See other Miscellaneous Articles
Title: Debate on 4um censorship--Weigh In!
Source:
n/a
URL Source: http://n/a
Published: Jul 24, 2005
Author: Christine and Zipporah
Post Date: 2005-07-24 23:28:38 by christine
Keywords: censorship--Weigh, Debate
Views: 4008
Comments: 295
Because concerns by several members have been posted to us, both publically and privately, about the free speech "allowed" on 4um, we have decided to create three new categories. The primary hot button is that of the Israel/Jewish/Zionism topic. We do not wish to censor and we also do not wish to offend (in reality, unavoidable, as what
offends one may not offend another) anyone. With the availability of specific categories, each individual may eliminate an entire subject that he/she wishes not to view via his/her personal 'setup' page.
In the spirit of cooperation, and with the goal of working toward a satisfying and pleasant forum experience for everyone, we'd like to request that you avail yourselves of these specific category selections when posting your articles. The three new categories are:
Israel/Zionism
All is Vanity
Author! Author!
We hope that you all feel that this is an equitable solution.
Christine and Zipporah
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-128) not displayed.
.
.
.
#129. To: Starwind (#127)
Great. They've already decided. They don't want to be
burdened with the added expense and onerous task of sub-categorizing content.
They've already stated that sub-categorizing will open up a new set (and sub-
set) of arguments over what category the content or post should be placed in.
End of discussion, huh?
Now.. if you filter all categories that somehow could be offensive to you, then is that not the solution?
"...when a society believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda..."
How about if we let you review everything before it goes up? This seems to be the solution that you're groping for. If you don't want to see something, bozo it. Otherwise you're being a thread nanny trying to control what the other people see. This is not a popular position.
Of course the best idea, which is one I practice, is to put the entire rest of the forum on bozo and only read my own posts, this way I am always in agreement and nothing offends. :P
Not interested. I've got a life.
ROFL! Kinda like the daily affirmation? "Because I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggonit, people like me!" "I deserve good things. I am entitled to my share of happiness. I refuse to beat myself up. I am attractive person. I am fun to be with."
"...when a society believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda..."
I'm glad we're having this dialogue on open forum as I wanted input to your ideas and suggestions from everyone. So far, the concensus is that further categorization is not desired and that this has the potential to create more dissention and discord in the forum. However, I remain open to the points of view of any other members who wish to weigh in.
Too funny......and what a great idea. I'm going to start doing that, too.
Really? It seems a large part of your life is looking over the shoulders of posters, observing what you deem acceptable content. It's stuff for the Blue hair crowd.
Then what have you been yapping about for the past five days. Simple solution: If something offends you, don't read it. If someone else reads it, it's none of your business.
Anything from her can be placed in the "Rantings of a
Rapture Rodent" category. Would the inclusion of that word suffice? No. The Israel Uber Alles crowd will settle for no less than full-blown censorship, calling any mention of Israel/Jews in less-than-glowing terms, lies, spitting on the floor, racism, etc. They say they don't advocate censorship, but their circular arguments always end up back at the same place, demanding that posters be banned and the "offending" material removed and/or not allowed at all. It worked out wonderfully for Retard Central (FU), it's for the good of the forum, don'tcha know? I would suggest that posters that don't like the content of the forum go ahead and opus and call us all anti-Semites, and just get it over with. Better yet, they could opus from the country, putting their mouth where my tax dollars are being sent to, and move to Israel. They're sure not needed here.
LOL!!
"...when a society believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda..."
WOW....Good one!
Yep, TBL rants, palo adds a comment and Todd doesn't answer. That's app. 50% of the forum content, give or take a few posts. The destroyers of FU did well....
Yeah, and maybe they're looking in to see what true FREE SPEECH is. Outstanding post, Esso.
Fine by me. Always would have been. But as long as I was asked, don't expect me to blow smoke. Fine. Then at least put an end to the fantasy that filtering is the solution, that I'm dictating your forum management, and that I'm trying to censor posters. If you ask me my opinion, don't be surprised when you get it, and please don't recast it into "demands".
