5 Filters

New mods

Site Feedback
#21

As far as I understand it, flagging simply brings a post to the attention of the mods. What happens after that is up for us all to decide. Flagging in and of itself does nothing else.

The reason for it is that we want to discourage folk feeling like they are “protecting” the board or some such thing. This happened frequently on MLMB and also on TLN. We didn’t want to bring that here. If something is bothering you, flag it and discuss it with the mods - that’s why we have them.

In the moderation guidelines, we talk a bit about sanctioning (deleting posts etc), and commit to making any such decision public. If it feels like the wrong decision that can be challenged.

Cheers

1 Like
#22

That is a great idea. It is possible to send a private message to any user on this board. I do encourage folk to make use of any tools that are likely to de-escalate an argy bargy.

#23

PP, the obvious question is, why you need Mods in the first place? Thesedays everyone knows how discussion boards work (unless you’re a 12-year-old about to be injected with stuff). Heavily moderated boards always stifle the free flow of conversation/debate, because, inevitably, each moderator will have their own prejudices about any given subject. That’s human nature.

Agreed that someone does need to have their finger on the ‘delete’ button if things get too beyond the pale. I’m quite happy for PP to be that person.

Just my two pennith worth.

1 Like
#24

Because as someone who was on the MLMB and then TLN, I saw many good posters chased away by abusive, bullying posters.

We want to avoid that on this board. Calling fellow posters Nazis, for example, is behaviour we don’t accept. That’s not the free flow of ideas, that’s just being abusive for no reason.

Zero moderation leads to abusive posts, bullying and posters walking away. Moderating to enforce a basic set of rules seems like a small price to pay to avoid those problems.

Cheers

PS - there are three mods so that the decision making doesn’t just come down to the whim of one person. Any decisions are made through consultation between three people

3 Likes
#25

I disagree with you.

If you come on a public forum and express your thoughts you have to be prepared to take the flak (and defend your thoughts).

Where’s the problem with that?

Why do you want to wrap everyone in cotton wool, and arbitrarily decide what’s right and wrong?

You are not God, and what you are saying is patent bullshit.

I could tell you another anecdote about Alaska (this one involves polar bears), but obviously the poor little dears will be too frightened by it all, so you have to censor.

I give up…

#26

BTW, the TLN has been almost entirely destroyed by the exact same censorship that you are advocating.

Doctor Dan is a total disgrace, as most of the medical profession have revealed themselves to be over the last 18 months.

#27

You’re allowed to disagree, of course. You’re not allowed to abuse other posters on this forum. Think of it as a challenge to find a way to express your opinion without resorting to abuse or bullying.

It’s not complicated. People do it in real life all the time.

Someone who loves language as much as you do should have no problem there.

Peace, Rob.

2 Likes
#28

Have you seen the suicide figures over the last 18 months? (and that’s without all the booze, drugs and domestic abuse).

I’m afraid my tolerance of Covidians is at an all time low.

You, of course, can convince me otherwise.

If we can come through this, Nuremburg 2.0 is what’s going to happen.

Again, convince me otherwise, and why the likes of you won’t be put on trial at Nuremburg 2.0.

#29

Rob, i object to you calling P “the likes of you” and implying that he deserves to be hauled before a Nurnberg 2 tribunal. That’s excessive, especially considering P’s record. I too happen to think the he - my old friend - has made a grievous mistake in believing in the poison-stabs, to the point of accepting them for himself, and believing that his father would have been helped by them.

But phrases like the above, and the ‘nazi’ label are going too far. They’re gratuitously offensive. I disagree with him on these points, but we still speak civilly to each other, and maintain friendship and respect. I’d very much like to do that with you too, bro (If I may call you that without annoying you :slight_smile: ).

I agree with you too, that the poison-stabbing of children is absolute anathema, and - quite seriously - ground for triggering actual civil war, if the criminal conspirators behind the covid scam push things that far. I would willingly physically beat into submission anyone trying to inject my great grandchildren with the poisons; as would their mother, my grand-daughter, bless her courageous heart.

But we-all - who should be comrades on the same side in this struggle - shoulldn’t cause destructive dissension within our own should-stay-united ranks by using insulting language to each other - gratuitously, for lack of a bit of self-restraint?

Please Rob, don’t be pissed off with my words here: truly, no offence meant. I value your membership here. But this - above - needs to be said. Cheers!

