Moderation and website technical issues
- This topic has 255 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 7 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
MattI am glad you decided to answer my post, though I notice on post #179 you fail to answer my questions.But before I continue I would like to ask you, what it is you think my motives are? Your previous post #170 to me suggested I wanted the problems on this forum to continue, despite my offering solutions as to how both sides of the debate could be appeased. We do not have to agree on everything, but I imagine we would both like to see an end to the current forum difficulties. Though it is obvious our solutions are far from the same. You see no problem, apart from personality issues, whereas I see a flaw in the moderation approach. A flaw that could easily be solved by a moderation framework.Varying numbers of warnings, warnings remaining active for varying lengths, varying time lengths of suspensions, all different for different members, along with highly selective post deletion as well as moderation queues after coming straight from suspension. I don't know about you, but for me this demonstrates clearly that there is no moderation system in place other than a carte blanche one. Carte blanche = having free rein to choose whatever course of action you want
Matt wrote:I repeat that mods are subject to oversight by the department in the event of an appeal against their decision. Posters should use the relevant procedures and their appeal wil be given due consideration.I have recently used the procedures you speak of. I asked Admin to clear an issue up for me, regarding some posts. He answered. I questioned the logic of his answer, he would not reply. So I sent an enquiry to the Int Dept. That was about eight days ago and I still have not had any acknowledgement of my enquiry. I did not expect a quick reply, but I thought I would receive acknowledgement. So much for your overseeing of moderation? Then there is the fact that not everyone would choose to challenge moderation decisions, even if they feel aggrieved. So in reality poor moderation may go unnoticed.
Matt wrote:I think many if not more will be bored shitless.Funny how those who dislike the topic always reel out that one. So perhaps it may surprise them that during the past five days there have been over 700 new views. The facts show there is more interest in this issue than many a thread on general discussion.
Matt wrote:Ironic acrimonic contradiction. Could be a song. The Outsiders?This is all rather to much heat for me personally……….So with one hand you make a sarcastic swipe, and with the other you feint a swoon, claiming the disagreement is too much for, "others of a quieter disposition such as myself". Did someone just cry wolf?At the end of the day this issue has damaged the party. For some it is easier to lay the blame on personalities, or that party members should take it on the chin etc. I on the other hand see it, not in terms of personalities, or lacking strength of character, but in terms of a system failure. Flaws have been exposed. The logical thing to do is work out a better system and put it place. The EC is seeking to do that. Time will tell if they succeed or not.
I think the fact that Admin has locked an entire thread on this forum, that was set up to discuss treatment of party members past and present and so disallowing an entire subject, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that censorship does indeed exist within the hallowed precincts of the SPGB.Imagine if the SWP get a whiff of this hypocrisy.
The political opponents of the SPGB will already be aware of this outcome SP, including the SWP and probably licking their lips at the whiff of hypocrisy it represents. Fan and crap spring to mind. Steve.
I am am absolutely appalled at the obvious censorship and suppression of opinion on a forum claiming to be part of the Socialist Party. More depressingly it has received full support from the EC. Is this the same Internet Committe that constantly 'moderated' Steve Colborn and myself on spintcom for being 'off topic' and as soon as we leave the party. ALL discussion on spintcom is 'off topic' and there is NO moderation.The IC were /is using 'moderation' as a cover for the suppression of opinion of ahandful of members.
I sent a post to the members ex-members and class traitors site, just before it was locked because, after 4 hours 15 mins of being ignored on PM I felt it was the only way to get an answer to my question. Not only was this post "moderated", it was deleted, then the whole thread was locked. would have been easier to answer my question. However, I have "previous" at being ignored and moderated, so am in no way surprised, I had just hoped this kind of action was a thing of the past.If anyone wants to see a copy of the deleted post PM me. Steve.
The history of popular culture in this country is littered with banned contributions from musicians, artists, film makers etc. Without fail, the censored items seem to generate more interest than they may otherwise have generated without the censored tag.The lesson we see going way over the head of Admin is, if you want to draw attention to something even more, censor it.So I expect this thread will see a reemergence of interest.I couldn't write this stuff.
