Censorship
Comments
-
I took the time to explain the reasons to you Feltham, and if that's how you want to read it then fine.
We have hundreds of threads started on here a month, and at most you will see 1 or 2 closed or removed. If that's too much for you then you have the choice not to use this forum.0 -
Pathetic and worse, self-defeating. As you can see from the thread I dislike the homophobic and racist chanting as much as anyone but resorting to "Censorship" and that last post just makes you look silly and gives a victory to the very people you say you oppose.felthamaddict said:Over the past year or so I have been reading threads on here where posters have been challenging the Neanderthal views of a small minority of Charlton fans regards the Lisbie song and Mr Ambrose. I think this is a good thing. It might actually make a difference in some cases. The views expressed have been interesting, entertaining and educational. They fall within the bounds of which I would call reasonable freedom of speech. They certainly wouldn't lead to the site being 'shut down'.
Now if I've understood correctly, the answer to my question is because of legal considerations. Ok so lets have clear guidelines:
1. No fan will start a thread criticizing other Charlton fans using racist or homophobic chants - you just have to lump
it.
2. A fan will always start a thread along the lines of: 'How many did we take to Rotherham' or 'Didn't we sing well at
Fulham'.
3. Every fan will repeat: everything is rosy in the Charlton garden.
Remember: BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU
AFKA has explained why he closed (not deleted but closed) the thread. It is still there to be read. He is the one getting the solicitors letters and his head on the block if they take it further.
You were allowed to make your points and others were allowed to disagree.
There are times when I think Admin close threads too soon and others when they let things go too far without acting but I would guess others think the same but about different threads and in a different order. But it's not my site nor me who will be sued and they get it right 99% of the time IMHO.
0 -
Oh do stop moaning lads. Look on the bright side. Sexism hasn't been banned, so you are are free to libel/be abusive to the majority of the population ;-)0
-
shut up you pr1ck!BIG_ROB said:Why don't people use their real names and photos so that everyine is accountable and let's have a "free for all", no risk to the forum.....
0 -
Admin do a tough job on here. Give them a break.0
-
Ok0
-
Blimey, imagine waking up and launching straight into an argument at 7am. I can barely bring myself to breathe in at that hour0
-
No, lets not.BIG_ROB said:Why don't people use their real names and photos so that everyine is accountable and let's have a "free for all", no risk to the forum.....
Just because there are real names and photos it doesn't mean the site can't be sued or threatened with closure.
And just because a person posts under their real name it doesn't mean what they say will be less abusive or unacceptable.
0 -
Someone in China arguing against "freedom of speech" ?Stu of Yangzhou said:There's a problem when the people who run and finance the forum have asked for these threads not to be started. If you want to ask the question, pm one of the admins, not complicated is it.
0 -
Sponsored links:
-
Truestilladdicted said:Oh do stop moaning lads. Look on the bright side. Sexism hasn't been banned, so you are are free to libel/be abusive to the majority of the population ;-)
0 -
Can somebody post a proppa Wouldya to reinforce this freedom.0
-
It's their house, their rules.
Simple really, as a guest you follow the house rules or don't visit.0 -
Reading this thread is all very familiar. I'm sure there is at least one other thread explaining why Admin have to close down certain discussions.
On this basis, I request that Admin close this thread !! ;-)0 -
Accountable not acceptable.Henry Irving said:
No, lets not.BIG_ROB said:Why don't people use their real names and photos so that everyine is accountable and let's have a "free for all", no risk to the forum.....
Just because there are real names and photos it doesn't mean the site can't be sued or threatened with closure.
And just because a person posts under their real name it doesn't mean what they say will be less abusive or unacceptable.
Sued/Site closure = Tosh
@cafcdave123 Belt up Trig, you let down.0 -
Pathetic and worse, self-defeating. As you can see from the thread I dislike the homophobic and racist chanting as much as anyone but resorting to "Censorship" and that last post just makes you look silly and gives a victory to the very people you say you oppose.felthamaddict said:Over the past year or so I have been reading threads on here where posters have been challenging the Neanderthal views of a small minority of Charlton fans regards the Lisbie song and Mr Ambrose. I think this is a good thing. It might actually make a difference in some cases. The views expressed have been interesting, entertaining and educational. They fall within the bounds of which I would call reasonable freedom of speech. They certainly wouldn't lead to the site being 'shut down'.
Now if I've understood correctly, the answer to my question is because of legal considerations. Ok so lets have clear guidelines:
1. No fan will start a thread criticizing other Charlton fans using racist or homophobic chants - you just have to lump
it.
2. A fan will always start a thread along the lines of: 'How many did we take to Rotherham' or 'Didn't we sing well at
Fulham'.
3. Every fan will repeat: everything is rosy in the Charlton garden.
Remember: BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU
AFKA has explained why he closed (not deleted but closed) the thread. It is still there to be read. He is the one getting the solicitors letters and his head on the block if they take it further.