5 Likes
#30

Rob. Let me start by saying I share your anger. I too look forward to Nuremburg 2 and tell my friends I’m waiting for the return of the gallows and I’ll be cheering from the ramparts as the heads roll into the baskets below. We (you and I) probably share more in common than just a few posts. Maybe we should meet up so we can both vent some of our anger?

That said, I am with Rhis. PP is not responsible for this situation. He may be on the other side of the argument, but I have a son and daughter in law who have taken the double jab. They won’t even debate all the video and documentary evidence I sent them. I felt really betrayed but I still love them.

So my point is anything that breaks us apart is complimentary to the whole anti-social distancing agenda.

As Rhis says, peace bro

3 Likes
#31

Thanks Rob, for indicating so concisely why we need people to moderate this forum. Thanks also Rhis and Pat for pointing out that I’m not actually in charge of vaccine policy anywhere except for my own body. I just happen to think the vaccines are saving lives.

I would suggest, however, that we move any further discussion of whether I am, in fact, a Nazi, who was personally in charge of mandating mass vaccinations, mandatory vaccine passports, and forced vaccinations of children against their will, and is soon to be judged by a war crimes tribunal, to a separate thread. I look forward to it, and I humbly await my fate at the hands of the angry, pitch fork wielding mob.

This thread is about what the community feels we should do about appointing (or removing) moderators, and any questions around mod policy.

I thank everyone for their contributions so far, but there are many we have not heard from.

@Twirlip
@JackieL
@Dimac
@Bob_sYourUncle
@Cobbett
@NewSi
@Willem
@rippon
@Poster123
@Sanjeev
@spike
@MattC
@Jamie

And all the others who post here. Please come along and add your voices

Cheers

PS

Pat, this is a great idea. Speaking personally, I’ve 100% enjoyed meeting folk from MLMB, including Rhis, Evvy, MikeD, Gutenberg and even the Dastardly Doctor Dan himself (who I found to be a very thoughtful, loving, intelligent and all-round great person). It is incredibly healing to meet like-minded souls in this bonkers time. If you do meet up, I hope you raise a glass to the rest of us. Wishing you well… PP

3 Likes
#32

This is how the Flag works. Have a go at flagging a post and you will see a series of options come up, the first one being the option to send a Private Message to the person whose post you are concerned about to discuss it with them. After that are several options as to why you want to flag it eg Spam, In breach of board guidelines etc. Clicking on the Flag itself does not automatically flag it - there is more of a process to go through before it goes to the Mods (and you can clear or close without anything happening at all so it is safe to click the flag on a post just to see what comes up). My understanding is if you select the Private Message option, no-one other than the recipient knows about it and it doesn’t get Flagged to the Mods.
Hope that helps :slightly_smiling_face:
J

3 Likes
#33

Very well said Rhis - as I agree with you, Rob G and Pat B on the need for Nuremberg 2.0, and extreme alarm at what is happening right now. And as said, it’s worse than anywhere in the world in OZ. Today in the Melbourne Age there is a story about a woman with three teenage daughters who is not prepared to “risk” sending them back to school until they’ve all been “fully vaccinated”. And there was just a report from the Victorian authorities calling on pregnant women to get vaxed as soon as possible because the risk of hospitalisation from COVID was five times that for non-pregnant women. It was not mentioned that no vaccines/drugs have actually been tested properly, or at all, on pregnant women. And contrary to the view expressed here, it is the Covidians in OZ who are the pitchfork wielding mob, in the most vindictive and threatening way possible. There is a little sympathy expressed for the “hesitant and tardy”, but none whatsoever for people who make the “selfish” choice to endanger the community by refusing to get vaxed. they deserve everything that’s coming to them, or not coming - as the pollies revel in explaining how the Fully Vaxed will be able to take advantage of the new freedoms - to gather with not more than 5 other fully vaxed people to share a meal or conversation.

My reservations on moderation come down to one point though - who decides? I am bombarded by disinformation and lies from all quarters, because the PTB have decided that all truth is “misinformation” and must be removed or denounced or hit with Facebook algorithms, regardless of its source.

3 Likes
#34

Here is an unmoderated forum (at the bottom of the article)

It’s useless except for those who are into one-liners. Even if someone does post some useful evidence it will beburied amongst all the flying cream buns and few will see it.

4 Likes
#35

Allow the group to self regulate. If a position or post is considered beyond the pale, then this will become apparent to the poster by the group’s response. The poster then has to either adjust their behaviour to be more in keeping with the group’s sensibility or continue in the ‘offending’ fashion, in which case, ignore them; eventually, without any reaction, they will probably just bugger off.