I have spent the whole of my adult life, 32 years, fighting the censorship and by extension, moderation, of Capitalism. A system of society that, in order to maintain it's control, tries to disparage and traduce, those who oppose it. What's right is right! If I have done this in Capitalism, can I do other than this now? I think not. Fairness and equality is not merely needed in a future Socialist society, it must be imbued in the struggle for it. What is right is right, I will not be gainsaid on this and what has been happening on this forum, is wrong!If individuals will not see this, as with the effort to try and get workers to see the harm and duress placed upon them by Capitalism, it is up to those, in good conscience, to do the same here. Logic is used by Socialists in the fight to rid the world of Capitalism, it must be used here, to show the contradictions of certain actions of certain individuals, against those who have, as they do, one aim, to be rid of Capitalism and to bring about a sane society.I have much experience in fighting for Socialism and why I must fight know, again, I cannot rightly see, it is a travesty. Steve.
The 'MODERATOR' in the Socialist Party has been given so much power that he can do what he likes without ANY explanation. He just quotes the forum rules. Is that democracy Socialist Party style these days. Ther was NO reason to block the thread. The IC should have locked the thread referred to on spintcom. It was deliberate provocation.
I started a new topic and admin has removed it without any explanation! Did anyone receive it via email?
TheOldGreyWhistle wrote:I started a new topic and admin has removed it without any explanation! Did anyone receive it via email?It's here:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/information-request-party-policy
ModerationTo report a comment to a moderator use the 'Report' button below each post. Calling out for a moderator response in-thread is off-topic and will only serve to further derail the thread. Commenting on moderation decisions in-thread is also off-topic and will only serve to further derail the thread. In-thread comments on moderation will be removed and their continual posting will result in disciplinary action. Comments on moderation can be made within the 'Website/Technical' section of the forum. Does anyone else see the irony of the posting guidelines that I have highlighted above, in light of the recent unnecessary thread lockdown?Off topic derails a thread, questioning moderation derails a thread, blah, blah, blah.Somehow it fails to mention that locking a thread also serves to derail a thread entirely, in a way that no one can work around.I suggest an addition to the guidelines.Locking down a thread derails the thread, but is perfectly acceptable because we make the rules. No discussion will be tolerated as it serves further to derail the thread. Pure comedy gold.
SocialistPunk wrote:Locking down a thread derails the thread, but is perfectly acceptable because we make the rules. No discussion will be tolerated as it serves further to derail the thread. Pure comedy gold.I agree SP. It is the 'No discussion will be tolerate' bit that I don't get. Why not? Isnt discussion good?Locking down a thread involving a discussion between you, Steve Colborn and myself was direct provocation and certainly derailed the thread. But hey, it is their forum. However, we are the only members of the forum they would do that to and they have the backing of the party via the EC. So any criticism of moderation is a criticism of the socialist party.
Sadly OGW, you have hit the nail on the head. Although open and free discussion is the key to democracy and therefore socialism, no organisation likes the light of possible criticism to be shone upon itself. The SPGB clearly is no different in that respect. The irony is that such un democratic displays of power, draws such attention even more.The way this forum is being managed is a reflection of the party. If one moderator is able to shut down a whole thread, that was not really a problem, (after all the issue is being discussed elsewhere) without following any kind of protocol, it sends a clear anti democratic and thus a clear anti socialist message.The party have always maintained that no single member has any special position or privileges, yet here we see one party member using the power at his disposal to try and shut down discussion between forum members he has had issue with previously. What is going on?No doubt we will get few answers, as we are not party members. But if that turns out to be the case then the party are shooting themselves in the foot, if they think such action will bring old friends or new recruits stampeding to join.
http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/forum/general-discussion/information-request-party-policy I really don't understand why mentioning moderation in a thread should lead to a suspension of a sympathiser and potential member. What the hell is wrong with this party??
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.