Censorship here?

[Fred259]

[QUOTE=Chicodoodoo;219000][QUOTE=Paul;218978][QUOTE]

I believe you've missed the point, Paul. The point is not to compare countries with forums. The point is to look at the basis of the "Love it or leave it" argument. It is fundamentally a form of censorship. It is essentially saying, "You either agree with us, or we don't want to hear you."

Ha…Chico bang on...

I was censored today for no apparent reason. Restricted in the threads where I can post that is.

Paul obviously doesn’t like Scottish people so tough you get restricted. Oh sorry Greybeard its not Scottish people sorry it’s just me…

When I PM'd Paul asking why?

This was the response….

Yes, I am "deciding what members can post and where." That is one of the ways available to me to maintain the health of the forum, as understood by Bill and his team of admins and moderators, including myself.

Still waiting for a response. So Paul you and I join the forum a week apart, you have the option to dictate who post where, thus controlling the agenda of the forum. I don’t see any mention of this in the forum guidelines, so I assume it’s just made up as you go along. Like I say Scottish People today. It must have been folks from Colorado last week.

So its not really a forum…more a cosy boys club…well that’s what Bilderberg is isn’t it. Us and them.

I agree, I see Chico’s point…

Poor old Chico posts “ the mods are watching my every word”… What use is that….

[NancyV]

Posted by dan i el (here)

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
The concept of a moderated forum is to moderate the expletives, the flame wars, the ad hominem attacks, the trolling, the thread hijackers too lacking in focus or with a purposeful agenda to destroy a thread, the mean-spirited voices that seem to get excited pleasure from creating a big stir.

<snip>

Life's too short to wade through the crap that some people can spew.

This statement would appear to be wholly counter-intuitive to accepting the role of being a moderator; that is exactly what they are tasked to do, traditionally..

I'm pretty sure he means that people who spew excessive crap are usually asked to leave instead of the moderators having to continue dealing with the repercussions of that crap. After being a moderator online for 10 years I can say that a forum is much better off getting rid of the members who like being excessively vitriolic, provocative, argumentative and nasty. Of course that is just in my opinion, but it is also the opinion of the majority of members in most cases.

There are plenty of forums which allow ad hominem attacks and have little to no moderation. This forum is not one of those types of forums. If someone enjoys that style of interacting it's pretty easy to find those forums.

[Aurelius]

The issues Chicodoodoo refers to on Avalon are a microcosm of the worlds issues we often discuss here (politicians, corporations, agenda's etc.). It's far from perfect.

I agree "moderation" is key, that's what is preventing Avalon from becoming like ats, glp etc. but this doesn't mean we have the best solution in place. we need to keep challenging ourselves to improve and do things in better ways. ego is part of the problem. we collectively must pave the way for the new world.

moderation, in time to come, will probably remove / filter out important character types that are needed here (this is beyond the ones we would be happy to see walk out the door).

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
When I was a child, there was a story that was told, and I'm not sure how popular it was in other countries, so I'll supply a Wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henny_Penny

Chicken Little (sometime referred to as "Henny Penny", in some versions), was walking along one day, and an acorn fell on her head. She had no idea that she had just encountered an acorn, all she knew is that
<snip>

Dennis

[qbeac]

If I have understood it correctly (please, correct me if I am wrong), this is the post where Chicodoodoo was censored (his text was erased) on Avalon:

Post #58, pag. 3
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...l=1#post212929

And this is Paul’s explanation:

[ Mod-edit: I removed the last paragraph of Chicodoodoo's response. It impugned the motives of not one, but three Avalonians, with some colorful examples to boot. Yes, I see Chicodoodoo's request above that such examples be discussed openly. No -- such will be deleted from this forum. Chicodoodoo is enjoying a one week vacation from this good forum. - Paul. ]

My question to Paul is:

What did Chicodoodoo say?

I’d like to know it so that I can judge by myself and make my own mind of whether Chicodoodoo deserved or not to be temporarily banned.

In the meantime, if the “checks and balances” system in this forum was already working (but it is not yet), I would clic on the “thank you” button for Paul because I appreciate that he acted as a moderator, but I would also clic on the “I don’t agree” button for Paul, because he erased something without giving me (us) the opportunity of seeing what it was, so that we could make up our own minds about it.

-------------------------------

With regards to this paragraph by Paul (see previous page):

That you (Chicodoodoo) would overlook this major and obvious difference between nations and web forums (and that you would title this thread "Censorship") suggests to me that you are more interested in complaining than in understanding.

Paul, what you label as a “complaint” by Chicodoodoo, I label it as a very good idea, as I explained in my previous post, because what Chicodoodoo is saying with this whole thread is:

Let’s have a “checks and balances” system

…. and that, to me, is such a great idea and such a reasonable proposition.

