Amiga.org
Amiga.org specific forums => Amiga.org Discussion and Site Feedback => Topic started by: Franko on September 02, 2010, 08:49:09 AM
-
It will have been noticed that Argo has decided to shutdown the interesting and sometimes highly amusing Amiga vs PC thread.
Now I dunno about you, but to me that's censorship and while part of a moderators job is to moderate the forums & topics to make sure things don't get out of hand, with regard to use of bad language or insults being made towards individuals. I don't agree that he should have the power to bring to end the subject on which some 360 opinions were expressed and had been viewed over 11 thousand times. (were all these folk wrong and you were the only one right Argo ?)
It's like if you held a rally in a public place and some folk didn't agree with what you were saying or were shouting louder than you and not even about the same subject on which you were speaking, would you stop the rally and storm off in a huff or would you have the courage of your convictions to carry on. I know what I would do.
I know you said "This derailed off-topic some time ago, around 15 pages back it look and going nowhere...." but is this really a good enough reason to stop folk expressing their views.
There are many threads here that have gone "off-topic" far sooner but I don't see them being locked, why...
My point is this, is it right for one person to have the power of censorship over many or has freedom of speech been dealt another blow here. It may have helped if you had given a bit more detailed and reasonable explanation for the action you have taken.
I probably won't get an answer to this or will be censored myself, but sorry, I really can't stand it when someone abuses the power of censorship.
-
The time this thread will disappear... 3....2....1....
"Attacking" a moderator ain't the smartest move.
-
My point is this, is it right for one person to have the power of censorship over many or has freedom of speech been dealt another blow here.
Freedom of speech has nothing to do with it. You're always free to express your opinion, but nobody has the obligation to provide you with a medium for it.
-
It's not censorship, noone was censored, the thread was just locked as it had drifted. Nothing wrong about that. To scream "censorship!" about this is rather sad, and almost an insult against those who really live with censorship every day.
-
I'm not attacking anyone, I just feel very strongly about all forms of censorship, wether it be in the hands of an individual, a group, an organization or the worst of all a government.
I have spent many years in the past fighting for the rights for freedom of speech and campaigning against censorship and yes It has got me into trouble in the past, but it will never stop me expressing my views & opinions no matter what the cost is to myself.
Here however I am merely hoping for a bit more detailed explanation from Argo about why he chose to take this action, nothing more, and it certainly wasn't meant as a personal attack on him.
I know that Argo does not owe me an explanation nor do I have any right to expect one, but if we are all wishing to express and exchange our points of view on things, then it would be a very sad day indeed if we couldn't at least do so without being censored on them.
Merely hoping that Argo is willing to respond and we can either agree or disagree on the subject.
@kolla, like it or not, if something is locked from public debate then that my friend is censorship in the true meaning of the word...
-
Freedom of speech has nothing to do with it. You're always free to express your opinion, but nobody has the obligation to provide you with a medium for it.
When you have paid for membership as I have done, then that does indeed give me some form of right here, to express my opinions in this medium...
-
When you have paid for membership as I have done, then that does indeed give me some form of right here, to express my opinions in this medium...
Yes, you always have the right to express you opinion, but you don't own this particular medium and must still follow it's rules. Just because I've paid an entrance-fee to a bar doesn't mean I don't need to follow the rules of said bar, and if I break the rules the staff can ask me to stop or throw me out. Locking a thread is the staff asking people to stop, and if they still continue (in another thread) they can very well ban (throw out) the offender.
-
Yes, you always have the right to express you opinion, but you don't own this particular medium and must still follow it's rules. Just because I've paid an entrance-fee to a bar doesn't mean I don't need to follow the rules of said bar, and if I break the rules the staff can ask me to stop or throw me out. Locking a thread is the staff asking people to stop, and if they still continue (in another thread) they can very well ban (throw out) the offender.
I don't claim to own this particular medium, If you had read what I said correctly you would understand that I am merely expressing what I feel about this matter and hoping, not demanding, that Argo would be quite simply willing to explain with a bit more detail why he chose to take this action.
-
I don't claim to own this particular medium, If you had read what I said correctly you would understand that I am merely expressing what I feel about this matter and hoping, not demanding, that Argo would be quite simply willing to explain with a bit more detail why he chose to take this action.
