Jump to content

Why Are My Post Subjected To Reviews?


james

Recommended Posts

I have posted about three comments in this forum today all I saw was message link that my comments are met to be reviewed and my comments aren`t posted. If I may ask, why that?

If for any inexplanable reason and I wish to quit the forum for good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 123
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Wow... different treatments.... people have always complained about Baron's posts also.... this is kinda unfair, sorry to say!

:P well, with that kind of a comparison, thor, is it any wonder that Rio scored below Doha?

Apples and oranges, man -- apples and oranges. :P

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow... different treatments.... people have always complained about Baron's posts also.... this is kinda unfair, sorry to say!

Unfair ? Just compare their post and you'll see the difference and the reason behind this .

Link to post
Share on other sites

While I agree James needs to be kept an eye on, I also agree with Michelle (who would've guessed!) that it sets an interesting - unwelcome - precedent. While I disagree with james anti-gay rants and constant arguing, he is entitled to an opinion. Wrong as it may be.

Furthermore I think Jim Jones is the bigger evil.

Link to post
Share on other sites
A little surprised that a member of gamesbids is being silenced like this. This board has thrived, based on principles of free speech. Wrong decision.

He wasn't really 'silenced.' He's just being monitored. ;) "Free' speech has its limits too, Michelle. I mean he was vexatious, contentious, cheeky, stupid and quite un-funny.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, there are limits to free speech. "Free Speech" doesn't translate to "free for all", like james does many times. Just like you can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater just for the hell of it. His posts are extremely offensive & vulgar at times. His rants are no different from any of those celebrities who have stuck their foot in their mouth & now you hear nothing about them on television, like that Michael Richards which comes to mind, after his racists tirade on stage. Now television seems to have censored him. This seems no different. There are far more tactful ways to speak your opinion without being vicious & derogatory about it, which is what james does.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He wasn't really 'silenced.' He's just being monitored. ;) "Free' speech has its limits too, Michelle. I mean he was vexatious, contentious, cheeky, stupid and quite un-funny.

He is being silenced, the moderator is only allowing posts he/she deems appropriate to be submitted. This is not about agreeing or disagreeing with James' points of view, it's about allowing members to speak freely about the Olympics or other matters. There is an ignore feature embedded in this website, maybe it should be utilized more instead of people complaining they find a members point of view invalid or wrong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
At least he's not being "banned" like some members in the past have been (MAXIU comes to mind right away) for the same kind of tactics that james uses.

I don't believe an ignore feature existed during the days of Maxiu. This website has evolved. If James has the view that homosexuality is wrong, he should be allowed to state his reasons, just as others are allowed to state why they disagree with him. It's called engagement.

Personally, I don't share any of James' views, but I support his right to state them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Michelle

Just because he thinks differentely doesn´t mean that he should be banned or censored.

Sometimes people get angry with other people just because they have a different opinion.

I´m not a regular in these forums anymore but sometimes I read the threads and I see that´s the case with most people (NOT ALL, but MOST) who feel offended by James. They just don´t have the same opinion and they can´t stand people with a different opinion.

There´s someone here - which name I won´t say (as if anyone would guess..) - who, in my opinion, write posts way more offensive than James posts. I don´t like them, but I need to now that, just like me, he has an opinion and he has, as a member of these forums, the right to express them.

So what I do ? I just ignore everything the writes. The mess starts when someone reply to a message that he/she particulary dislike. Then both parts has no reason, because both start to offend each other.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone that wishes to become a member of this forum had to agree to the terms. Also this isn't a public forum, it's a private forum, therefore rights and freedom doesn't apply here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree with Michelle. This is a private forum and whilst everyone has the right to free speech, it is fairly obvious that some are only using to it to troll.

The best football forum I post in (COYS) is the best precisely because they're not afraid to ban members when they get out of hand; there's nothing wrong with this tactic. There's a clear code of conduct compiled by the forum's mod and members know where the line is and know that if they overstep it they're our of the door. New members don't want to see trolls; it's a put off. If banning one or two members (read "trolls") means new people are more likely to sign up and not leave after one or two visits then I'm all for it.

Saying that, I've never had a great problem with James and whilst I understand why his posts have been put under moderation, I don't want to see him forced out. Banning a certain other member (do I really have to name him?) would though, be benificial to the forum in general. I feel slightly aggrieved that I have to use the ignore function for a member that doesn't just annoy me, but annoys the majority of regulars on this board.

The moderation in this forum is good. I'm not knocking what Rob does; just stating what I think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
New members don't want to see trolls; it's a put off. If banning one or two members (read "trolls") means new people are more likely to sign up and not leave after one or two visits then I'm all for it.

Trolling is a word I dislike. Are you a troll because you refuse to conform? If you stand up for your beliefs? Many are deemed a troll on this website because they contradict a forum regular - so the word troll, certainly used on this website, it sometimes applied unfairly.

I understand that this is a private forum, there has to be some code of conduct. But the code needs to function for all members of this forum, James included. I have witnessed some vicious verbal assaults on him, is this acceptable? We treat people who share different outlooks in a way which hardens their stance?

This may well be a "private forum", but this website has always worked best when allowing members to speak openly and frankly. If you start moderating members who don't always share the common view, we erode what makes this forum the collective it has become.

I understand many members have a personal grievance with James, but this is not the best way forward.

I think the ignore feature of this website has to be improved. If you ignore a certain member, all his/her posts should be removed from your view - but the present system allows you to know when he/she posts and the ability to read a particular reply. It's not effective.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Trolling is a word I dislike. Are you a troll because you refuse to conform? If you stand up for your beliefs? Many are deemed a troll on this website because they contradict a forum regular - so the word troll, certainly used on this website, it sometimes applied unfairly.

I understand that this is a private forum, there has to be some code of conduct. But the code needs to function for all members of this forum, James included. I have witnessed some vicious verbal assaults on him, is this acceptable? We treat people who share different outlooks in a way which hardens their stance?

This may well be a "private forum", but this website has always worked best when allowing members to speak openly and frankly. If you start moderating members who don't always share the common view, we erode what makes this forum the collective it has become.

I understand many members have a personal grievance with James, but this is not the best way forward.

I think the ignore feature of this website has to be improved. If you ignore a certain member, all his/her posts should be removed from your view - but the present system allows you to know when he/she posts and the ability to read a particular reply. It's not effective.

He is getting censored because of hateful speech, something that is against Canadian law, as this is a Canadian forum. Not because he thinks Abuja is a great city.

Link to post
Share on other sites
He is getting censored because of hateful speech, something that is against Canadian law, as this is a Canadian forum. Not because he thinks Abuja is a great city.

Should racism be censored? Is a racist rant a form of hateful speech?

As I said, the code of conduct should operate fairly for all members.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...