UK posts being made invisible

[JoeCanuk 3]

Why is the current post not locked then, instead of censoring? There is no consistency here.

Yesterday post was locked 'by request of the OP' - no mention was made of 'closed for violating the TOS'. Yet the vicious attack made against me was a clear violation of at least 4 points in the TOS.

Quit your whining will ya? By the way, there is no such thing as censorship on a messageboard. You don't have the right to freedom of speech on a messageboard to begin with. Cry me a river...

Going forward, I'd like to see:

- invisibility as last result. It is big brother & unneccessary unless racist, threatening, etc.

- warnings to chill out

- consistency in which posts get censored

- less bias

-If a threadmust be name chnaged, say why. This thread had no business being renamed, or moved.

So now you're FOR "censorship" as long as you approve of the censorship in question?

Now where are those mods - TOS violation anyone?

There is no such TOS violation whatsoever. You don't scare me devilette. Play your games. I said what you needed to be told and now I can run along to another thread.

You just got told.

[LaL 418]

guys - Ewok is asking for suggestions on how best to implement the modding tools. Refrain from attacking member's suggestions!

[no name 1]

There is no such TOS violation whatsoever. You don't scare me devilette. Play your games. I said what you needed to be told and now I can run along to another thread.

You just got told.

You've come in here, insulted me and mocked my signature, Im quite sure that's a violation of TOS.

[Mags 112]

I'm always happy to explain a decision I have made. PM me though rather than attack a decision in public; that only brings further ammunition for arguments and there is no point to that. If I am wrong I'll change it. If I'm unsure I'll ask another Mod to check it too. I'm not too proud to ask for help or advice if it is needed.

Lal, Yodrak and I put in alot of time here for what is, mostly, a thankless task. But we do it because we love VJ and we want to rid it of situations like the ones the UK forum has been experiencing lately.

I know that we are ALWAYS open to questions, suggestions and ideas. ALWAYS assume that we will listen, because we will. We are here for the members of VJ, not for our health or blood pressure!

[JoeCanuk 3]

Quit your whining will ya? By the way, there is no such thing as censorship on a messageboard. You don't have the right to freedom of speech on a messageboard to begin with. Cry me a river...

What are you talking about? Just because the Constitution doesn't cover VJ, doesn't mean that deleting posts isn't censorship.

What do you mean what am I talking about? I made it clear as day. Anyways, it's my opinion (based on fact). Please don't "censor" it. lol

Based on what fact? Look up censorship in the dictionary. Yes, VJ has every right to censor posts, but that doesn't mean it isn't censorship.

Also your pointless and inflammatory post adds nothing to this discussion. Mods!!!

It's not censorship when you don't have the right to say what you want in the first place. You prove it with your last sentence. Even though I did nothing wrong. And I'll repeat what someone else said on the first page of this thread: The OP was inflammatory...along with being pointless.

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

Going forward, I'd like to see:

- invisibility as last result. It is big brother & unneccessary unless racist, threatening, etc.

- warnings to chill out

- consistency in which posts get censored

- less bias

-If a threadmust be name chnaged, say why. This thread had no business being renamed, or moved.

So now you're FOR "censorship" as long as you approve of the censorship in question?

ok this is not a TOS violation but lets not argue please. Lets keep this constructive please.

[Jenn! 918]

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is about a censored post, really.

[JoeCanuk 3]

There is no such TOS violation whatsoever. You don't scare me devilette. Play your games. I said what you needed to be told and now I can run along to another thread.

You just got told.

You've come in here, insulted me and mocked my signature, Im quite sure that's a violation of TOS.

I didn't insult you. Where did I insult you? As for your signature, I don't see a rule that says I can't use yours and adapt it for my own purpose. By the way, who made you a mod to say the things you said IN your signature?

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is about a censored post, really.

LOL I saw your avatar and could only think...."did I do that?"

[Captain Ewok 1,891]

TO EVERYONE: Stay on topic and lets make this a constructive conversation. If you want a side bar take it to PM please. No attcking each other, no digging up the past. This post was doing great and getting some constructive new ideas so lets keep it on topic please .

[JoeCanuk 3]

Going forward, I'd like to see:

- invisibility as last result. It is big brother & unneccessary unless racist, threatening, etc.

- warnings to chill out

- consistency in which posts get censored

- less bias

-If a threadmust be name chnaged, say why. This thread had no business being renamed, or moved.

So now you're FOR "censorship" as long as you approve of the censorship in question?

ok this is not a TOS violation but lets not argue please. Lets keep this constructive please.

Ok Ewok, no problem. I just wanted to make a point that now she was for censorship. I made my point though...nothing much left to say. Good job.

[Mags 112]

Watch it, I've got my hat on!!

[Dr_LHA 3]

It's not censorship when you don't have the right to say what you want in the first place. You prove it with your last sentence. Even though I did nothing wrong. And I'll repeat what someone else said on the first page of this thread: The OP was inflammatory...along with being pointless.

censorship |ˈsensərˌ sh ip|

noun

the practice of officially examining books, movies, etc., and suppressing unacceptable parts : details of the visit were subject to military censorship.

Censorship has nothing to do with if you had the right to say something in the first place. If you post something, and someone removes it, its censorship. Plain and simple. You don't seem to understand this, and appear to be mixing up censorship with "The right to Free Speech". Nobody has the right to free speech here, as anything can be censored.

Edited June 22, 2007 by Dr_LHA

[no name 1]

TO EVERYONE: Stay on topic and lets make this a constructive conversation. If you want a side bar take it to PM please. No attcking each other, no digging up the past. This post was doing great and getting some constructive new ideas so lets keep it on topic please .

Seriously, this is what I'm talking about. The ADMIN & mods are in this topic, yet Joe has been allowed to go on & on & insult?

[Traviesa 0]

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is about a censored post, really.

I would have said the same thing before it happened to me! I just don't think it's fair that in the past, one thread always sticks out in my mind-the one where I told everyone what happened at our interview and instead of getting support literally it was like a gang attack-and other more recent situations where people are getting away with saying things that are downright HATEFUL and cruel, and I can't speak my mind the one time when I decide to do so...it pretty much sucks.

[Jenn! 918]

I guess I just don't understand what the big deal is about a censored post, really.

I would have said the same thing before it happened to me! I just don't think it's fair that in the past, one thread always sticks out in my mind-the one where I told everyone what happened at our interview and instead of getting support literally it was like a gang attack-and other more recent situations where people are getting away with saying things that are downright HATEFUL and cruel, and I can't speak my mind the one time when I decide to do so...it pretty much sucks.

I completely understand what you mean, and by the way, I did think that you had a right to the statement that you made, as I told Ewok. The problem, for me, is consistency, not censorship. I think if deleting posts were a *more* regular occurrence, people would just get used to it.

*runs and hides*