But let’s supposed for a minute it was a complaint. So? What’s the problem with that? Don’t we have “freedom of expression” even to complain about things we want to complain about?

Freedom of expression
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_speech

Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak freely without censorship.

The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes used to indicate not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used.

In my opinion, Paul’s interventions (erasing text, etc.) are good reasons to introduce as soon as possible the “checks and balances” system that Chicodoodoo has suggested, just in case.

Moderators also need to be moderated, just as the power of the executive, legislative and judicial branches needs to be checked and balanced.

Checks and balances
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3A...ks_vs_balances

checks and balences are just so each house can make sure not just one has too much power.

Separation of powers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_powers

Separation of powers….. Under this model, the state is divided into branches, each with separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility so that no one branch has more power than the other branches.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Seikou-Kishi (here)

Posted by Chicodoodoo (here)
It is essentially saying, "You either agree with us, or we don't want to hear you."

I can't help but agree with Chicodoodoo here; the logic of his reduction is unpalatable but, I think, undeniable.

The need to provide an open forum for a variety of views must be balanced with the need for people with shared values and interests to freely associate.

Insisting that any group allow all views to be expressed leads to many towers of Babel.

It is healthier to have a variety of groups, communities, organizations, and other associations of people with various specialized interests and viewpoints. It is good that, for example, the local Catholic church that my sister attends is not compelled to hear my rather more atheist views, or that the local Dallas Cowboys fan club is not compelled to hear my praise of San Francisco Forty-Niner quarterback Joe Montana.

It's not agree with us or we don't want to hear you. It's contribute to the common interests, purposes and (varied) viewpoints of a group, or contribute to some other group(s) instead.

Posted by NancyV (here)
There are plenty of forums which allow ad hominem attacks and have little to no moderation. This forum is not one of those types of forums. If someone enjoys that style of interacting it's pretty easy to find those forums.

Exactly .

[SKAWF]

why i'm walking this path again i dont know, but here i am.

i was once 'holidayed' for 2 weeks it was a long time ago, and in a galaxy far far away,
the reason was because i 'insulted' another member.
as it happens, i didnt insult anyone.
i made an observation about someones reaction to another members post.
my memory is like video. i remember quite a lot of what i say. word for word.

so when i saw that my post had been removed, and that i'd been suspended
for insulting another member i was shocked, for about ten seconds.
it wasnt only that the post was removed,
it was the mod edit that said id insulted someone. i hadnt.
but its ok to write those things about me, even though they are untrue

i would say to Chico though......
he who wins the war writes history.
he who loses has no say.

steve

[Seikou-Kishi]

I think we're all agreed that ad hominem attacks shouldn't be allowed.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Fred259 (here)
When I PM'd Paul asking why?

This was the response….

You should be aware, Fred259, that quoting the contents of a PM to others or on the forum, without the senders permission, is against the Guidelines (see link right below.)

[Fred259]

[QUOTE]

Posted by SKAWF (here)
why i'm walking this path again i dont know, but here i am.

i was once 'holidayed' for 2 weeks it was a long time ago, and in a galaxy far far away,
the reason was because i 'insulted' another member.
as it happens, i didnt insult anyone.i made an observation about someones reaction to another members post.
my memory is like video. i remember quite a lot of what i say. word for word.

so when i saw that my post had been removed, and that i'd been suspended
for insulting another member i was shocked, for about ten seconds.
it wasnt only that the post was removed,
it was the mod edit that said id insulted someone. i hadnt.
but its ok to write those things about me, even though they are untrue

i would say to Chico though......
he who wins the war writes history.
he who loses has no say.

steve

This is precisely Chico’s point Checks & Balances…

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Fred259 (here)
When I PM'd Paul asking why?

This was the response….

You should be aware, Fred259, that quoting the contents of a PM to others or on the forum, without the senders permission, is against the Guidelines (see link right below.)

Id quite like a reply actually as to precisely what I have done wrong.. I have replied to you after all.

[Chicodoodoo]

Posted by Darla Ken Jensen Pearce (here)
This is where your anger over perceived censorship issues is coming from not Avalon!

I have to disagree.

My first message sent after joining in January was to Bill Ryan. I had been following a thread on the forum when I witnessed an Avalon member (plumr2007) be banned in real time suddenly and without any real justification by Bill Ryan himself. I was shocked, because I was under the impression that truth would never be censored on Avalon. Bill is one of my heroes, and I was having real trouble processing what I had just witnessed. I wrote Bill saying that there had surely been a misunderstanding, and I also asked for leniency for this banned person that I didn't even know. Bill wrote back, thanking me for my integrity and saying he appreciated the message, but he basically reserved the right to ban anyone at any time.

