Are OCUK Forums in decline?

Freefaller · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:15

Aedus said:
That's what the problem is, it should be actionable because anyone everyone here knows exactly what he means.

I showed my girlfriend his posts, and her opinion of him is that "He's a ****ing bigoted **** who needs to get a life".

The question is, will I get banned now for "Personal attacks"? by some logic, it's not my opinion, it could be, but I never stated it was my opinion, but then again I just typed it. So what do you do? Why should rules be black and white? It's clear what she meant when she said it, but because I haven't directly said it to him, and I haven't stated I agree with the statement, technically it's not breaking a rule.

People can just bend rules as they see fit with how they word things, but the actual meaning is still there no matter how much it's sugar coated.

I completely agree - and no you won't be banned for your post just now.

Ok so DD and/or others have hugely biggoted views - do we just censor it? Is that what you want us to do? I'm happy to, if I were allowed to post how I feel I'd say some things that would lead me to having to ban myself... So shall we say that moving forward, report the posts (via RTM

) and if they haven't been actioned in a day or two, get in touch with me personally and I will look into it for you and create a discussion topic (if necessary) in the DR.

This is my pledge to all of you. I may not have time to do it all myself, I have a busy life, but when I do have the time I will do what I can.

I shan't do any retroactive moderation as I'd be here all day, but moving forward from now. Yes? No?

My only fear is setting too much of a censorship/harsh moderation precedent... I don't want to be overzealous either.

krooton said:
I know and agree, but I would similarly not want young minds being swayed by "send them back" propaganda.

Definitely not.

Tummy said:
Younger members who are fine to be subjected to inherently racist posts?

Of course not, this is why this is being discussed! Keep up old bean!

Tummy · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:15

5UB said:
How would expanding the team help?

Because moderators have frequently used the lack of time 'excuse' (for lack of a better word, don't apply negative connotations to that) for not dealing with certain threads.

Would inviting a few more worthy moderators not help deal with that?

That is what I was getting at.

Delvis · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:15

Aedus said:
Nah bro, I don't think that of him, I never would even contemplate saying words like that to someone, I'm just forwarding external views of someone else which don't match my own opinions of said member.

Yet you're forwarding them on with the indirect intention of said user seeing them.

quite frankly I'm sure he doesn't give a damn

mjones1 · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:16

Nitefly said:
Young people are intelligent and I'm sure that members of the forum are able to decide what is a reasonable point of view and what isn't.

They should be able to make their mind up about drugs then. :confused:

krooton · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:17

Freefaller for PM! (sorry spuds)

Tummy · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:17

Nitefly said:
Young people are intelligent and I'm sure that members of the forum are able to decide what is a reasonable point of view and what isn't.

This is such a contradiction / hypocritical thing to say

This basically;

mjones1 said:
They should be able to make their mind up about drugs then.

Nitefly · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:18

krooton said:
Yet they are not afforded the same trust with regards to other topics.

I'd rather my kid grow up and dabble in drugs than grow up being racist. But horses for courses, the rules are as they are.

I appreciate what you are saying but it's a commercial forum and as such it must abide by sensible commercial practice.

Tummy said:
This is such a contradiction / hypocritical thing to say

See above.

krooton · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:20

Nitefly said:
I appreciate what you are saying but it's a commercial forum and as such it must abide by sensible commercial practice.

Allowing thinly veiled racist threads the remain isn't sensible commercial practice though, the store has enough of a bad rep regarding such things without giving haters even more fuel.

Tummy · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:21

Nitefly said:
I appreciate what you are saying but it's a commercial forum and as such it must abide by sensible commercial practice.

How are inherently racist threads sensible commercial practice?

Robbo · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:22

krooton said:
Allowing thinly veiled racist threads the remain isn't sensible commercial practice though, the store has enough of a bad rep regarding such things without giving haters even more fuel.

Ultimately those rules have to be up to someone... and that person has decided they're happy to allow what some people consider to be 'thinly veiled racist threads'.

The issue is how the viewpoints/threads are put across, not the negative connotations behind them.

fiveub · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:23

Tummy said:
Because moderators have frequently used the lack of time 'excuse' (for lack of a better word, don't apply negative connotations to that) for not dealing with certain threads.

Would inviting a few more worthy moderators not help deal with that?

That is what I was getting at.

We have been discussing this already, and we have some plans.