You were allowed to make your points and others were allowed to disagree.
There are times when I think Admin close threads too soon and others when they let things go too far without acting but I would guess others think the same but about different threads and in a different order. But it's not my site nor me who will be sued and they get it right 99% of the time IMHO.
So there have been solictors letters?0 -
BIG_ROB said:
Sued/Site closure = Tosh
AFKA said in an earlier postDRF said:
So there have been solictors letters?
"Having had legal issues in the past, we are more guarded against that than perhaps some other forums."
I'm not admin so I don't know if they were letters/emails/phone calls TBH so perhaps shouldn't have said "letters" but read what AFKA said
So not tosh. Other sites have been closed such as Coventry's City's and we have all seen people arrested over twitter comments.0 -
I think the moderators do a very good job in difficult circumstances on the whole.
The one thing I would say is that it would be nice to see a few words of explanation as to why a particular thread has been closed.
I think the arbitary closure with no comment is what antagonises people.
Just my opinion.0 -
Sponsored links:
-
DRF said:
Pathetic and worse, self-defeating. As you can see from the thread I dislike the homophobic and racist chanting as much as anyone but resorting to "Censorship" and that last post just makes you look silly and gives a victory to the very people you say you oppose.felthamaddict said:Over the past year or so I have been reading threads on here where posters have been challenging the Neanderthal views of a small minority of Charlton fans regards the Lisbie song and Mr Ambrose. I think this is a good thing. It might actually make a difference in some cases. The views expressed have been interesting, entertaining and educational. They fall within the bounds of which I would call reasonable freedom of speech. They certainly wouldn't lead to the site being 'shut down'.
Now if I've understood correctly, the answer to my question is because of legal considerations. Ok so lets have clear guidelines:
1. No fan will start a thread criticizing other Charlton fans using racist or homophobic chants - you just have to lump
it.
2. A fan will always start a thread along the lines of: 'How many did we take to Rotherham' or 'Didn't we sing well at
Fulham'.
3. Every fan will repeat: everything is rosy in the Charlton garden.
Remember: BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING YOU
AFKA has explained why he closed (not deleted but closed) the thread. It is still there to be read. He is the one getting the solicitors letters and his head on the block if they take it further.
You were allowed to make your points and others were allowed to disagree.
There are times when I think Admin close threads too soon and others when they let things go too far without acting but I would guess others think the same but about different threads and in a different order. But it's not my site nor me who will be sued and they get it right 99% of the time IMHO.
So there have been solictors letters?
Yes0 -
Exactly, the poster was accountable, Twitter hasn't been closed down, to my knowledge.......Henry Irving said:we have all seen people arrested over twitter comments.
0 -
I don't think CL has access to the considerable legal expertise Twitter has.BIG_ROB said:
Exactly, the poster was accountable, Twitter hasn't been closed down, to my knowledge.......Henry Irving said:we have all seen people arrested over twitter comments.
0 -
That is a fair point which i accept, but i can assure you it isn't done to antagonise people but purely out of situation.LenGlover said:
The one thing I would say is that it would be nice to see a few words of explanation as to why a particular thread has been closed.
I think the arbitary closure with no comment is what antagonises people.
I do the main bulk of moderating, and i'm no longer able to access the site via a pc during my working day, which means the bulk of it is done via my mobile or when i can get to the library for my lunch break (now). The necessity of doing it via mobile means it isn't always easy, particularly with a flakey internet signal in central London (ridiculous), or have the time between meetings etc to be able to provide explanations. To be honest, in the vast majority of cases, i would have thought that it is obvious but i always state if anyone ever wants to follow something up then please inbox me and i will respond when i can.
Yes, we've made that known a number of times in the past. We also get requests / demands from clubs, organisations and individuals to remove content from the forum. Some of it I view of completely unnecessary, but its still hassle you could do without.DRF said:
So there have been solictors letters?
But that is broadly irrelevant. The vast majority of the moderation is done to either stop a pointless row escalating, or for the reasons I set out in point 2.
0 -
I just live here, I don't make the rules. Also, don't believe everything you read in the papers, China is not half as bad as western media would have you believe.PL54 said:
Someone in China arguing against "freedom of speech" ?Stu of Yangzhou said:There's a problem when the people who run and finance the forum have asked for these threads not to be started. If you want to ask the question, pm one of the admins, not complicated is it.
Plus I clearly wasn't saying we should have freedom of speech on CL.0 -
Are we going to have this everytime a thread gets closed?0
-
hope so0
-
Apparently0
-
I'll organise a fund raiser in the back of the Cons if Mussingbird comes knocking....WSS said:
I don't think CL has access to the considerable legal expertise Twitter has.BIG_ROB said:
Exactly, the poster was accountable, Twitter hasn't been closed down, to my knowledge.......Henry Irving said:we have all seen people arrested over twitter comments.
0
