visit?

i dop not see why boards.ie should change its stance on things, just because you object.

i mean, you can always just go away and never come back?

I know, and I appreciate the judge's decision is final and all that.

That said, I didn't start this censorship complaint thread, and I'm not asking you to change your stance. All I'm saying is that I don't think it should have been locked, and there are other ppl who seem to agree.

Gazza22

sterculelum wrote:

All I'm saying is that I don't think it should have been locked, and there are other ppl who seem to agree.

Seems to me that it's just you and Acri that protest the locking of that thread

WhiteWashMan

whether or not the thread was locked is nothing to do with me, but i respect the opinion of the other mods, c-mods, and s-mods to do as they see fit.

if seamus feels the thread was going nowhere, was getting legitimite complaints (and not just 'i dont agree with this topic') and there was a level of immaturity going on (and yes, saying i r teh win is bring a topic of discussion down) then i think any user is well within their rights to get the thread locked.

remember, you are allowed to have difference of opnions, its why this site thrives, but sometimes we need to err on the side of caution because at the end of the day, we do not want the look, feel and atmosphere of this site poluted or tainted by a few individual threads that do nothing more than provide some sort of vehicle for people to act stupidly or be inconsiderate to other people.

if there is a real issue over the locking of the thread, then please take it to the feedback forum and make a complaint.

aidan_walsh

sterculelum wrote:

I never actually said this, so please stop misquoting.

par·a·phrase
n.

1. A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.
2. The restatement of texts in other words as a studying or teaching device.

WhiteWashMan

and lets not get angsty or pedantic.

its a pointless excercise.

sterculelum

aidan_walsh wrote:

par·a·phrase
n.

1. A restatement of a text or passage in another form or other words, often to clarify meaning.
2. The restatement of texts in other words as a studying or teaching device.

Thanks for that, but I think you were kind of twisting my words. I think if you are paraphrasing, you should try to keep the intended meaning. And you don't have to add in intentional spelling mistakes and so on to try to degrade.

And there were people who didn't think the topic shouldn't have been locked (or at least didn't have to be), just look in the original thread or the number of ppl who voted.

sterculelum

BTW, Seamus, is this like a Strike 1 for me? I don't think it should be.

WhiteWashMan

sterculelum wrote:

BTW, Seamus, is this like a Strike 1 for me? I don't think it should be.

it doesnt matter what you think.

locked.