Cencorship, Going a little overbord?

Discussion in 'Soap Box' started by Steel Tears, Mar 8, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Steel Tears

    Steel Tears Member

    Now i am sure that some people out there don't want to see the word Fuck a billion times in this post, because thats what most people try to cencor in text now days. Swearing

    I am wanting to know what your generalized idea of Cencorship is, and what should be cencored and what SHOULDN'T be

    I honestly think that the Admins of SF cencor too many of our posts because somone might find it "Offencive" yet they are willing to post up things that might make somone kill themselves as long as *Trigger Warning* Is in the topic. And thats just retarded..

    No doubt my message will be edited because of the previous post, but the admins are simply taking away more knowledge and insightful conversation that may spark from this

    Granted they arent doing bad either

    Now this is rather contradictory of me to say, but i will admit, that there are probably some posts that need to be tweaked a little. Like just Bashing Christians, or Vegans, Excessive swearing Etc. But cencoring somones views and own personal oppinions is wrong in my oppinion. Lets see what the masses say.
     
  2. Jenny

    Jenny Staff Alumni

    Hi there,

    Personally I don't swear a great deal, only when very stressed out. I don't particularly enjoy reading/hearing lots of swearing but at the same time i don't have anything against it. Most of the time it reflects how the person truly is feeling at the time..

    Sorry you feel Admins censor too much on this forum.. but seems you were wrong about this thread. I have not edited your post.. quite the contrary, I am interested in how members are feeling about the forum, afterall this is everyone's forum and you are entitled to your opinions...

    Having said that it is not possible to please everyone. We do try to make the forum 'safe'. 'Safe' means different things to different people so what may trigger one person may not another, etc. I'd like to think we don't allow threads on the forum that may "make" someone kill themselves as long as 'trigger' is in the title. For example, if someone is encouraging suicide or breaking any of the rules, it doesn't matter what is in the title, the post will be edited.

    Thanks for raising your issues and hopefully this thread will attract some constructive feedback.. I look forward to hearing from people. If anyone doesn't want to post publicly on the forum you can always approach any member of staff, including myself :)

    :grouphug:
     
  3. Steel Tears

    Steel Tears Member

    Yeah, it will be interesting to see what some people have to say.. I am Honestly looking forward to ProzacDeathWish's response.
     
  4. Steel Tears

    Steel Tears Member

    BTW, can i get off moderation? I already explained my situation to the Admins and stuff, so i might as well explain it out here too.

    Me and a bunch of people that i know all go to the same school. We all also go to this forum to seek advice and support. The problem is that the schools internet is routed through a single main hub, meaning that all our IP addresses are the same, Etc. 's why we have so many accounts from this one place. And its really annoying under moderation.. It seems like people don't take you seriously, or even look at your posts much.. -Shrug-
     
  5. sadsong

    sadsong Staff Alumni

    Just so you know the issue of your moderation has been bought up with staff (thanks jenny!) and we'll discuss it.

    I do agree with you that sometimes things are censored too much. I personally rarely edit a post, but that's usually cos there's someone around who might have done it before me!

    I think the problem comes with the fact that it's hard for people who are vulnerable or not thinking straight don't always take the responsibility for themselves to keep safe. Everyone has something that triggers them, and that's going to be different from everyone else. We all need to take responsibility for avoiding threads that we don't like, and not to keep on replying and starting arguements. But when we're not thinking straight, it's hard to people to do that.

    If we wanted to keep everyone completely safe then everything would be edited because it would offend someone.

    Having said that if someone broke the rules then the post would definately be edited.

    just my thougts.
    Lizzy
     
  6. PoetMan

    PoetMan Well-Known Member

    I haven't noticed much censorship because I haven't been here that long, but I have noticed that it makes some posts hard to understand. I think if you think a key part of the post is inappropriate it would be better just to remove the whole thing.
     
  7. Steel Tears

    Steel Tears Member

    True as that may be, some topics are just plain innopropreate IE Suicide methods, past experiances with trying toi do it ETC because it states in the rules, that you are not allowed to discuss methods with other people, and by allowing people to post their stories, it is the same as telling somone how to do it.

    I honestly also think that NOTHING on this thread should be edited, just so that people can say what they want to. It makes it easier to understand things when your blunt then when yor trying to beat around the bush and prey that they get it.
     
  8. Fluffy

    Fluffy Well-Known Member

    I have to say that from the time I have spent here so far I think those involved in maintaining the site and keeping it safe do a very good job. I haven't noticed anything that I would perceive to be excessive moderating - although I know it is harder to tell in retrospect when something has already been edited. I think tho that with a forum that deals with issues such as this and very vulnerable people, it is better to err on the side of caution and risk over-moderation that to go the other way too far. I moderate on another forum that deals with sensitive issues and it can be a tough judgement call sometimes; we are all human after all.
     
  9. Mya

    Mya Well-Known Member

    Can i get of mod to? ive been really good and i miss being able to change my settings and look at peoples pages and stuff...if not...oh well i guess...:unsure: :unsure:
     
  10. worlds edge

    worlds edge Well-Known Member

    I am wanting to know what your generalized idea of Cencorship is, and what should be cencored and what SHOULDN'T be


    A difficult question to answer from where I'm sitting. In general I think it is a legal issue, meaning it can typically only be imposed by a government, or perhaps a quasi-governmental entity. In the USA most colleges have imposed rather draconian speech codes, as an example of what I mean by "quasi-governmental."

    Beyond that it is the restriction of ideas, images, books, etc., through fines or prison terms, that sort of thing. I'm afraid I'm rather a prude on sexual issues, so I generally support restrictions on (say) sexually provocative billboards. I do not support the suppression of any ideas, no matter how absurd or offensive. As in, if somebody wants to deny the Holocaust they should be allowed to. Doesn't mean I have to read what they say.

