Censorship on AAM

T

tobo

Guest
I note the topic entitled 'G string post moved' has been locked out for further contributions after criticism was posted there about the decision to 'move' the topic.

I did not see any of the original G string postings and so cannot comment on what was contained there. What concerns me however is the following:

a) Why say it has been 'moved' when as far as I can see it has been 'removed'

b) Burgessbrendan said:-

we are actually proud of the general tone of AAM, even on Letting Off Steam
Click to expand...

Who is 'we'? and how was it established what 'we' thought?

c) Who makes the decision to censor postings/topics on AAM and by what criteria??

d) Why was the decision made to lock out the topic 'G string post moved' so that no further comment could be made? and by whom?

e) Whatever happened to the concept of Free Speech? In my opinion no post should be considered for removal from AAM unless it might fairly be considered to be grossly offensive to the majority of reasonably minded individuals, or otherwise considered unlawful or defamatory. Even then, criticism of the decision to remove should be tolerated without further censorship.

f) I believe it is time for a full blown debate about what I perceive to be an increasing amount of intolerance to contributors and their opinions, shown by the 'clique' who run/manage/control/moderate the AAM site. There is a danger that this site might ultimately lose credibility unless this tendency is curbed by greater democratisation and a charter that protects free speech and expression of views.
 
the natives are restless

tobo: I think many people who use this site, and in fact this would apply to resources on the internet in general, feel they have paid for or earned a right to use it. This is usually not the case and there is a real danger here of pissing off the golden goose.

There should be no 'debate' or explaining done in my opinion, perhaps a revised mission statement or more stringent posting requirements, but everyone here really is a visitor. Like it or leave.
 
Re: the natives are restless

Jaspertherat said:-

There should be no 'debate' or explaining done in my opinion, perhaps a revised mission statement or more stringent posting requirements, but everyone here really is a visitor. Like it or leave.
Click to expand...

Hopefully, a debate might lead to a 'revised mission statement or more stringent posting requirements'. How else would it occur?

It might even help if it was more clearly stated that visitors were entering somebody's private forum or fiefdom, and clearly identify that person or persons so that 'visitors' might know who they were visiting. It seems to me that a number of persons involved in this site do not consider themselves as visitors but set apart from the visitors. Therein lies the rub.
 
Re: the natives are restless

The policies of the site are laid out in the links at the top of the page. Brendan is the ultimate owner in that he unilaterally set up the site in the first place and he pays the bills etc. The moderators voluntarily help out in terms of adminsitration, tehcnical assistance, moderation etc. But ultimately AAM is comprised of all the people who contribute. Trust me - there is no conspiracy here to stifle debate. However some contributions are either such rubbish or so contentious that they are best dealt with through modification or removal. There are other boards (e.g. www.boards.ie , www.p35.net etc.) that are arguably more suited to some of the rubbish that gets posted here from time to time. Constructive feedback on the running of the site and the policies applied is always welcome.
 
About time

I am glad to see piggy and his aliases (DoM etc.) outed. Their obssession with the female buttocks has no place in AAM. Piggy may spend his day ogling bums and tits but this is an intellectual forum.
 
Clubman

>Constructive feedback on the running of the site and the policies applied is always welcome.

Is that why you locked the thread where I posted my criticism then Clubman eh???????

I think not. You made your views very clear didn't you blankety blank.

Too many egos here.
 
Over the last couple of weeks in particular there have been some downright nasty personal attacks on contributors/moderators from bizarre posters who just seem to appear from thin air. The one on the g string thread on Brendan from the person calling themselves "Barney Bear" was bang out of order.

In my opinion also there have also been some distasteful threads created which do nothing for the site. There was even a thread about Nick Berg which I have to say shocked and upset me at the time. In reality, what was there to debate about watching this particular video??? There have been various other topics, I am sure people will know which ones I am talking about.

I personally have got some good advice over the time I have visited the site (over two years now) especially in relation to monetary matters,(after all it IS ASKABOUTMONEY) buying my house, legal rights, best buys in loans, etc. and I am very grateful that the site was there for me in this regard.

Does anybody know where the downright odd/bizarre posters are coming from? Are they all the one person. I would like to think so, because if not, there is a horrible element of bitchiness creeping in, which takes greatly from the site.

In relation to the g string topic (Piggy you are not going to like me here) I could see the funny side of what Piggy was trying to get at, but felt the comments about the "babe" on the train were way too personal and if I am perfectly honest blatently sexist and not acceptable. I showed the thread to four other girls at work and all four felt similar. (By the way I am not insinuating Piggy is in any way resonsible for any of the other sinister topics which have been appearing, Piggy I just want to make that clear) I am just commenting on that one topic.

I am all for debate and against censorship in general, but sometimes there is only one answer for some of the absolute tripe which appears - the delete button!

I just hope the horrible bitchy element goes somewhere else and this site does what it does best, gives out some good advice to those of us who need to ASKABOUTMONEY and have a a bit of a lighthearted banter at the same time.

Sorry for the rant.

Thanks


Amanda C
 
offended?

