Should there Be Censorship on Heartland?

[9while9]

And therre lies the question of - when does moderation for the sake of political correctness or to prevent hurt feelings become censorship? Please, don't hate me for asking this question. I personally don't have an answer to it. (So don't assume that I do.) It is the asking of the question itself which promotes balance. I say - Ask the question, each of you - if you dare.

This guy may be a troll, but that is a valid question that deserves discussing.

Something only offends you if you let it.

Who cares if the guy makes a homophobic statement, the ignorant will laugh and the smart people will know he’s just an idiot. Seriously, why get offended by a homophobic remark when it’s quite obvious that if the person makes fun of someone vindictively just because of their sexuality, then they are obviously stupid. You guys are way too sensitive and you’re giving the troll its bottle.

You have hurt my feelings Nick.........

[nick the stripper]

You have hurt my feelings Nick.........

There, there. I'm sure it hurts less than what I'm about to do: blow your balls off.

[DarkAngel]

Now 9 - he is a troll - and a bastard. (with a sweet, mushy inside) If anyone wants a picture of 9 - p.m. me and I'll see what I can do.

[9while9]

You have hurt my feelings Nick.........

There, there. I'm sure it hurts less than what I'm about to do: blow your balls off.

Had to cut and paste to see the pick....

I love Army of Darkness...

[DarkAngel]

anyone fancy a pint...?

I'll take that pint now!

[CellThree]

You're all chatting s**t. Now give it a rest.

[Doktor Gott]

OK, I missed most of the thread since I was at home last night rapidly evacuating the contents of my stomach upwards..

However, with reference to the uniforms and that kind of thing, you only have to consider Laibach who have made a career out of such things.. only problem is, you will always have a number of people who take things literally and not realise that in fact their message is the opposite of the means of delivery.. bit like people missing the joke with the Sisters quite a bit..

[markfiend]

I personally think Heartland (or at least some of its members) occasionally goes through fits of political correctness gone mad. That’s not to say I dislike the members, I just think they become oversensitive.

Also, it annoys me to no end to see people who claim they believe in freedom of speech and then start screaming in an offended manner about how ‘you can’t say that, it’s wrong!’

And therre lies the question of - when does moderation for the sake of political correctness or to prevent hurt feelings become censorship? Please, don't hate me for asking this question. I personally don't have an answer to it. (So don't assume that I do.) It is the asking of the question itself which promotes balance. I say - Ask the question, each of you - if you dare.

For the last time...

In what way was locking a thread censorship? The posts are still there for all to see (I'm almost tempted to pull the thread back out of the trash...)

It's not just a case of "preventing hurt feelings" is it? "Oh it's all just for a giggle, we mean no harm!" -- yeah, right, that's what the bullies at my school used to say too.

Oh and FYI, anal sex is not practiced by all homosexual men, and there is such a thing as anal sex between a man and a woman.

What is it about other people's sex lives that winds you up so much? Not getting any?

[Doktor Gott]

Oh and FYI, anal sex is not practiced by all homosexual men, and there is such a thing as anal sex between a man and a woman.

If I remember correctly, this is from an article in the British Medical Journal on homosexuality and health, there are more heterosexual couples using anal sex as their "preferred method of sexual expression" than there are gay couples doing so...

At the end of the day, why the hell should we give a flying feck what someones sex live entails as long as its consensual and doesn't involve children or animals.. (i.e groups unable to give consent..)

What happens in someones bedroom really isn't any of my business.. just as long as they don't take a penchant to nailing their tackle to the chair on my bus to work in the morning...

[Badlander]

However, with reference to the uniforms and that kind of thing, you only have to consider Laibach who have made a career out of such things.. only problem is, you will always have a number of people who take things literally and not realise that in fact their message is the opposite of the means of delivery.. bit like people missing the joke with the Sisters quite a bit..

Exactly. In a perfect world where everybody would be smart, nice, beautiful, honest and love each other, you could very well separate the ethics from the aesthetics. But then again in a perfect world there would no such thing as Nazis and wars, so there would be no need to separate ethics from aesthetics either...

[Dark]

Dark - -where are you when I need you?

