Post removal hypocrisy

Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:23 am

Err, can I ask why my dark humour post that got 5 thanks in the 9/11 topic got removed yet .Adam advocating child abuse in the Thorpe Park 2011 topic didn't get removed?

Edit: oh OK, just seen it got removed because it's against the rules to only post an image, which is fair enough. I gone done reposted it with sum of dem words abuv it.

Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:41 am

Perhaps if you felt there really was an issue with .Adam's post you should have reported it using the "Flag Post" button and brought it to the team's attention instead of bringing it up here a few days later?

Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:44 am

[quote=""Chris""]Perhaps if you felt there really was an issue with .Adam's post you should have reported it using the "Flag Post" button and brought it to the team's attention instead of bringing it up here a few days later?[/quote]
I didn't feel there was an issue with it. I believe in free speech, and that people have the right to post horrible things as long as anyone else has the right to reply. I was just pointing out the hypocrisy of his post being left whilst mine was deleted, even though it was accompanied with some words and put the rest of the posts after it in some sort of context.

Sat Sep 03, 2011 2:31 am

I am entitled to my opinion thank you very much...

DiogoJ42 · Sat Sep 03, 2011 5:50 am

It's against the rules to only post an image?

So how come this thread is still going?
Seems rather odd to suddenly enforce a rule that is usually ignored. :para:

Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:05 am

[quote="".Adam""]Sam stop being a little bitch.

I am entitled to my opinion thank you very much...[/quote]
Yes you are. That's exactly why I said above I didn't want your post where you advocated violence against children for "being cheeky" removed.

As Diogo pointed out, it's the inconsistency of the enforcement of that rule that bothers me, especially when it DID include text above it...

Dormiens-Dave · Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:06 am

It was enforced because it was reported, there are a lot of posts that are created every day and there are 4 of us to check them, this isn't a "moderated" forum and if you think a post breaks guidelines report it so we see it.

As for the images Sam i removed them, if you want more information PM me, i'm fairly sure my free speach credentials have always been very clear, but at the same time we want good debate from either side of an argument not just pictures of cartoons.

Also keep personal attacks and swearing off the forums, if only because it looks silly (we have margs for adult humour)

Moley · Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:16 am

I did enjoy me getting a warning for posting sarcastic anti-Merlin stuff in topics a few weeks ago. Yet if I had actually meant them, I'd probably have been drowning in thanks. :P

Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:39 am

There is nothing wrong with posting constructive images. The point is that if the image used was deemed inappropriate, or with intent to cause offence, there is reason for it to be removed.

Given the sensitive nature of the topic in question I would say it was removed rightly.

There is nothing wrong with freedom of speech, and voicing your opinions on the matter, but there are some instances where careful consideration should be taken for how it may come across to other people, and not just members. Remember, you are posting online where almost anyone in the world can see it.

The image posted could have easily been taken the wrong way, and/or caused offence to someone. Given that in this case the "someone" is a very large group of people the decision to remove it is justified if you ask me.

As I said, there is nothing wrong making your voice heard, but there are more constructive ways than posting a potentially offensive cartoon.

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk

Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:47 am

Just thought I'd pop my head into here and say that I think that the decision to lock the 9/11 topic, for whatever period of time, is absolutely ridiculous.

Sat Sep 03, 2011 10:55 am

[quote=""D4n""]Just thought I'd pop my head into hear and say that I think that the decision to lock the 9/11 topic, for whatever period of time, is absolutely ridiculous.

[/quote]
It would be really helpful if that opinion had any kind of justification to it...

As has been said, the locking of the topic is by no means permanent, it's just to give the Team a chance to discuss the direction in which it is going, and what action we feel should be taken regarding reports. If it was you reporting a post, I imagine you'd want full attention to be given to it too.

Of course, if any members wish to make posts purely consisting of an image, Ma Garrita's is ready and waiting, but in accordance with the guidelines they don't belong outside of there.

Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:02 am

No. If I report a post I don't expect the entire topic to be locked, taking the steam out of a lively debate just so that the moderators can "discuss the direction in which it is going". From what I can see, the thread had actually slowed down, and if it was going to be locked, it should have been locked last night. When it was actually "kicking off" in there.

Of course, if any members wish to make posts purely consisting of an image, Ma Garrita's is ready and waiting, but in accordance with the guidelines they don't belong outside of there.

Yup. So that's sorted... and surely that's the only post in the thread that anybody can find issue with? All of the other posts in the thread, no matter how extreme, are merely expressing an opinion. I was under the impression that TTF was somewhere where members can speak freely?

I disagree with a great deal of the posts in that topic. That does not make them "report worthy", in my opinion, and I expected the moderators here would take that stance, too.

Obviously not.

Dormiens-Dave · Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:13 am

As for freedom of speech, the only post deleted only included photos and didnt add to the debate. The only post edited was to remove expletives and personal attacks.

The topic has not been hidden so peoples oppinions have not been censored, and the topic will likely be open soon.

As for the decision to lock the topic that was mine as at the time i was the only moderator online (only one foolish enough to be up early on a saturday). If you think it was a bad decision then you can if you wish contact the Admin team.

If you think the decision was because of my own personal oppinion of the comments then all i can say is the only protest i have ever attended has been to protect the freedom of speech.

Website · Sat Sep 03, 2011 11:55 am

Was the post offensive or just slightly bad taste, dark humour? I would suggest the latter, and an attempt to stir up a bit of debate, which it certainly did. Though follow up posts after that, knowing some controversy had been created were probably a bit trollish.