Since then, I have witnessed more unjustified bannings. My integrity requires me to speak out against this censorship. My love of Avalon requires me to work towards a solution to this problem, even in the face of criticism and ridicule.

Forgive me, but I know what I'm doing and why I'm doing it. I have our best interests in mind.

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Fred259 (here)
Id quite like a reply actually as to ...

Right now, the two of us are in disagreement over a key issue. You think I have not spoken, and I think you have not listened.

This thread is not the right venue, nor a healthy venue, for making progress on that issue.

Enough of that complaint here.

[qbeac]

Posted by Paul (here)
The need to provide an open forum for a variety of views must be balanced with the need for people with shared values and interests to freely associate.…..

Paul, that statement of yours sounds like the statement one would hear in a religious forum:

“If you don’t believe in what we believe, we’ll show you the door, because we don’t debate nor discuss different believes from our own in this forum.”

I have participated in several religious forums for several reasons: to learn, to ask questions, to do research, etc., and, in my opinion, and in my own practical experience, many religious forums are the places where the least amount of freedom of expression exists.

Many religions forums simply do not allow dissension, and they are very strict at it.

However, many of us came to this forum (Avalon) precisely because we do not agree with the society that TPTB have constructed for us, in which censorship and the crushing of dissension is the way things work.

So, I would really appreciate if you could clarify what “shared values and interests” you are referring to? Mine, yours, his….? Whose? Is there a common denominator among all the people who are here, other than we all are or want to be truth seekers?

I don’t know about you all, but that’s my main interest: truth seeking!

And censorship, crushing dissent, or the like, has no place in a truth seeking spirit.

[Dennis Leahy]

Posted by Seikou-Kishi (here)
I think we're all agreed that ad hominem attacks shouldn't be allowed.

But there is more than ad hominem attacks that are not allowed. The Membership Guidelines spell most of it out. The opposite (and positive reinforcement side of that) is that Bill has asked every member to do their part to make Avalon a respectful community. See the Welcome to Avalon post by Bill: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...ll=1#post61959

So, rather on focusing on what we cannot do, (and some folks just act like children and have to tap a toe just over the line to see what - if anything - will happen), it would be really cool if everyone focused on what we all should do for one another and the Avalon community.

Dennis

[Flash]

Hi Chicodoodoo, I am glad you are back. Your posts, even those I did not agree with, provoked in me quite a lot a thinking. I understand your point of view in terms of circular moderating. Would it be feasible and how, I am not sure. But even thining about it could be ways of moderating that would be easier on the moderators, even if not circular at the end.

One thing is sure though, is that you have been trying to put people together i order to do something as a whole, as a community, for the good of humanity, for a while on this forum. And I thank you for this, it takes quite a lots of energy.

However, I have been a bit paranoidly burned with the outstanding Lors Sidious, and his really great thread. I intervened not knowing of him being of the the Atticus' 18 now 17. I saw some of the things he saw, but i just hope I was not unwillingly part of a program set up with targets that I am not aware of - since we still do not know that the objectives of the 17 are or Atticus' objectives neither.

My question therefore is: Are you one of the remainining 17?

[ThePythonicCow]

Posted by Darla Ken Jensen Pearce (here)
I am so laid back the house could burn down and I'd hardly notice, I'd just leave quietly with my kittens and laptop.

Sometimes I cannot make head nor tail of your posts, Darla. You are indeed quite different than I. But I just had to say I liked that line. Thanks.

[andywight]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)
Chicodoodoo, you can shriek "The Censorship Is Here! The Censorship Is Here!" as many times as you want, and it still won't be true. You can find a dozen more people to join in the chorus, "The Censorship Is Here! The Censorship Is Here!", and it still won't be true.

Dennis,

Why don't we have a poll about members thoughts on whether censorship has become a problem here? so we can finally put this matter to rest.

Andy

[Seikou-Kishi]

Posted by Dennis Leahy (here)

Posted by Seikou-Kishi (here)
I think we're all agreed that ad hominem attacks shouldn't be allowed.

But there is more than ad hominem attacks that are not allowed. The Membership Guidelines spell most of it out. The opposite (and positive reinforcement side of that) is that Bill has asked every member to do their part to make Avalon a respectful community. See the Welcome to Avalon post by Bill: https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...ll=1#post61959

So, rather on focusing on what we cannot do, (and some folks just act like children and have to tap a toe just over the line to see what - if anything - will happen), it would be really cool if everyone focused on what we all should do for one another and the Avalon community.

