Amiga.org and Bias

[pixie]

@bhoggett
> This site is continually being accused of applying pro-Genesi censorship,
> which as far as I can tell is not true.

How can you see the other side of the pound if a comment get censored (i.e: deleted)!? Why can't someone decide in their own minds if the comments are off-topic, trolling, some kind of abuse or whatever... why can't them be moderated down like it's done on another sites!?

When MBouma moderate someone elses comment, it was all the shock and horror on ann, because he'd done the only thing a moderator should, moderate it down, the comment was still visible and one could judge if it had the reason to be moderated down or not, more, what was said by the potential troll (or whatever) is still written, so the one who writed it could be viewed as the troll (or whatever) he really was/wasn't, plain and simple!  

How can *I* see others arguments if they get deleted!? Because moderators use their own bias to say so? I rather have my own!

Let everyone have the hability to decide! Damn, where's Seehund when we needed it!? If this doesn't deserve a petition I don't know what will!!  :-D

> I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to see politically
> motivated censorship here, although I do think it is necessary to
> enforce a certain level of civility.

Hitler also thought that way... ;-)

[pixie]

SirLancelotDuLac:
> This is why I believe censorship is not necessarily a bad thing, sometimes
> it takes a moderator to censor things so they won't infringe on other peoples
> rights."

And my right to see the message!? ;-)


Bhoggett:
> I did see HMetal's posts that were moderated, though not whever it was
> that may have got him banned. Certainly the posts that were edited were
> both abusive and personal, and were rightly censored IMHO."

But this can't be a private club where only a few get to see what is written, besides, as SirLancelotDuLac well putted*, what does right really means!?

Let's the people decide... Seehund, can you help me on this!? :-D

*" Wouldn't that be more of a matter of perspective? As who each person see/experience an event and interpets its meaning/significance to  themselves. Thus forming an opinion on the relivant related topics."

[pixie]

@Kronos:

> Modding a comment down just doesn't work with xoops (AFAIK).

I also thought that so, I hope it will change soon...

> And it is also no warranty to stop the thread going OT or down the gutter.

Edited: World just isn't a perfect world you know, you can have the best topic, peoples conform to it and still have the worst discussion because of lacks of arguments and such, and many times discussions do *have* to be OT, sometimes issues are bring, and while OT they are related to some of the content of a given message, extending it further, and while they're OT they're still On...

[pixie]

> Mike Bouma did not moderate comments down on AW.net, because that
> runs Xoops too and there is no option to moderate down.

So... I Couldn't be talking about MBouma moderation on AW now, now could I !? I was talking, as said by SirLancelotDuLac by his moderation on OSNews

> Unless what you mean by "moderate down" is make one last scathing
> comment and then lock the thread, preventing the right of reply.

Which I haven't...

> Personally, I'd rather keep an interesting thread open and edit the offensive
> posts than allow abusers the ability to bring interesting debates to a
> premature end.

Here I would agree if it was the case, but it isn't, but edited is diferent from deletion, it could be like putting automatically I guess &$%$$# on some sweard words 'cause there's always ppl bitchin about it, but this already seem to happen to A M I G A W O R L D . N E T which is no swear world, at least not in any dictionary...

> Frankly, if you want a completely anarchic environment where you can
> read anything - including the abuse - there's always the bunny. Next comes
> ANN, where people feel free to abuse others under the cloak of
> anonymity when they would never dare say the same thing under their own
> names. And then we have this place, which is IMHO the most civilised of
> the "open" forums.

Only that this way it wouldn't, people would always brag about it, but at least they could say: hey, was I trolling because I said x, y or z? Beside, here you are not logging anonimously so...

> Anarchy is fine in small doses, but I wouldn't want to see it everywhere,
> and I do happen to think that comparing my views with Hitler's is going a
> bit far.

I also do think that *you* comparing your view with hitler was being a bit far, what I expressed and even if I'm not an native english user I think I pointed out well to the sentence where you says:

> I don't know about anyone else, but I don't want to see politically
> motivated censorship here, although I do think it is necessary to
> enforce a certain level of civility.

Censorship is censorship wether it is political or otherwise as long as it's... censorship, but of course I wasn't calling you hitler, that never crossed my mind, but in the end I guess that you understand my analogy rather well, besides there was a ;-) in the end...

Let me start a campain about adding moderation down option on xoops instead... Seehund, where are you!!!! :-D

[pixie]

I assume Pixie is talking about the gentlemen who made a huge fuss recently on Mike moderating down comments on OSNews, which DOES allow comments being moderated down. However, I only remember reading that thread on the Bunny and not on ANN.

Yes, unfortunatly I was mistaken