(The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only true good news)
I've done some testing on the bozo filtering and I do need to revisit it. Starwind is correct in some of these filtering holes. The bozo filter apparently is not working in the title box, but the category filter is. Both filters work on the LC page, but not the Latest Article page (which I'm guessing Starwind meant). It does not work on the headlines page, though that page is not visited much so it's not been much of a priority overall. I am seeing that bozo'd posters are never displayed on the LC page so I don't understand the last item. One difficult programming decision is what should happen if you have a category filtered, but then get pinged from a non-bozo in that category. Should you not see the ping because it's in a filtered category, or should the ping from the non-bozo take precedence over the category filter? And again what if a ping list you're subscribed to is used on a filtered category? Should the subscription ping or the category filter take precedence? Some might want to get the ping, some might not. Perhaps what should happen is the LC page should warn the user that they've been pinged to a filtered category (?) I could have the preference be indicated on the user setup page, but that might make things a little complicated for many to understand. There are other filtering options I've thought of which could help. One would be an "Ignore Thread" feature where if you see one particular thread you don't like that perhaps is generating dozens or hundreds of posts (and dominating the LC page), you can filter out that particular thread for perhaps 1 week. Another possible option is a Title Word filter where you give list of words on your setup page. If any of those words appear in the title of a thread, it's bozod. (I.e. "Jews" or "Zionism"). But yes, Starwind is correct that the present filtering is not doing everything it should be doing. I'll turn my attention to that in the coming days.
Outstanding play-by-play analysis. You should be a sports announcer -- missed your calling.
Plain talk like that is what we need. It's not just Todd.. At the risk of offending some people, I'll just say it out loud: Regardles of the free speech claims, "Anti-semitic" (Whatever that means now) material has, at times, met with a sub-zero response there. The Zio-Censors can count the havoc they caused on FU as, at least, a partial victory.. While Todd's quickly taking of what remains. :(
"Working Three Jobs is: Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic... Get any sleep?" (Laughs) ~ George W Bush
Good grief, Neil. This filtering and categorizing stuff is complex, cumbersome, and expensive -- all so some overly sensitive soul won't become offended and suffer post-traumatic stress disorder from having laid eyes on some text.
Wasn't this post originally called "3 New Catagories" ? Now is titled "Debate on 4um censorship--Weigh In!" Could the "critisiums" or "comments" sent to Neil, Chrissy, or Zip be posted here (not revealing who made them)?
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
Kind of like what she went through when she found out there was no Santa Clause
Book recommendation: Thinking About Social Thinking
Ha! A new career, eh? I’m actually working on one presently. It’s called vagabond.
Yes, I changed the title last night as I wanted to encourage comment by all members. The criticisms and comments are being posted here now as per my invitation to do so.
Perhaps, but at minimum, the existing filters should function as advertised. No debating that.
But then again, Jethro, what do you know? Post your petty, snide remarks to someone who's interested.
So true. The place has a mole in a key position. The place is NTBT (not to be trusted).
What about the complaints? Is it too "exposing" to reveal them to make a level playing field for debate?
The mind once expanded by a new idea never returns to its' original size
We're done now, crack, thanks.
Provided a decision is made at some point to further refine the filters, I'd suggest just simplfying this mess and taking the patron at their word. When they de-select options, I'd say that puts the onus on them.. The ball is in their court. You choose "NO, I don't want to see that" just filter everything. Member Pings, Subscription pings, all of it. It would seem simpler to implement from the programmers point of view, and.. if you leave a loophole here then, IMVHO, you can expect a whole new thread complaining about it at some point in the future. Hyper-sensitive patrons who never wish to miss a ping, probably shouldn't be de- selecting categories to begin with.. Should they?
"Working Three Jobs is: Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic... Get any sleep?" (Laughs) ~ George W Bush
I think this "debate" then has been very productive.
Same thing.
I've heard you're already a vagabond virtuoso.
The *proper* response to "hate speech" is additional speech, engaging the person and winning a debate. A loser's tactic is censorship. Of course, there is always the "If you don't like what you're reading, don't read it." The First Amendment very nearly requires "hate speech" to be responded to with additional speech exposing the "hate speech" for what it is and challenging its author/speaker to defend it. Its a nicely self-policing system when used as originally intended.
There's been allot of speculation about that.. I know I saw something from a PM show up elsewhere, once. I like Bret, personally.. and I like FU. But to say it doesn't have some very real issues that remain completely unaddressed would be dishonest.
"Working Three Jobs is: Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic... Get any sleep?" (Laughs) ~ George W Bush
Thank you.....and very well stated.
I would too, but those are people that I have zero interaction with and it would be in DC where there are clear crime statistics pointing to more risk. It's not completely analytical obviously it's partly visceral, but I try to be more analytical once I have some interaction. On an anonymous crime-free forum it does not matter one iota what the race of any poster is. Unless they wear it on their sleeve. I choose to drink very little. If you told me you were Irish and didn't mention the alcoholic disposition of that race, I would assume nothing. But maybe that's just inexperience. Or too much experience, my GF died an alcoholic and my dad was borderline, but I drink in a few social situations without any problem.
(If you see flies at the entrance to the burrow, the ground hog is probably inside)
Comments (169 - 295) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestChristine, and/or Zipporah, and/or whomever they choose to
delegate. It's their forum and I'll accept their honest judgement.