Fair enough, although he already mentioned the reason to closing the thread. No need to throw around accusations of censorship or how this would be limiting freedom of speech. Censorship in this case would be removing the whole thread, but everything is still free for all to read.
-
It will have been noticed that Argo has decided to shutdown the interesting and sometimes highly amusing Amiga vs PC thread.
Now I dunno about you, but to me that's censorship and while part of a moderators job is to moderate the forums & topics to make sure things don't get out of hand, with regard to use of bad language or insults being made towards individuals. I don't agree that he should have the power to bring to end the subject on which some 360 opinions were expressed and had been viewed over 11 thousand times. (were all these folk wrong and you were the only one right Argo ?)
It's like if you held a rally in a public place and some folk didn't agree with what you were saying or were shouting louder than you and not even about the same subject on which you were speaking, would you stop the rally and storm off in a huff or would you have the courage of your convictions to carry on. I know what I would do.
I know you said "This derailed off-topic some time ago, around 15 pages back it look and going nowhere...." but is this really a good enough reason to stop folk expressing their views.
There are many threads here that have gone "off-topic" far sooner but I don't see them being locked, why...
My point is this, is it right for one person to have the power of censorship over many or has freedom of speech been dealt another blow here. It may have helped if you had given a bit more detailed and reasonable explanation for the action you have taken.
I probably won't get an answer to this or will be censored myself, but sorry, I really can't stand it when someone abuses the power of censorship.
Wall of text crits for over 9000!
-
being censored would mean deleted posts or words. Neither of which has happened as far as I can see.
Thread get locked when they stray too far from thee original topic.
If you want to continue the OT discussion start another thread as long as the discussion does not breach TOS or Posting guidlines you will be fine
-
being censored would mean deleted posts or words. Neither of which has happened as far as I can see.
Thread get locked when they stray too far from thee original topic.
If you want to continue the OT discussion start another thread as long as the discussion does not breach TOS or Posting guidlines you will be fine
Given the rarity with which threads are locked I was a little surprised that it was closed.
Especially when you consider some of the threads that have been allowed to continue even recently.
Ahh the joys of having to make decisions on moderation based not on precedent but rather on gut feeling/experience. It's precisely these kinds of threads that make me glad not to have to bother with that crap any more.
-
I think people don't understand the word censorship.
They toss out ideas, such as that freedom of speech doesn't trump private property rights.
Well that isn't actually always true - private property rights in the United States are not always sacrosanct.
The problem here is 'censorship' is such a loaded word, that people dont' usually want to admit they censor. But you do censor. You censor yourself - you don't hall off and let everyone 'have it' if they make you mad, you temper your own responses.
You censor your children, you censor threads.
Yes censorship is not merely removing or deleting someones words but also - inhibiting speech.
Locking a thread to prevent it from going off topic, is censorship.
Now, is it the type of censorship we should object to?
Well the original poster actually laid out some smart argument as to why it might be - the number of people who participated in the thread, read the thread - what little actual harm it was causing.
And few people here have laid out any counter argument, just going off topic with your misunderstandings and musings about free speech issues.
Inhibiting speech will always be a form of censorship. Some forms of censorship will always be allowed.
I think the original poster is correct. Unlock the thread. It's not my site - for those that are confused I'm not claiming a private property right - this is whats called an 'opinion'.
-
@Franko
@kolla, like it or not, if something is locked from public debate then that my friend is censorship in the true meaning of the word...
If you think that is censorship, why would you ever post on AWN?
-
Wall of text crits for over 9000!
You don't even understand the meme's you try to use. Embarassing...
-
Just to give you further 'food for thought' why censorship does not require merely deleting or removing speech - but does include blocking speech -
consider this, the words were never deleted or removed. But because new posts couldn't be added, it never again appeared at the top level of the site - that's inhibiting the ability to find the post. It's 11,000 reads show popularity, but we all know this thread has been killed. Without the ability to float back to the top level page and become a 'recent' it's going to die.
What if instead of deleting or removing any post, it was simply removed from amiga.org entirely and nobody could find it at all - or see it again.