I didn't find anything offensive about that post. I thought it was quite funny. What's sexist about it...we talk about guys sometimes like that?
 
Hi Tobo - AAM is not (and I suspect never will be) a democracy. This model has worked successfully for 4-5 years. I see no reason why it should change.

Some people are always going to take a huff over any kind of management & control. So either we have no control, or we accept that somebody has to be in charge.

Without being rude, my own opinion is that you can take it or leave it. If you don't like it, go elsewhere - or better still, set up your own bulletin board where you bear personal responsibility for the posts of strangers.
 
Offended

Hi Fiona,
In reply to your post above why I was offended...

Just say for example you were on a Dart going into work on a Friday morning would you like to click on a website such as AAM and read yourself described as (and I cant remember the exact words used but this was the jist of it) must have looked good in their day, busty, pudgy, jeans open with rolls of fat hanging out. etc

Would you like yourself or any one of your friends/family described as such for the amusement of others? I know I know I certainly would'nt and lets face it, it could be any in woman in Ireland on that Dart going into work. It could be any woman reading that thread and thinking, that could be me hes talking about.

That was the part of it that I didnt like. I thought those type of comments were were too personal and sometimes a joke is not funny if the laugh is at someones expense. Its nice to laugh with people not at people. When I was in Inter Cert Year (all those many years ago) a friend of mine who at the time was insecure about her body and (lets face it, most women are at some point) overheard people making comments about her in a similar vein and developed a severe eating disorder which to this day she is still battling. The people who made the comments never knew what they started. Thats why I think people would be better keeping personal comments like that to themselves.

That is just my opinion, but other people must have taken offence if the thread was deleted.

Amanda C
 
Is that why you locked the thread where I posted my criticism then Clubman eh???????

I'm not sure which thread you're referring to. Maybe you can clarify?
 
Rainyday said:

take it or leave it. If you don't like it, go elsewhere
Click to expand...
This view appears to have the intention of stifling debate on a serious issue. I have benefitted from postings on this site and, in turn, I have attempted to benefit others. I am a great supporter of the site but that doesn't mean to say that I should never express any kind of criticism of what I consider to be an unwelcome trend developing in the way the site is managed/controlled, nor should it mean that I should leave the site because I have a criticism of it. The attitude portrayed by comments such as 'take it or leave it' is symptomatic of some of the insensitivities that I believe a number of contributors have complained about in recent times.

I am also not sure that you are correct about the issue of personal responsibility for the content of postings. On what legal basis do you base this view. If that was the case then all posts would need to pass through a moderator before being placed on the site in order to protect whoever you feel it is that needs protecting.
 
Re: Offended

The Editorial/Moderation Plolicy is very clearly set out:


I think we - and that's all the contributors to askaboutmoney - should be proud of its reputation for civilized and informed discussion. There is an average of 250 posts a day. We delete or edit about one thread a month, excluding spam. This says a lot about the quality of the contributions and the quality of the moderation.

Moderation is a judgement call and it's not clear. I have deleted two threads recently. Let me explain how I arrived at my judgement.

Someone posted a purely religious post in Askaboutmoney. When I saw it, I glanced through it and said to myself, "this will be trouble, but leave it and see what happens". It was when the replies were blasphemous and offensive - I hit the delete button on the entire thread. I have no religion, I don't believe in gods, but I respect the right of people to believe in gods and they should not be written about offensively.

I was accused of taking a pro Catholic line and applying a different standard to anti-muslim comments on the War Against Terror thread. I chose not to dignify this with a response. I didn't delete the comment, I just let it be the last word on the topic. It says a lot more about the anonymous poster than it does about me. Just in case it's escaped anyone why I might not have deleted anti-Muslim comments. I don't read every thread on AAM. I certainly don't read long debating topics to which I can't add anything. I am sure that other moderators are contributing to the thread and they will delete or edit as appropriate.

I saw Piggy's G String post and thought to myself "Have these people not heard of p45.net?". But I had to make a judgement and I left it there. Later a regular contributor complained to me about this offensive post. And I thought about it.
"Does this add anything to Askaboutmoney?" - clearly it doesn't.
"Does it offend people?" - Clearly it offends some people, so I hit the delete button.

Askaboutmoney is a "useful information" site. Anything which detracts from that will be deleted or edited.

I much prefer reading and replying to useful threads about financial topics. Neither I nor any of the other moderators enjoy editing or deleting threads or discussing why we do it. To me, I have wasted about an hour on this G String thread. I could have been much more usefully employed answering some other financial question.

There is no issue of "free speech" here. We have no monopoly on the web. There are hundreds, maybe thousands of sites who thrive on blather. Askaboutmoney though, is not the forum for it.

Brendan
 
Re: Offended

One particular point made by tobo:
... I perceive to be an increasing amount of intolerance to contributors and their opinions, shown by the 'clique' who run/manage/control/moderate the AAM site.
Click to expand...

Most contributors recognize what AAM is about and post their blather elsewhere. If there is an occasional blather post, we leave it and hope it stops. But unfortunately, blather is often contagious. So the "intolerance" rises and falls in line with the rubbish posted.