#130. To: Starwind (#127)
#131. To: Phaedrus (#128)
I didn't say your job was easy. It can be done but perfection can't be the standard. We are, after all, only human ...
#132. To: Zipporah, christine (#130)
#133. To: crack monkey (#131)
How about if we let you review everything before it goes up?
#134. To: 1776 (#132)
Of course the best idea, which is one I practice, is to put the entire rest of the forum on bozo and only read my own posts, this way I am always in agreement and nothing offends.
#135. To: Starwind (#127)
#136. To: 1776 (#132)
Of course the best idea, which is one I practice, is to put the entire rest of the forum on bozo and only read my own posts, this way I am always in agreement and nothing offends.
#137. To: Phaedrus (#133)
Not interested. I've got a life.
#138. To: Phaedrus (#133)
Not interested.
#139. To: christine (#125)
Can you come up with a subcategory for me to place this post? ;)
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#140. To: Tauzero (#114)
The untruth might be resolved with the simple word "most".
#141. To: Jethro Tull (#137)
It's stuff for the Blue hair crowd.
#142. To: Esso (#140)
#143. To: Esso (#140)
It worked out wonderfully for Retard Central (FU), it's for the good of the forum, don'tcha know?
#144. To: Esso (#140)
It worked out wonderfully for Retard Central (FU), it's for the good of the forum, don'tcha know?
#145. To: christine, Freedom William (#135)
Freedom William: They've already decided. They don't want to be burdened with the added expense and onerous task of sub-categorizing content. They've already stated that sub-categorizing will open up a new set (and sub- set) of arguments over what category the content or post should be placed in. End of discussion, huh?
Christine: So far, the concensus is that further categorization is not desired and that this has the potential to create more dissention and discord in the forum.
#146. To: Starwind, christine, Zipporah, All, *Pinguinite Software* (#63)
As it is, the bozo filter does not filter articles on the "Latest" menu, the latest comments page, the headlines page, and doesn't even filter pings from bozo'd posters.
#147. To: Jethro Tull (#143)
#148. To: Esso (#140)
I would suggest that posters that don't like the content of the forum go ahead and opus and call us all anti-Semites, and just get it over with. Better yet, they could opus from the country, putting their mouth where my tax dollars are being sent to, and move to Israel.
The IF crowd hates clean and non-parsed speech, they flee truth like a vampire does a Cross.
#149. To: Jethro Tull (#143)
#150. To: Neil McIver (#146)
#151. To: christine (#13)
Debate on 4um censorship--Weigh In!
#152. To: Freedom William (#150)
all so some overly sensitive soul won't become offended and suffer post-traumatic stress disorder from having laid eyes on some text.
Hey, Meester,wanna meet my seester?
#153. To: christine, All (#111)
The Roman Emperors American people could have any single bureaucrat killed removed from office, but ultimately they required the cooperation of the bureaucracy in order to rule.
#154. To: Freedom William (#147)
#155. To: Itisa1mosttoolate (#151)
#156. To: Freedom William (#150)
Good grief, Neil. This filtering and categorizing stuff is complex, cumbersome, and expensive -- all so some overly sensitive soul won't become offended and suffer post-traumatic stress disorder from having laid eyes on some text.
#157. To: Jethro Tull (#137)
Really? It seems a large part of your life is looking over the shoulders of posters, observing what you deem acceptable content. It's stuff for the Blue hair crowd.
#158. To: Jhoffa_, unamused, Ross (#149)
The Zio-Censors can count the havoc they caused on FU as, at least, a partial victory..
#159. To: christine (#155)
#160. To: crack monkey (#138)
#161. To: Neil McIver (#146)
One difficult programming decision is what should happen if you have a category filtered, but then get pinged from a non-bozo in that category. Should you not see the ping because it's in a filtered category, or should the ping from the non-bozo take precedence over the category filter? And again what if a ping list you're subscribed to is used on a filtered category? Should the subscription ping or the category filter take precedence?
#162. To: Neil McIver, Starwind, All (#156)
Perhaps, but at minimum, the existing filters should function as advertised. No debating that.
#163. To: Flintlock (#152)
Kind of like what she went through when she found out there was no Santa Clause
#164. To: Jethro Tull (#154)
Ha! A new career, eh? I’m actually working on one presently. It’s called vagabond.
#165. To: Freedom William, Starwind (#82)
#166. To: Jethro Tull (#158)
The place has a mole in a key position.
#167. To: mirage (#165)
#168. To: Tauzero (#107)
But even Jesse Jackson was relieved once to find that the sounds of footsteps behind him were not being made by a group of young black men.
.
.
.