Perceptions of sciforums moderation

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by James R, Apr 13, 2009.

?

Compared to other online forums, the moderation of sciforums is (tick all that apply)

Poll closed Apr 27, 2009.

  1. not strict enough

    9 vote(s)
    20.9%

  2. less strict

    18 vote(s)
    41.9%

  3. equally as strict

    6 vote(s)
    14.0%

  4. more strict

    5 vote(s)
    11.6%

  5. too strict

    1 vote(s)
    2.3%

  6. much less affected by the personal biases of moderators

    4 vote(s)
    9.3%

  7. a little less affected by the personal biases of moderators

    5 vote(s)
    11.6%

  8. about the same in terms of moderator bias

    10 vote(s)
    23.3%

  9. a little more affected by the personal biases of moderators

    7 vote(s)
    16.3%

  10. hopelessly affected by the personal biases of moderators

    4 vote(s)
    9.3%

  11. applied arbitrarily by moderators without any clear guidelines

    7 vote(s)
    16.3%

  12. applied somewhat more arbitrarily

    9 vote(s)
    20.9%

  13. applied with about the same moderator discretion

    7 vote(s)
    16.3%

  14. more strictly in accordance with the published rules

    1 vote(s)
    2.3%

  15. always rigidly applied according to the rules

    2 vote(s)
    4.7%

  16. hopelessly below par, even for unpaid volunteers

    5 vote(s)
    11.6%

  17. somewhat less competent

    4 vote(s)
    9.3%

  18. about the same in terms of moderator competence

    9 vote(s)
    20.9%

  19. somewhat more competent

    6 vote(s)
    14.0%

  20. very good, given that moderators are unpaid volunteers

    21 vote(s)
    48.8%

  21. I do not wish to participate in this poll

    3 vote(s)
    7.0%
Multiple votes are allowed.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Page 10 of 17
  1. Mrs.Lucysnow

    Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    No copernicus its has nothing to do with paedophilia as a subject matter.
     
    Mrs.Lucysnow, Apr 28, 2009
    #181

  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. copernicus66

    copernicus66 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    639
    Oh no, we mustn't discuss paedophilia.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    copernicus66, Apr 28, 2009
    #182

  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. John99

    John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    we shouldnt, or rather it serves no purpose. that is where the mods and admins are too lenient. forget cesspooling a thread, just delete it and be done with it.
     
    John99, Apr 28, 2009
    #183

  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Mrs.Lucysnow

    Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    Its been discussed here often in the past without any issue or problem just like everything else.
     
    Mrs.Lucysnow, Apr 28, 2009
    #184
  8. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    There is a difference between discussing it and advocating it.
     
    Bells, Apr 28, 2009
    #185
  9. copernicus66

    copernicus66 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    639
    So we should censor people who advocate reprehensible activities? Don't mention that to James R, he'd have a field day deleting all the posts which advocate meat eating!
     
    copernicus66, Apr 28, 2009
    #186
  10. John99

    John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    of course.
     
    John99, Apr 28, 2009
    #187
  11. copernicus66

    copernicus66 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    639
    Why? Why can't we just let people express their opinions, no matter how objectionable?
     
    copernicus66, Apr 28, 2009
    #188
  12. Mrs.Lucysnow

    Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    You can't be serious

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    You seem to purposely be missing the point here. Anyway this site is ok, maybe not to you but by and large its fine. Its a community and like all communities it controls who can or should be part of the community and what is or is not acceptable. You are not going to change this place because you have grievance with one or all of the mods, it would see the back of you first. The mods are members as well as representatives.
     
    Mrs.Lucysnow, Apr 28, 2009
    #189
  13. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Should we allow members to advocate fucking children, to put it bluntly?

    Eating meat is legal. Having sex with children is not.

    Can you tell why one is not acceptable on this site and why one is?
     
    Bells, Apr 28, 2009
    #190
  14. Orleander

    Orleander OH JOY!!!! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    25,817
    :wallbang: yep
     
    Orleander, Apr 28, 2009
    #191
  15. John99

    John99 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    22,046
    because we try to be civilized. i see no point to be controversial just for the sake of being controversial with nothing creative or even remotely intelligent to be derived from it.
     
    John99, Apr 28, 2009
    #192
  16. copernicus66

    copernicus66 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    639
    YES! No matter how objectionable such an opinion is, a member should be allowed to express it. Let me do a Baron Max and put things in perspective. Many posters on this forum argue in favour of a war in Iraq, and said war results in thousands of children being blown into iddy bitty bits. Are you going to censor anyone who argues in favour of a war?

    So we can't argue in favour of activities which are illegal? Oh well, no more threads which argue in favour of pot being legalised.

    I know *why* advocating pedophilia is not accepted on this site, but I don't necessarily agree with the justifications. Just because society as a whole finds such behaviour reprehensible doesn't mean we should censor people who would advocate such behaviour.
     
    copernicus66, Apr 28, 2009
    #193
  17. Mrs.Lucysnow

    Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    The member who shall not be mentioned wasn't being sensational nor creative nor controversial. That should tell you everything right there.
     
    Mrs.Lucysnow, Apr 28, 2009
    #194
  18. copernicus66

    copernicus66 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    639
    On this forum? HAH!

    I don't think individuals who advocate pedophilia (or attempt to minimise its effects) are trying to be controversial just for the sake of being controversial, they genuinely believe what they are saying. But even if they *are* being controversial just for the sake of it, why not let them? Sometimes such controversy is beneficial, it offers up a different perspective, allowing us to understand even the most perverse portions of society.

    How would you know that, if you don't even allow the discussion to flourish in the first place? You find pedophilia so reprehensible that whenever someone wants to discuss it in a way which defies social convention, you just erect a defensive wall in a knee-jerk fashion.
     
    copernicus66, Apr 28, 2009
    #195
  19. copernicus66

    copernicus66 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    639
    If the owners of the site wish to prohibit discussion of pedophilia, fine, it's their site. I'm not attempting to redefine rules or defy their wishes, just ensure that moderators are held accountable to them.
     
    copernicus66, Apr 28, 2009
    #196
  20. Mrs.Lucysnow

    Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    copernicus not only are you climbing up the wrong tree you have missed the branches and are in danger of falling to your demise. You are a member of this community but like all communities it chooses who they can tolerate and who they can't. If you try and change basic community values and functioning the community boots you out.
     
    Mrs.Lucysnow, Apr 28, 2009
    #197
  21. copernicus66

    copernicus66 Banned Banned

    Messages:
    639
    So now the members decide who goes and who stays? The majority can over-ride the wishes of the moderators and admin? Cool! All I need to do is behave in a charismatic fashion and win enough members over to my cause!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    copernicus66, Apr 28, 2009
    #198
  22. Mrs.Lucysnow

    Mrs.Lucysnow Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,879
    I have been here since 2003 and like I said threads on that subject have been discussed without issue. they are not prohibiting any discussion
     
    Mrs.Lucysnow, Apr 28, 2009
    #199
  23. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Oh?

    http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2238716&postcount=193

    Care to not contradict yourself?

    We do adhere to that rule in that we don't advocate paedophilia. But you're saying we should and then saying if the owners wish to prohibit it, they can since it is their site. Make up your mind.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Bells, Apr 28, 2009
    #200
Page 10 of 17
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page