I can think of no example in the 5 years of AAM where any opinion was edited or deleted. We only delete the way things are said, not what is said.

Intolerance of contributors? If a particular contributor's posts have to be edited a few times, we then spend less time being nice to that contributor and hit the delete button more easily. Or put it another way, if a long established valuable contributor, says something out of order, we ask them to edit it themselves, and in the very few cases this has happened, they have done so and recognized in hindsight that the post was inappropriate.

Just to put it in perspective, two of my posts were edited by my fellow moderators and correctly so. Other moderators have been asked to edit their posts as well.

Brendan
 
It's Brendan's decision guys

Guys,

You're all getting your kickers in a twist over nothing in my opinion.
I'm not that bothered that my post was deleted. What's the big deal? It was humour...nothing else. It gave some people a laugh and something to talk about. I still find it peculiar that some people were offended by something as harmless as what I posted. However, they were (perhaps?) so I understand the decision. I have a pretty good idea who the regular contributor was who found my post offensive, or "rubbish".

I did also lay out my views on the site for Ham Lover in that post, where I stated that amongst other more serious reasons AAM can be a good place for a little humour (and I DON'T think it needs to go in the craic all the time either). However, I'm not a moderator so I don't make that decision.

For what it's worth and to put this debate to an end (hopefully) I respect Brendan's decision. It's his site and he makes the call on what content goes in it. I might not necessarily agree with him, and I'm sure others wouldn't either, but I respect his decision.

AAM is first and foremost a financial help website. That's what I personally use it for most of the time. Secondly I use it to debate certain topics of interest to me. Thirdly I use it for some light relief during the day. Friday being friday I thought I'd post something mildly humourous. Anyway, I'm going on about it.

AAM continues to be a superbly run website (second to none in fact). Respect Brendan's decision guys. I will. I don't always agree with all of the moderators but Brendan asked them to do a job. We don't always get on well with our work colleagues either, do we?

I have to go now as it's saturday and I believe there's something called 'The Outdoors' which I haven't seen much of all week.
 
(AAM) not a democracy

Morale will continue until the beatings improve.
 
right on

Respect Brendan's decision guys. I will.
Click to expand...

Yeah, come on guys. If the founder of AAM has made a decision that Piggles respects, that should be good enough for the rest of us.
 
Tobo - just so that you can't say your questions weren't answered, here are my views.

a) such posts can be moved to non-public forums. To the public they are removed, to the moderators they are moved.
b.1) "we" is the community that is AAM, and this includes all posters including you. If anyone feels that they are not proud of the general tone of AAM then perhaps they are not part of the community.
b.2) it is logical to assume that people that return and make many hundreds and thousands of contributions to a voluntary community are proud of it. Maybe not all members of the community are proud of it all the time, but if these people were in the majority there would be no community - there would be factions.
c) the moderators make the decisions, the criteria are as set out in the posting guidelines and as expanded upon above.
d) Brendan moved the post, as explained above.
e) Free speech still exists. You are entitled to your opinion and AAM is entitled to its posting guidelines. If the several thousand contributors to AAM arrive in your living room I am sure they will abide by your house rules. While you are in the AAM community it is only fair that you reciprocate.
f) I think you will find that the credibility of this site is founded on the contributions of the posters. There are two ways that the site can lose credibility - one is if many posters start to consistently post misleading or inaccurate information so that Joe Public sees no value in asking a question or researching a topic. The other way it can lose credibility is if too much time is spent debating why non-financial topics are moderated and not enough time is spent providing usefull financial information.

I trust this addresses your concerns.

I believe you are getting the debate you asked for, and you have not been censored or moderated as far as I know. Piggy, the originator of one of the posts you are concerned about has accepted that sometimes posts may need to be moderated.

To paraphrase some of the posts above - the moderators are here to moderate. They begin with goodwill towards all in equal measure, but as certain contributors display an unwillingness to comply with the guidelines the goodwill (towards them specifically) depletes. Repeated offences simply result in deletion. Moderators are busy moderating the core content of this site.

The more that the moderators (and other posters as above) have to explain basic concepts of moderation and how to deal with the fact that what is not offensive to some may be offensive to others, the less time they spend doing valuable work.

You most recent post indicates that you have benefited from content on this site and you feel you have benefited others by your contributions. This is a good thing. You have raised your issue and got your debate. Hopefully you will accept the explanations given in this regard.

If you do not accept the explanations then it is as simple as has been outlined above - AAM is not a democracy. If you feel that you cannot abide by the wanton moderation you may be faced with the only option of leaving the community to remove yourself from exposure to such moderation. We do not want to see any contributor leave, but if they feel that the atmosphere is too oppressive then I guess there is only one way for them to go.

z
 
Re: blather

Minor quibble on one point, Zag.

Moderators are busy moderating the core content of this site.
Click to expand...

Moderators are busy with their day jobs and the rest of their lives. There should be no imposition of effort on the mods by posting in a manner that inevitably leads to moderation work. Again, if a guest arrives in your house, you welcome them in, but you expect that they don't leave the loo in a mess EVERY morning. You expect them to look after themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register