The mere fact that it exists on a hard drive somewhere, means its not censored?
Imagine a government agency, said you can't talk about politics unless you pay a $100,000 fee. Is the fact that talking about politics is legal and allowed - mean no censorship occurred or did the fee have a chilling effect on speech?
Of course, it should be plain and obvious that locking a thread is censorship - the proper course of action is to defend the censorship.
The real counter argument is that by censoring the site, the overall quality of the site improves. (which is absolutely true - by deleting spam, by not allowing porn, by prohibiting discussion of illegal activity - the site is a higher quality site).
So did censoring this off-topic and tedious thread improve the site - that's the counter argument, if you ask me.
Denying the censorship, that is just either intellectual dishonesty, or just some kind of quick response that wasn't well thought out.
-
You don't even understand the meme's you try to use. Embarassing...
On the contrary - clearly you didn't understand the meme. It's okay, I'm sure most of a.org probably doesn't play WoW.
-
Two famous but very opposing views of the term censorship...
"All censorships exist to prevent any one from challenging current conceptions and existing institutions. All progress is initiated by challenging current conceptions, and executed by supplanting existing institutions. Consequently the first condition of progress is the removal of censorships."
-- George Bernard Shaw
"Vietnam was the first war ever fought without any censorship. Without censorship, things can get terribly confused in the public mind."
-- William C. Westmoreland, General and U.S. military commander
The folk who have stated their opinions that just because you can still read the thread therefore it is not censorship are totally wrong, if the individual is not given the opportunity to respond then that is indeed censorship.
My own view and taking into account that I am medically diagnosed as being Schizophrenic.
"Censorship is something I have to battle on a daily basis, two minds in one body with very opposing views, on which I have try and censor myself, not through choice but through necessity" -- Franko
Its not an easy thing to admit to but perhaps it may help folk to understand why I try to write with a touch of humor in my posts but don't always succeed. I guess today was just one of my bad days...
[youtube]ZE2t6HWmquc[/youtube]
Perhaps I'll be back on form tommorow, unless of course I get barred/censored...
-
Denying the censorship, that is just either intellectual dishonesty, or just some kind of quick response that wasn't well thought out.
Ugh.... Censorship this, censorship that... It's absurd to cry about the censorship on Amiga.org or most any web forum. It's not a public forum. The Amiga.org staff doesn't "owe" anyone the ability to post or respond in any way. Amiga.org is a moderated forum. It makes this fact very clear.
To take an example from the United States. If you're a US citizen, you have the right to peacably assemble and discuss or protest. You DON'T have the right to do it on my lawn, if I don't want you to. Why? Because it's my private property.
So, no, Amiga.org is not censored. Amiga.org is moderated. I don't think anyone is trying to hide this fact.
So did the moderation of this off-topic and tedious thread improve the site - that's the counter argument, if you ask me.
Fixed that for you.
BTW, I'd argue the answer was yes, as the moderation of this thread would also improve the site.
Edit to add:
As I reread my reply, I see my tone wasn't exactly as I meant it.
MarkTime, I largely agree with your post, with just the one glaring mistake. Amiga.org is not a public forum. Amiga.org isn't censoring anything or anyone -- they're maintaining their forum. If you don't like Amiga.org's moderation, you're free to go elsewhere and set up a forum as you see fit. If Amiga.org was somehow preventing you from doing that (paying off corrupt ISPs or governments to disconnect you?)... THAT would be censorship.
-
That thread had become a load of useless crap and was just a waste of bandwidth (IMHO). I am glad it was locked.
-
I'm not attacking anyone
Hello??? I see you have a logic problem...
Issues with the site or staff? PM or we have a contact form.
The topic I closed, it went off track in to PC land abit after page 10 and it was 25 pages long! Not just PC Land but had devolved into arguing about Windows 3.1 and 98SE for God's sake in at topic labled Amiga Vs PC in the Amiga General Chat forum of all places. It no longer belonged there and had gone on too long. Not to mention the various insult pandered back and forth.
By all means, feel free to start up your discussion of the amazing virtues of Windows 3.1 to Windows 98SE and the amazingness of IE 3 and 4 in the appropriate forum.