    I'm a firm believer in private property, however. Meaning if somebody wants to watch pornography in their own home, they should be allowed to. Going the other way, if a commercial webserver doesn't want to host porn or holocaust denial or what have you, they should not be required to...somebody else doubtless will.

    I honestly think that the Admins of SF cencor too many of our posts because somone might find it "Offencive" yet they are willing to post up things that might make somone kill themselves as long as *Trigger Warning* Is in the topic. And thats just retarded..

    I think you're proceeding from a mistaken premise in that Suicide Forum is private property and the owner of the site can impose whatever sorts of rules they wish. If you wished to, with a little effort and some cash you could create a discussion forum of your own where you could permit or forbid anything you wished. If you wish to post here, though, you agree to abide by whatever rules the administration sets. (And FWIW, I've seen a few "free speech" forums, they've all turned into nonstop flamefests in short order.)

    Thus, whatever is done to you (or me, for that matter, and yes I've had at least one post deleted at SF) here is not really censorship. And are things really that restrictive here, anyway? The biggest thing I personally need to bite my tongue over is the pro-life/anti-suicide bias, but I understand that the rules are the rules.

    No doubt my message will be edited because of the previous post, but the admins are simply taking away more knowledge and insightful conversation that may spark from this

    Speaking of "insightful conversation" should you yourself define the terms you're asking others to define?

    Now this is rather contradictory of me to say, but i will admit, that there are probably some posts that need to be tweaked a little. Like just Bashing Christians, or Vegans, Excessive swearing Etc.

    I imagine this sort of thing is done simply to keep threads from devolving into flame-fests. Unfortunately unmoderated forums sink pretty quickly to that level. For a forum to remain viable somebody has to be willing to play cop. Preferably somebody with thick skin because nobody's going to appreciate you and everybody's gonna bitch at you. (At least that's how it seemed my one and only time being a moderator on a site devoted to political debate. :tongue: )

    But cencoring somones views and own personal oppinions is wrong in my oppinion. Lets see what the masses say.

    I agree with you in one sense, in that the censoring by statute of personal opinions is wrong . However, I disagree that what occurs here is censorship in that sense, or really in any sense. That someone will be denied an outlet for any opinion simply because it is not permitted here on SF does not follow. And I'll take that one step further. If somebody showed up here and all they wrote about was automobiles, Jessica Simpson and The Lord of the Rings, the Adminstration would be perfectly within their rights to send them on their way. This site simply isn't supposed to be about any of those topics, even though none of what I've mentioned is necessarily offensive. They're just all wildly off-topic and would degrade the discussions of suicide and depression.

    Heck, there are hundreds, for all I know, thousands, of discussion forums out there. If SF isn't to your liking, find one that you're more comfortable with. Or start one of your own.
     
  11. Robin

    Robin Guest

    I've removed Steel Tears and Ivy from under moderation, will email everyone else from your school to let me know which account they would like to have reopened.
     
  12. PoetMan

    PoetMan Well-Known Member

    Let's here it for gmork, the last bastion of logical reasoning!
     
  13. I agree with gmork that because the SF is a private entity they have the right to set up their own parameters as to what is tolerated or not.

    Having said that, I believe the censorship threshold is set too low ( for my tastes ) here at the SF. Suicide is a serious topic and I believe we as
    individuals have the right to deal with it from any angle that we choose to, be it pro or con. I frequently feel that a true sharing of opinions is stifled here because of the paternalistic atmosphere. Again, that's not my call, it's not my forum to do as I please.

    I get what I can from the limits that are placed upon me here. I don't try to fight the system. There are other sites available that offer a more balanced approach to suicide and I visit them as well. In this sense, variety is not only the spice of life...but the spice of death as well.

    Long story short, use the internet. Options abound.
     
  14. Ignored

    Ignored Staff Alumni

    Well, we don't try to have a balanced approach insofar as we do not have a laissez-faire attitude to suicide. We are pro-life and actively state and promote that... there is no attempt to suck people in and then spring it on them. In all that we state we claim to be pro-life... if people disagree then they don't have to stay.
     
  15. Why are you offended by my post ? Didn't I agree that this is your playground ? I never once insinuated or even hinted that the SF misrepresented itself. Your characterization of open-mindedness as "laissez-fare" is also very insulting to me.

    Apparently I cannot even share my thoughts on this thread without incurring a reprimand. Your idea of a "balanced approach" is truly baffling to me.

    Your indignation toward me is NOT justified.
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2007
  16. Ignored

    Ignored Staff Alumni

    I don't believe that I expressed that I was offended or indignant. Just told you how it is! Nor is this a reprimand... am I not allowed to express an opinion???
     
  17. I will not be sucked into a flame war. Just leave it, okay ?
     
  18. Ignored

    Ignored Staff Alumni

    I had no intention of doing anything else.
     
  19. theleastofthese

    theleastofthese SF Friend Staff Alumni

    Ok everyone, take a few steps back and a few deep breaths and remember - we're all in this together. Please no fighting or feeling insulted or offended. Neither of your posts was inflammatory or insulting or offensive. Methinks that maybe you all are having a bit of a rough time. Please don't take it out on each other. We're all brothers and sisters in humanity, right? Come on, like I tell my cats, "hiss and make up".:rolleyes:

    love to you both,

    least

    blessed are the peacemakers... for they shall take the hit that was meant for someone else...
     
  20. Prozac waving hand "good bye".... leaves as door slams shut behind him.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.