Tummy · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:23

Robbo said:
Ultimately those rules have to be up to someone... and that person has decided they're happy to allow what some people consider to be 'thinly veiled racist threads'.

The issue is how the viewpoints/threads are put across, not the negative connotations behind them.

A racist thread is a racist thread, even if you're nice about it.

A homophobic thread is a homophobic thread, even if you're nice about it.

Robbo · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:25

Tummy said:
A racist thread is a racist thread, even if you're nice about it.

A homophobic thread is a homophobic thread, even if you're nice about it.

It could be a race related thread, not necessarily a racist thread.

Show me what you consider to be a racist thread (link!).

Tummy · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:27

I can't be bothered

Aedus is our current DirtyDog expect racist quote finder.

TBH, most of Dirty Dogs threads are.

Now, you'll come back with the 'well he's discussing X Y Z' but that's irrelevant because he's doing it in such a manor to instigate racial tensions and promote racial hatred.

Nitefly · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:28

krooton said:
Allowing thinly veiled racist threads the remain isn't sensible commercial practice though, the store has enough of a bad rep regarding such things without giving haters even more fuel.

Tummy said:
How are inherently racist threads sensible commercial practice?

In my opinion 'dirtydog' threads usually raise a potential political issue even if he does have a ridiculous and silly agenda. Discussing political issues is not a problem. Under the same reasoning, this is why discussion of drugs is allowed regarding illegality, to certain extents, because it is political. However, illegal drug taking / posession / etc is illegal and discussion encouraging such activity is prohibited.

Personally I think it's quite easy to make the distinction.

Tummy · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:30

Then why is he allowed to continue to promote this agenda?

It's certainly possible to discuss these things without his racist bile.

Robbo · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:31

Tummy said:
Now, you'll come back with the 'well he's discussing X Y Z' but that's irrelevant because he's doing it in such a manor to instigate racial tensions and promote racial hatred.

Yes, I can see why people think that but generally he's just airing his own views which are in turn ripped apart and then he disappears.

As I said, I don't think it would fall under inciting racial hatred therefore it doesn't break the rules... even though you think it should.

I can totally understand your point but ultimately what he posts isn't usually direct racism.

Aedus · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:31

Freefaller said:
I completely agree - and no you won't be banned for your post just now.

Ok so DD and/or others have hugely biggoted views - do we just censor it? Is that what you want us to do? I'm happy to, if I were allowed to post how I feel I'd say some things that would lead me to having to ban myself... So shall we say that moving forward, report the posts (via RTM

) and if they haven't been actioned in a day or two, get in touch with me personally and I will look into it for you and create a discussion topic (if necessary) in the DR.

This is my pledge to all of you. I may not have time to do it all myself, I have a busy life, but when I do have the time I will do what I can.

I shan't do any retroactive moderation as I'd be here all day, but moving forward from now. Yes? No?

My only fear is setting too much of a censorship/harsh moderation precedent... I don't want to be overzealous either.

I agree that censoring is hard, very hard, mods of OcUK need to not take the rules as black and white and look in to what is being said and what the actual hidden message is behind said post, instead of seeing that rule X, Y or Z isn't broken, so technically it's okay. Even if you warn him, posts will be made and he will be extremely clever in how it's worded. People still know what he means, everyone here knows exactly how he is and what his views are so you should be able to easily identify what he means when he types.

Delvis said:
Yet you're forwarding them on with the indirect intention of said user seeing them.

quite frankly I'm sure he doesn't give a damn

I have no idea what you could possibly mean :eek:

krooton · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:32

Nitefly said:
In my opinion 'dirtydog' threads usually raise a potential political issue even if he does have a ridiculous and silly agenda. Discussing political issues is not a problem. Under the same reasoning, this is why discussion of drugs is allowed regarding illegality, to certain extents, because it is political. However, illegal drug taking / posession / etc is illegal and discussion encouraging such activity is prohibited.

Personally I think it's quite easy to make the distinction.

Inciting racial hatred is a crime as well. Posting on forums trying to get people riled up and angry about another race seems to fit the bill.

This offence refers to:

deliberately provoking hatred of a racial group
distributing racist material to the public
making inflammatory public speeches
creating racist websites on the Internet
inciting inflammatory rumours about an individual or an ethnic group, for the purpose of spreading racial discontent.

Delvis · 1 Feb 2012 at 14:32

I don't even know why you're all discussing this single user, especially when he isn't even here.

Can't remember the last time I saw him post. Let alone if it was racist in any way