I'd gone to bed. Too much late-night arguments and paragraphs longer than 3 lines gives me a right headfuck.

I'm gonna stay quiet now, FWIW, this thread achieves nothing rather than argument.

Mine's a whiskey and orange, Barman Blast, and don't delay.

[Jaimie1980]

Swastika and other occult symbols nazis used were not created by them and have meaning beyond being nazi-symbols. Banning symbols like that is kinda like declaring all knives illegal so that a potential killer might not be tempted to use one.

(Just my opinion, not subject to criticism or discussion)

My opinion exactly as stated on another thread. Generally I believe in as little censorship as possible but I realise there might be times when it's needed.

[markfiend]

Well, to be fair, I have argued the same myself in the past. However, given that there are people on this board who are in Germany, and given that the symbols the Nazis used are largely now illegal there, it's more a case of discretion and consideration of other people than a case of censorship, no?

The same with swear-words coming out like "f**k" so that people who have swear-censors can still browse the board.

[Quiff Boy]

ok, so the focus of the discussion has changed now. good.

however, i must point out for the record the swastika in question it wasn't just a swastika image. there are plenty of them about – half of them are being thrown into dustbins or being punched into small pieces.

this image was the nazi party flag - a black swastika inside a white circle, on a red background.

which is a whole different kettle of spanners.

its not just an image, its a flag, a logo, a symbol - a symbol of something deeply unpleasant and deeply loathsome. and regardless of any moral debate about censorship etc, the long and short of it is that its not something i want on my forum.

and the fact that it has dubious legal implications for a decent proportion of HL's readers merely compounds my opinion that i was correct in seeking its removal.

you can intellectualise all you want about the ethical rights and wrongs of censorship in general, but this one ain't up for debate. it wasn't censorship, it was moderation.

i repeat, moderation

check further back in the thread for the dictionary definition and see how it applies to the removal of the flag for a hate-fuelled, bigoted, extremist fundamentalist group.

furthermore, its usage on the forum was purely inflammatory, and as such not welcome in this community.

i hope we're clear now.

[DarkAngel]

Oh and FYI, anal sex is not practiced by all homosexual men, and there is such a thing as anal sex between a man and a woman.

What is it about other people's sex lives that winds you up so much? Not getting any?

Now - wouldn't you consider that statement inflammatory as well as argumentative. Censor yourself first.

[DarkAngel]

And I bring you all back to the question - when does moderation become censorship? Perhaps you can offer some insight?

[Quiff Boy]

nevermind.

i look out the window from here at work and its lovely and sunny. and its friday. i'm finishing in a bit, and the footy is going to start soon. so i don't really care

have fun debating your hypothetical (and now near-mythical) censorship

still makes me laugh that some people seem to think moderating is the same as censoring

[DarkAngel]

still makes me laugh that some people seem to think moderating is the same as censoring

How can you presume to know what anyone else is thinking? Are you the thought police? It is a question and I am interested in hearing your view. When does moderation become censorship?

[Quiff Boy]

in this instance, censoring is when we remove something so that people cant see it

moderating is when we ask people not to do stuff for the sake of "the peace"

consideration. if you're so keen on the meaning of words, go read up on it.

as izzy so rightly points out further up in this thread, we could ALL deliberately post stuff that would upset someone, but why would we want to?

HL thrives as well as it does because most people here realise thus fact and draw their own personal lines.

you seem unable to grasp that concept.

you're also seeming to pose a question, but lets be honest here: it has barbs on it. its loaded. its not hypothetical, its personal and you’re trying to get me to justify myself.

here's a bit of news for you – I don’t need to justify myself. its my bat, my ball, my toys and my pram. and more importantly for you lot, my finger hovering over the big red OFF button.

you think i need this s**t? you think i spend all this time, energy and money on keeping this place running, so that people can call me a nazi because i choose to work on the basis that some people in the world like causing trouble, and should they surface on my forum, i'm going to stop them. end of story.

give me one good reason why my approach is wrong?

what utopian message board are you dreaming of where people run around casually throwing insults about in the name of freedom of speech? bet that's a lovely place to hang out.

i remember a couple of years ago when we had a spate of white supremacist posts. should i have left them? should I have left their hate and their bile on MY forum?