-
Given the rarity with which threads are locked I was a little surprised that it was closed.
Especially when you consider some of the threads that have been allowed to continue even recently.
Ahh the joys of having to make decisions on moderation based not on precedent but rather on gut feeling/experience. It's precisely these kinds of threads that make me glad not to have to bother with that crap any more.
or the fact I am just one person and do not have the massive amount of time to read all posts to this site. What the other moderators choose to do is their decision. We have rules. Read them please.
-
P.S. I moved the topic to the appropriate subform. Hope that is Aokay! :)
-
@kolla, like it or not, if something is locked from public debate then that my friend is censorship in the true meaning of the word...
I disagree, censorship would be deleting the thread so that it couldn't even be read any more.
Personally, I wouldn't have bothered locking it as it it keeps the people that want to argue about such trivial things all in one place. However, that thread has generated a number of reported posts. Argo was well within his remit to close it.
-
I agree with locking the thread. Moderation is much different than censorship. I censored myself on that thread, I posted something then realized how rediculous the thread had become so I blanked my post.
We can argue stuff up, down, and sideways; but when we get back to win3.1 I'm definitely out.
-
Help, help, I'm being repressed!
..oh wait, never mind.
-
...
Perhaps I'll be back on form tommorow, unless of course I get barred/censored...
I've always liked your posts Franko I hope you aren't going anywhere :)
-
When you have paid for membership as I have done, then that does indeed give me some form of right here, to express my opinions in this medium...
"I bought this sandwich, I can scream 'fuck' in your restaurant if I wanna!"
Well, no, actually you can't, either.
-
I agree with locking the thread. Moderation is much different than censorship. I censored myself on that thread, I posted something then realized how rediculous the thread had become so I blanked my post.
We can argue stuff up, down, and sideways; but when we get back to win3.1 I'm definitely out.
What a pity; I set up a DOSBox VM running 3.11 and Photoshop 3 to show Amigaski. :]
-
We can argue stuff up, down, and sideways; but when we get back to win3.1 I'm definitely out.
Actually, I though I'd nip it in the bud before they got to arguing between MSDOS Vs Dr. DOS, cause then there would have to be someone that would just post on and on about the awesomeness that is QDOS! But we know better, CP/M RULEZ!!!
-
Right, first things first... had me happy pills... in a much better mood now... :)
@Argo, thank you for the explanation, I know you didn't have to but it's much appreciated and I have to say I agree with the points you made and hope I didn't offend or upset you... :biglaugh:
Now I could start ranting and raving again, but I'm in too good a mood and can't be arsed getting involved in any more crap about censorship... :)
So I think I'll step out of this whole debate that the other me started and have a look around for something just plain daft to comment on... :)
Cheers :drink:
Franko (the happy one !!!) :)
-
Have some haggis and wash it down with The Macallan!
-
"I bought this sandwich, I can scream 'fuck' in your restaurant if I wanna!"
Well, no, actually you can't, either.
Egg and cress? I wanted Tuna!
(http://www.getfrank.co.nz/assets/Uploads/_resampled/SetWidth171-cover10.jpg)
-
Right, first things first... had me happy pills... in a much better mood now... :)
@Argo, thank you for the explanation, I know you didn't have to but it's much appreciated and I have to say I agree with the points you made and hope I didn't offend or upset you... :biglaugh:
Now I could start ranting and raving again, but I'm in too good a mood and can't be arsed getting involved in any more crap about censorship... :)
So I think I'll step out of this whole debate that the other me started and have a look around for something just plain daft to comment on... :)
Cheers :drink:
Franko (the happy one !!!) :)
Good, may we lock this thread? :hammer:
-
Egg and cress? I wanted Tuna!
(http://www.getfrank.co.nz/assets/Uploads/_resampled/SetWidth171-cover10.jpg)
Okay, who are you on space_ghetto ?
:D
-
Good, may we lock this thread? :hammer:
Gad, censorship on the censorship thread! Will it ever end?