Dennis

Oh no I'm fully aware of that Dennis, all I meant was that since we all agree that ad hominem attacks aren't to be tolerated, we can remove that section of the argument... I guess I'm just trying to contain a fire before it burns the whole place down lol

[Fred259]

[QUOTE]

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Fred259 (here)
Id quite like a reply actually as to ...

Right now, the two of us are in disagreement over a key issue. You think I have not spoken, and I think you have not listened.

This thread is not the right venue, nor a healthy venue, for making progress on that issue.

Enough of that complaint here.

I agree and respect that, however Chico is talking about checks and balances. That’s my point and his. Why is it you have complete power just to ban or restrict a member for any reason.?

Members who haven’t abused the guidelines like me for example shouldn’t be restricted from where they can post…. Chico’s point on Censorship…

#46 SKAWF… more of the same it would seem….what did he do wrong.. nothing it would seem yet he gets a naughty boy letter…

Where are the checks and balances Paul?

[Carmody]

[QUOTE=Fred259;219041]

Posted by SKAWF (here)
why i'm walking this path again i dont know, but here i am.

i was once 'holidayed' for 2 weeks it was a long time ago, and in a galaxy far far away,
the reason was because i 'insulted' another member.
as it happens, i didnt insult anyone.i made an observation about someones reaction to another members post.
my memory is like video. i remember quite a lot of what i say. word for word.

so when i saw that my post had been removed, and that i'd been suspended
for insulting another member i was shocked, for about ten seconds.
it wasnt only that the post was removed,
it was the mod edit that said id insulted someone. i hadnt.
but its ok to write those things about me, even though they are untrue

i would say to Chico though......
he who wins the war writes history.
he who loses has no say.

steve

This is precisely Chico’s point Checks & Balances…

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Posted by Paul (here)

Posted by Fred259 (here)
When I PM'd Paul asking why?

This was the response….

You should be aware, Fred259, that quoting the contents of a PM to others or on the forum, without the senders permission, is against the Guidelines (see link right below.)

Id quite like a reply actually as to precisely what I have done wrong.. I have replied to you after all.

To those who are asking for more paperwork, meetings, and democracy.

~~~~~~~
And beyond a certain point, it bears no relevance to the function and the day to day operations and success of the forum as an enterprise where people communicate.

It becomes deconstructive, at the very least.

And, IMO, this is becoming distracting and deconstructive. Argumentative, at the minimum.

Ie, from my observation.. your vision is not my vision nor is it the vision of the majority of members.

You seem to be barking at a tree that has nothing in it. Heck, I don't think the tree is even there.

Democracy, as an execution of an idea does indeed require checks and balances, lest the administrative and relative aspects take precedence over the idea of it's function.

What I see here is a few people that seem to think that administration needs to be bigger than the organism it is in existence for.

This is patently insane.

The other part is that you seem to have a conflict of personality and expression type. That... is inevitable.

It will always happen with a few people.

On this forum, well, it is not feasible to build some grand aspect or structure that services your needs in that respect.

I've been banned form a forum for that very reason: A Personality conflict, my posting style and content of posts... compared to that of other members.

It was simply expedient (and correct for the overall membership)...to not have my type and style on that forum. I was deconstructive to the specifc forum's overall working direction and ambitions. I was unwanted sand in their gears. I was more of a headache than I was worth.

Only this one time I was ever banned.... and it smarted. I was right!

But not for that forum.

Simple enough.

Usually it comes down to an expression characteristic and/or given personal style of human relations.

Claims to censorship bear no relevance here, IMO. one must conduct themselves according to the forum members' overall character, in at least some ways.

Meaning, if the forum's mods find themselves cleaning up a given member's messes fairly often, then it becomes a clear cut case of excising the issue.

After that.... running around wanking loudly about injustices is just blind posturing in my book. I know that my posts seem a bit harsh, but they are meant to be. In order to hopefully get the point across.

I'd swear that some of you have never been in (or near) a management position before and don't really understand the limitations of management and how it NEEDS to go about things in order to keep a system or organization intact and working. That type of system has limits, and they are soft limits, variable limits, limits that move with the situation at hand. They have to be in order to accommodate the variables.

However, IMO, this continual stressing in the one direction is exceeding those sorts of limits.

IMO, your demands are harming the forum and it's day to day operation.

[SKAWF]

__________, once again you've taken a criticism of something you said,
and you've turned it into an attack on someone else.
you did the same thing to me earlier on.

if i can see it, so can others

steve

(that got me banned for a 2 stretch)
there was a little bit more, it refered to the original post, and the poster.

i said i have a very good memory.