anonimity of posters

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
It was over-moderated, I had experience of that myself. I like this site but they have a general area for people wanting to make risque comments so why not use that area for threads like the one which was closed today instead of the football page which has a broad mix of people using it?
 
Because it doesn't seem to be what most posters want, nor is it what the site owner set the site up for.
 
Dutch_Mountain_Dog said:
Because it doesn't seem to be what most posters want, nor is it what the site owner set the site up for.
Click to expand...
You or the other moderator could have moved the thread that was closed to that section maybe? I wouldn't have a problem with that? Like the person who made this thread says I don't think most people really want to see threads with headers referring to 'crazy chinks' and stuff like that. People either wont contribute or wont use the board.
 
SpaceMan Tiger said:
You or the other moderator could have moved the thread that was closed to that section maybe? I wouldn't have a problem with that? Like the person who made this thread says I don't think most people really want to see threads with headers referring to 'crazy chinks' and stuff like that. People either wont contribute or wont use the board.
Click to expand...

I can only repeat the previous replies, but one element of your argument was already adressed by another mod before I even saw the thread.
 
The old 606 was ridiculously heavy-handed in terms of moderating. You couldn't criticise anyone or anything. I got threads deleted because I pointed out that I didn't like going to Stoke to have bottles and bricks thrown at me. No swearing or anything, just the mere accusation that violent acts took place was enough to delete threads.
 
To be honest I think most people selectively ignore stuff they don't want to see but sometimes its hard to do that when its actually in the title of a thread. Thanks for the replies anyhow. Be nice if it was more about football than stuff like this really.
 
PLT said:
The old 606 was ridiculously heavy-handed in terms of moderating. You couldn't criticise anyone or anything. I got threads deleted because I pointed out that I didn't like going to Stoke to have bottles and bricks thrown at me. No swearing or anything, just the mere accusation that violent acts took place was enough to delete threads.
Click to expand...
It was too much then again it did deal with just about everything. What I hated there was you had to wait 5 minutes between posts.
 
SpaceMan Tiger said:
To be honest I think most people selectively ignore stuff they don't want to see but sometimes its hard to do that when its actually in the title of a thread. Thanks for the replies anyhow. Be nice if it was more about football than stuff like this really.
Click to expand...


There's no problem with raising issues on how the board is moderated. We try to keep it in the background, but it's not our board, it belongs to the people using it. We just tidy up.
 
I started that 'Crazy chinks!' thread and prefaced it with an O/T.

The intention was to show the bizarre story of parents demanding that their kids be allowed to cheat and kicking off with the invigilators.

I'd like to think that most people on here are brave enough and tough enough to have read the title without feeling persecuted, victimized, traumatized etc , and that they can see it was 'racy' title rather than a sombre moralistic one.

(Did you hear about the bloke who asked the chinky lass for some 69?)
 
Not sure if it's been posted but the owner of the site is responsible for all content written on the forum as he is the one hosting it, not to say the person writing comments wouldn't get into **** too.
 
Chien said:
Not sure if it's been posted but the owner of the site is responsible for all content written on the forum as he is the one hosting it, not to say the person writing comments wouldn't get into **** too.
Click to expand...

Isn't he 'offshore'?

Is he a 'Yank'?

(Oh ****, I've done it again! )
 
LincolnTiger said:
To be honest, and in my own humble view there are too many off topic threads with either a racist/homophobic/sectarian/political agenda going up. I wouldn't ever wish to deny anyone free speech, each to their own, but it's a football forum ffs. If I want to argue the other stuff, I would do it on political or academic forums where the real and sincere debate is taking place (and indeed I do so). Dear mods, there is an increasing instance of this happening on what is otherwise a great forum. If someone wants to run their own political agenda via the (national) Daily Mail or Telegraph political agenda (or any paper for that matter) can they do it over there and not here. It's getting tedious...
Click to expand...

It's the close season so there are bound to be more O/T threads than usual.

I give the ones I find boring a wide berth (usually transfer speculation, 'my team for saturday' bollocks, social media or computer game stuff).

Not sure I would ask them to be banned, I just avoid wasting my time clicking on them.
 
lou roll said:
Just been reading one of the threads with accusations of racism being raised.
I wonder if any of our legal experts can tell us if forums are duty bound to protect the true identities of posters in the event that the authorities were brought in to investigate racist/homophobic comments.
Could the forum organisers be held to account in any way?
Click to expand...

Oh, and it's 'anonymity', by the way.....
 
City Agro said:
I started that 'Crazy chinks!' thread and prefaced it with an O/T.

The intention was to show the bizarre story of parents demanding that their kids be allowed to cheat and kicking off with the invigilators.

I'd like to think that most people on here are brave enough and tough enough to have read the title without feeling persecuted, victimized, traumatized etc , and that they can see it was 'racy' title rather than a sombre moralistic one.

(Did you hear about the bloke who asked the chinky lass for some 69?)
Click to expand...

Chinks, Krauts, Pakis, all in common parlance(in some circles), all unnecessary and rather pathetic.

As has been mentioned already, it screams 'look at me', it's a pointless use of a derogatory term.

I think the moderation on here remains very balanced, the old 606 was shockingly bad, I'm still getting emails now to tell me my posts have just been deleted ffs.
 
originallambrettaman said:
Chinks, Krauts, Pakis, all in common parlance(in some circles), all unnecessary and rather pathetic.

As has been mentioned already, it screams 'look at me', it's a pointless use of a derogatory term.

I think the moderation on here remains very balanced, the old 606 was shockingly bad, I'm still getting emails now to tell me my posts have just been deleted ffs.
Click to expand...

Chink is not derogatory per se.

Is Yorkie derogatory?

It's the context and intention which determine this.
 
I think you have to take racist comments with a pinch of salt, people are only writing this for Attention and the shock and awe value! If that person didn't have that anonymity you wouldn't see it posted. I posted my name and address on here (stupid thing to do) To prove i stick by what i say and what i would say to a person in the street. But if you wanted to get people information from this site you wouldn't have to try hard to get it unless they are using guerrilla mail account.

On a whole i think the site is managed well on this board and the mods (at times i dont agree) do a good job.
 
City Agro said:
Chink is not derogatory per se.

Is Yorkie derogatory?

It's the context and intention which determine this.
Click to expand...

As someone who spent 20% of the year in Hong Kong, every year for ten years and someone who has spent several weeks in Hong Kong every year for the past thirty years, I can tell you that the Chinese find 'chinky' just as offensive as those from Pakistan find 'paki'.

As I count some of them amongst my best friends, I find it equally offensive.
 
originallambrettaman said:
As someone who spent 20% of the year in Hong Kong, every year for ten years and someone who has spent several weeks in Hong Kong every year for the past thirty years, I can tell you that the Chinese find 'chinky' just as offensive as those from Pakistan find 'paki'.

As I count some of them amongst my best friends, I find it equally offensive.
Click to expand...


Interesting.


http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/...-‘embarrassing’-racial-attitudes/

Maybe you only met a small fraction of the hypocritical locals?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back