I’m wary or individuals deciding what is and what isn’t acceptable and as for name calling, well, sticks and stones and all that…

#36

Hi everyone

I want to give an opinion but haven’t really kept up with events on the board recently. What’s been the situation thus far? Has a particular event on the board provoked this debate? What responsibilities and powers does/will a ‘Mod’ have? Has there been a situation where a poster has been ‘moderated’ off the board and if so, why?

My twopenneth thus far would be that we don’t want to end up like the LBMB, which is just a hollow shell of its former self. It (and the MLMB before it) used to be my first click to find out what was ‘going on’ but the purge has rendered it ineffective as a news gathering site. If I have a complaint about this message board, it’s that it has become a bit single issue board, but then that’s the fault of people like myself who don’t post anywhere near as often as they should.

2 Likes
#37

That btl shambles below the AFLD piece is precisely what’s to be avoided. There were plenty of people wanting to bring actually-useful input to the discussion, but it was simply swamped by the lying one-liners of the Bob shill. This, I suspect, is exactly what they’re paid to do: to prevent any useful chat, and to make lots of people terminally pissed off and inclined just to leave. How to wreck a seriously-intended website, for the gics.

I for one shan’t be staying on 5-F if it’s ever allowed to degenerate to this. Some means has to be devised to get rid of people who seem to be demonstrating that they’re probably paid shills. That isn’t useful argument, it’s just wilful wrecking - and, of course, deliberately sowing hypnotic seeds of doubt by constant repetition of the same handful of canards over and over again. Classic hypnotic induction technique. The suggestion goes in, and breeds, even whilst you think you’re rebuffing it:

“Everything that we see and hear can add to or increase us in some way/
And so it may have been with my play/
Some seeds have drifted from our stage/
A few, perhaps, have taken root in you/
But whatever these seeds are, even though/
In your darkest places they may feed and grow/
Whatever these seeds are, you will never know.” (Turns contemptuously away)

  • De Sade (played by the wonderful and long-dead Pat Magee) addressing the audience at the end of Peter Brook’s production in 1966 for the RSC at the Aldwych of Adrian Mitchell’s lovely translation of Peter Weiss’s ‘Marat/Sade’. (I was a young bruiser then. I played a guard-thug in the madhouse!! How appropriate! ) :rofl:
3 Likes
#38

Thank you, PP, for including me in your post. It has encouraged me to respond.

Mods, such as yourself, in running this forum, allow us to express ourselves freely. This does not mean, as I have come to see recently, allowing gratuitous personal abuse of anyone here (or elsewhere, for that matter).

If I may answer your call by just quoting the guidelines of John Michael Greer’s own website:
“All the standard rules apply — no profanity, no sales pitches, no trolling, no rudeness, no paid propagandizing, no long screeds proclaiming the infallible truth of… fill in the blank”.

“No rudeness” is the all-important one: it just renders any argument as a rant - a personal fact-free attack on the other person, and not on their views.

(Personally, I consider swearing as allowable!)

Perhaps PP, and the other mods, just to delete any post that goes against your rules, and let the poster knows why. There is no need for this to be highlighted, we are all adults and can follow the rules of behaviour… or not.

Best wishes to all here.

5 Likes
#39

To me, what to do depends on a number of factors – the type of board, number of contributors, how long they’ve been around etc. The unmoderated board that E_d mentioned is, like RT, a place where people react to an article. Like RT, I suspect it has lots of contributors – far more than on here. This board, like TLN and MLMB, is more a place to have discussions, often linked to some article which is considered of current interest. There are relatively few contributors, and, crucially I think, it started with a group of like-minded individuals (OK maybe not on Covid…), so little need for moderation…

…until there is a need. Eg posts deliberately winding others up should be deleted. So yes, there should be someone (or a group of three) who do this. Three is probably better (after experiencing Dan at TLN!), but having said that, I think there’ll be pros and cons with whatever system you choose!

I have to say, I’m happy with the board as is.

5 Likes
#40

This is a crucial point I think. We currently have three Mods who, you are right, are not in complete agreement on Covid - which let’s face it is by far the busiest topic on the board - but what we do agree on is the kind of board community that we were hoping to facilitate when the board was set up last year ie one that allows space for the discussion of a wide range of ideas and opinions as long as the posts are civil and legal. I think the disagreement on Covid by the Moderators is one of the strengths of this board as it ensures that Moderation decisions are about whether or not posts are abiding by board guidelines for civility etc, not on whether the Moderators personally agree with the arguments being put by the contributor. I think having three Mods is working well from that point of view.

6 Likes