.

Taking offence to something is purely subjective to the individual. One may find it amusing, but in bad taste, someone else will find the same thing deeply offensive. Which one do you keep happy?

It does some nowdays that people are quick to find offence in everything said or written. Dark Humour can be offensive by it's nature, and can really make you cringe when you think that no doubt what has just been said would really get someone's goat.

You (Using you in a broader sense, rather than referring to a particular individual) have to be careful when taking the moral high ground in cases such as trying to protect people from being offended, especially when it is seemingly deemed acceptable on meets to crush people up in queue lines and shout 'Hillsborough'. From my personal experiences of that event, I could find that deeply offensive, though I don't, more in bad taste and a bit cringeworthy, knowing someone else is bound to find it so, just like the picture that was posted. If people need protecting from being offended, then I assume we will be seeing action being taken on that too?

Craig · Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:33 pm

Let's be honest here though Sam, the actual discussion and opinions by some people that some would perhaps consider as "bad taste" have been left on the topic. What was removed were the images which were simply there more to antagonise and cause offence to those who had already raised issues with your feelings about the event. In other words, as Vik has so wisely put it - they were a little on the trollish side. Do they really contribute to what was some lively, heated debate or have they served to do nothing but to nudge things off onto a tangent, when discussion could have carried on without them? Personally, I feel your point could have been made without these images, which has only resulted in a locked topic, and discussion about the topic and not about the event itself.

In terms of the one image policy, that rule is there and the removal of such images is at the team's discretion. Single image posts can often be trollish, although in some cases can warrant being left up. In the case of this topic, the images are doing nothing except to wind up those who are willing to participate in proper, constructive debate rather than what I feel amount to nothing more than shock tactics in posting the images.

As for locking the topic, again this is down to the team's discretion, but we do appreciate feedback when this happens. The topic will be unlocked again shortly, however the team still reserve the right to remove or edit posts which we don't feel contribute to the discussion effectively. Play the free speech card as much as you want, but we have to strike a balance between constructive discussion and preventing what can quickly turn into arguments.

Website · Sat Sep 03, 2011 12:43 pm

Vik, I agree that the post that was removed was dark humour and in bad taste. If I am honest, it didn't really offend me that much, it was the later posts in the thread that I took offence to. As mentioned though, this post was removed due to posting guidelines. The fact that this post was the first response (or very nearly the first response) to a fairly serious thread (exc. the poll element) that someone had spent the time to create was a blatant and antagonistic attempt to create controversy. Yet again.

I also think that I am also allowed to say that I find these kinds of posts offensive without effectively being told 'If you don't like it, go elsewhere' (followed by a winky face of course). Always nice to hear.

I expect that the thread will be re-opened, it was just an overly cautious means to get some feedback from other team members. These kinds of threads are quite interesting to be honest, as you get a very real insight into people's personalites.

Veering off topic slightly, I do agree on your comments about some un-acceptable behaviour on meet up's, which have partially caused me to back away from them for the most part this year.

Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:04 pm

Just because the events of 9/11 don't directly affect most people on TTF, does that mean any remarks potentially offensive remarks should be accepted or allowed? In other words should we all see it as "it's as it doesn't bother me". Given the scale of 9/11 there are still thousands of people who have been affected by it, and they would no doubt take offense to something like that.

As I said earlier, remember that what is posted on these forums is viewable to just about anyone online. Imagine if an American was to look through that thread. How do you think it would make them feel? Odds are they wouldn't be impressed. Is this the kind of image we want TowersTimes and TTF to give out to people reading?

While not as large as the event of 9/11 how would you feel if you looked at an American site and saw them making a mock of the 7/7 bombings? Also, what would that make you think of the site? The scale is much smaller, but the point still stands. Put yourself into the position of an American person looking at that topic. I doubt you'd be impressed seeing that.

Regardless of if we were directly affected by something or not, that in no way makes it acceptable to make offensive remarks.

If like Sam you think the events were incredibly overly hyped as it were then by all means feel free to say it. But be considerate of how others feel on the same matter when voicing your opinions. That's all.

Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:11 pm

[quote=""Vik""]especially when it is seemingly deemed acceptable on meets to crush people up in queue lines and shout 'Hillsborough'.[/quote]

What a moronic thing to do.

The people who partake in that should be absolutely ashamed of themselves.

If Theme Park Review were mocking the 7/7 bombings I'm sure select individuals on here would be taking a completely different view on the matter.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

DiogoJ42 · Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:18 pm

I find it interesting, considering that some of the stuff posted on this forum, never mind shouted out loud on meets, is practically intended to offend people, that this is the one topic being clamped down on. :-k

Have the US government threatened TTF with legal action?

(Nathan: if you think that's bad, you should hear what some people were shouting in Germany

)

Craig · Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:27 pm

Let's make one thing clear here - whether you find it offensive or not the images were not really contributing to what was some very interesting discussion. They simply seemed to be there pretty much to be trollish towards those who had already raised objections to people's opinions about the event.

As for meetups, it's very much up to individuals how they behave on them. Although the forum might be used to organise the meetups, they take place in a public place, it's something that's difficult to police from a forum point of view. Ultimately, I would hope as adults people would raise their objections with the individuals concerned? Failing that, feel free to contact me regarding specific incidents and examples and I'll see what I can do.