so what would happen if someone espousing the merits of child pornography decided to grace us with their presence? should I leave that too?

where exactly would you like me to draw a line? would you like to run this place? you think you could keep it going as long as this without it descending into a childish, petulant s**t storm every 20 minutes? think again. judging by your puerile attempts at provoking (the same) discussion (over and over) so far, i'd hazard a guess and say you wouldn’t last a week. and you certainly wouldn’t end up with something as fab and groovy as this place is. i'm proud of this forum. i'm proud of the people on it. i'm humbled that they seem to find the place i created nice enough to hang around as much as they do.

you want a go yourself? download this - www.phpbb.com - and get yourself some cheap hosting space. and have fun. speak to me again in 4 years, and tell me how you're coping.



why am i even being drawn into this? i never learn.

to quote the world's favourite troll: "ga weg".

[aims]

still makes me laugh that some people seem to think moderating is the same as censoring

How can you presume to know what anyone else is thinking? Are you the thought police?

Because he's the thought police and we're his loyal army of lemmings. Didn't you get the memo?

Or maybe it's just because people are crying censorship over moderation. Just a thought.

[Thea]

The thought police are everywhere... Just keep your tin-foil hat on and you'll be fiiiiiine

[Quiff Boy]

"because people are crying censorship over moderation"

yep. thats the bit that gives the game away.

i moderate, someone cries censorship.

i dont need to be uri geller or david bloody blaine to work that one out.

f**k me this is nice way to spend the afternoon innit?

[_emma_]

I can't believe I've just read 12 pages of it!
For God's sake, it's easy. Nazism is wrong, and so it should be banned/censored/trashed. Homophobia is wrong, and so it should be dealt with the same way. So is any form of harassment, or any form of doing harm to other people on purpose (for no good reason). On the other hand, freedom of speech is a good thing, and getting to know other people's opinions is a good thing too.
As for flamewars on the Internet, they are usually immensely amusing. Even when "people" get "hurt".
All this considered, I voted for No.
Not that I think there is real censorship here.
But dear Mods, please don't close the most amusing threads so soon in the future. Danke.

[Quiff Boy]

"Not that I think there is real censorship here."

thank you.

thats the point we're missing from this poll isn't it?

whilst the question is "should there be or shouldn't there be?", what DA is alluding to (and what everyone knows she is alluding to) is that there *is* censorship here.

and as emma points out, there is no "real" censorship. we have gentle moderation, which when pushed can turn heavy, but it always begins gentle. and that is enough for most reasonable human beings - they realise that they are over-stepping the mark and that their comments aren't approriate.

i'd be very interested to see the results of a similar poll here that asks if people are happy with the levels of moderation/censorship/whatever you want to call it, on HL

in short, f**k it. DA is wrong, most people know DA is wrong, and if you Mrx & Mrs DA don't like the way we do things here, well... as the saying goes, don't let the door hit you on the arse.

(storm < teacup) < heartland

so can we please let it lie now?

[Doktor Gott]

"Not that I think there is real censorship here."

thank you.

thats the point we're missing from this poll isn't it?

whilst the question is "should there be or shouldn't there be?", what DA is alluding to (and what everyone knows she is alluding to) is that there *is* censorship here.

and as emma points out, there is no "real" censorship. we have gentle moderation, which when pushed can turn heavy, but it always begins gentle.

that is enough for most reasonable human beings - the realise that over-stepping the make and that their comments aren't approriate.

i'd be very interested to see the results of a similar poll here that asks if people are happy with the levels of moderation/censorship/whatever you want to call it, on HL

in short, f**k it. DA is wrong, most people know DA is wrong, and if you Mrx & Mrs DA don't like the way we do things here, well... as the saying goes, don't let the door hit you on the arse.

(storm < teacup) < heartland

so can we please let it lie now?

Exactly, and if anything I would have thought that the majority of people on here would have by now realised the boundaries of speech on here, which if anything are in place to avoid nasty arguments or worse.. plus at the end of the day, I personally figure that not too many Sisters fans are likely to have anything in the way of right-wing tendancies..


and those that do can take them and -snip-