-
******* ***** ** *****, **** ** ****?
****!
:)
-
Actually, I though I'd nip it in the bud before they got to arguing between MSDOS Vs Dr. DOS, cause then there would have to be someone that would just post on and on about the awesomeness that is QDOS! But we know better, CP/M RULEZ!!!
z80's were very cool cpu's almost as cool as 68000's
-
z80's were very cool cpu's almost as cool as 68000's
Nah! Z80s and 6502s were one shots by renegade engineers who thought they could take the ball and run with it. They were cheap though, which is just one of the reasons I'm still pissed off by Apples pricing on their computers.
Hey! You do realize that we're SO far off topic that we'll probably get this thread shut down too.
-
nah! Z80s and 6502s were one shots by renegade engineers who thought they could take the ball and run with it. They were cheap though, which is just one of the reasons i'm still pissed off by apples pricing on their computers.
Hey! You do realize that we're so far off topic that we'll probably get this thread shut down too.
hulk angry
-
hulk angry
Quickly - Didn't say they weren't cool products, Red.
But they didn't go anywhere. Well that's not exactly what I mean, hell they were in EVERYTHING.
But they didn't lead to next generation processors (unless you count the 6502 derived processors in the C65 or AppleIIGS).
Being a controller geek, I miss the 6811.
Damn, that still off topic.
OK, hmm, censorship? OK, Frank Zappa testifying against music industry censorship (my hero)!
-
Yawn... Just woke up , spotted this thread by the other me, what the F$&*k... :huh:
seems to have started off about censorship, now it gone waaay of topic on to food & drink and CPUs... :crazy:
I've got a faulty CPU, it's a B.R.A.I.N. 1 but it was made way back in 1964 and can't seem to find a replacement anywhere, any ideas... :)
On the subject of food, it's brekky time, think I'll have a tortoise an mushroom sarrnie, washed down with a nice cup of melted car tyres and tree trunks... :drink:
censorship... never heard of it... :rolleyes:
PS: why isn't this thread locked yet !!! ;)
-
Each to thier own, but personally I have no qualms with threads that have deteriorated to the kind of garbage that the thread in question was reduced to being closed. What exactly is it that people are wanting to defend ? The right to talk crap and annoy others with semantics and/or innane arguements that people involved with understand both sides but argue anyway just to be "right"? Yes, what a tragic loss that is. People often talk of censorship and peoples right to freedom of speech. What about others rights not to have to deal with those that think of forums as thier own playground for rudeness ? A medium such as this has an obligation (if not that, at least an interest in) to keeping the majority happy, and hopefully the sheer volume of childish behaviour comes from a small minority. In short the needs/wants of the many are more important than the right to free speech..... believe what you want, even talk about it, but not when it's to the detriment of others.
-
Hi fishy_fiz, I agree with the majority of what you say in your post, but then you went and shot yourself in the foot with the statement "In short the needs/wants of the many are more important than the right to free speech.....".
In posting this statement you have just elected to use the ability of free speech but what if the majority had decided that it didn't suit their 'needs/wants', by the virtue of your own statement then you shouldn't have been able to place your post to start with.
If you restrict the ability of even one individual or a minority to use free speech, no matter how much you disagree are insulted or find objectionable what those views are. Then as a society we would be saying that censorship is more important than free speech just because the 'needs/wants of the many' who are either too blind to see, or have chosen to ignore the harm and injustice this would cause to the few is more important.
A simple and perhaps the most obvious example of this would be the abhorrent and crazed views of a certain Adolf Hitler, he used the right of free speech and somehow managed to pursued a whole nation that the 'needs/wants' he expressed were more important and a whole nation blindly followed him.
So by your statement he was right and the right of free speech by others, the minority, in this case the Jews was wrong.
It may be an extreme example but sadly it's part of history and true, and only points out that the right to free speech whether it be an individual or minority far outweighs the 'needs/wants' of the many.
This thread has been a very good example of the right to free speech & censorship, it started of with me using free speech to make a minority viewpoint heard, and resulted in the person at whom I was expressing my viewpoint to ie: Argo, having the decency to respond and not being upset at my viewpoint or using the power he has to censor me. That on behalf of Argo shows the true meaning of how important free speech is in a civilized society.
(can I get back to some nonsense now...) :)
-
PS: why isn't this thread locked yet !!! ;)
I can handle that:hammer: