Circumstances under which censorship is ok.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gilbert Maines</b><p>I am not sure what these circumstances could be. Actually, I think that locking a thread and allowing it to die its natural death by falling off the front page is proper treatment under extreme circumstances. However, I do not pretend to either know it all, nor speak for others.<br /><br />Leon disagrees and contends that under extrordinary circumstances censorship is ok.<br /><br />What are your thoughts?<br /><br /><br />leon <br />(Premier Login leonl)<br />Forum Owner hey guys September 28 2007, 10:58 PM <br /><br /><br />Under an extraordinary situation I had to delete a few threads. <br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Frank Wakefield</b><p>Leon deleting a post, locking a thread, or banning someone isn't censorship. They are free to start their own site or board... they're not free to say whatever they want here.<br /><br />I have a few prewar Dinky Toys. If I start posting about those I think he'd act on that. That isn't censorship. Censorship would be disallowing me to start or continue my own board about Dinky Toys. <br /><br />So I accept what Leon has done in times past. I think that he shows great restraint.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>I agree with Frank. If Leon feels it's in the best interest of the board to delete a thread, that is not censorship. While we may prefer all threads to remain, there are always extenuating circumstances.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ed Ivey</b><p>Board participation is a privilege, not a right.<br /><br />There is no state action here. I just don't get all these references to 1st Amendment and censorship.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Jeff Lichtman</b><p>Thanks, Ed, for providing some sanity on this issue.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>will</b><p>Man, go away for a week for business...<br />Deleted threads, deleted posters, locked threads, posters who should be locked...<br />One of the funniest comments was about lurkers (like me) posting more if not for the likes of Jay, the Dorskins, sometimes Jim, the grammar police, etc. Would sort of defeat my status, wouldn't it?<br />Not much to add to the board, but have gotten a lot from it. Main point is that there is nothing that the pot-stirrers do that affect my lurking or participation. As for the train-wreck threads, I read the first 5 and last 5 posts.<br />One suggestion for Leon - make your moderating a little less public. Delete what you need to, ban whoever you want. Just do it. Don't need all the discussions/poles/opinions/votes about everything you do. Really detracts from the purpose of the forum. If a better forum shows up, you will know by the # of hits dropping. Hasn't happened yet...<br />One hour to kickoff.<br />Regards all -<br />William List<br /><br />edited spelling (sorry Barry)

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Rand brotman</b><p>i totally agree with all the posts here (so far). the board is a privelege, you cannot say whatever you want, and Leon should just run it the way he sees fit and not make to much drama when to lock or ban. once again, this is FREE, no membership fees, what i've learned from this board is amazing. thanks

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Mark L</b><p>I am more interested in discussing baseball cards than baseball card collectors. The more emphasis we are able to place on the former, the more interesting and engaging I find the board.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Harry Wallace (HW)</b><p>Ed, well said.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>barrysloate</b><p>Yea, the grammar police...those guys are a pain in the butt and I think they have to go!

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>JimB</b><p>I vote to delete this thread. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Can we just get back to cards please.<br />JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Guys,<br /><br />There's only one situation in which it is justifiable to delete a thread. You should delete a thread if it sucks the energy from the Board. In other words, a thread should be deleted when it depresses the community.<br /><br />There is only one reason to lock a thread. You lock a thread when there is nothing else to say. So far, Leon and the Crew have done a good job.<br /><br />Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Al C.risafulli</b><p>So, should this one be locked, or should it be deleted?<br /><br />-Al

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>It should be locked because we have covered all the bases. <img src="/images/happy.gif" height=14 width=14><br /><br />Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Gil</b><p>This thread should be deleted because the Net54 community has voted almost unanimously in favor of deleting threads. And this thread serves no purpose other than documenting that fact. And that fact is inconsequential since the voting membership prefers not to even be advised of such "board maintenance" issues.<br /><br />Personally, I've copied it, and some day I too will delete it.<br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>peter chao</b><p>Deletion is an extreme remedy and should not be done unless the energy of the community is being sapped.<br /><br />There's nothing wrong with this thread, we are documenting what we have agreed upon and made our final comments on the issue so let's lock the thread.<br /><br />Peter C.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Joann</b><p>Leon has recently had a policy of lock and leave on threads that have become disruptive, and I think it's a good one. It allows the content to be preserved but stops the arguing. He also does a good job letting arguments run their full course before locking.<br /><br />But there are cases that would justify deleting. The first that come to mind are the two recently where the original poster requested they be deleted and then deleted (himself) the content of the original post. Without the lead post the whole tread doesn't make sense, plus in this case the poster specifically requested it.<br /><br />And extraordinary circumstances would also be a reason to delete. A few that come to my mind off the top of my head would be obscenity, trolls, threats of violence or posting of exhaustive personal information. By that I mean the scary stuff like address, phone number, family makeup and contact info, place of work - the kind of stuff that allows people to find someone or harass them more directly than online. I know we exchange similar info on BST xactions, but someone posting specifics about someone else - especially if there is fighting or threatening going on - should be deleted. <br /><br />So I'm just rambling and saying that there are reasons to delete threads even in light of a general policy to lock but leave them intact. So far Leon's done a pretty good job of finding that line.<br /><br />As much as I am against censorship in general, I think Leon is best situated (and maybe has the best temperament and sense of balance) to decide what constitutes an extraordinary circumstance.<br /><br />Joann

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Eric B</b><p>Everyone seems to be against censorship. But I do it all the time. Usually it involves keeping "extreme" issues away from my children (age 6 and 8) when it involves pornography, disturbing graphics, foul language, etc. <br /><br />Other examples would be to keep prisoners from free discussions with associates (both incoming and outgoing) or allowing competitors the ability to influence your employees. PETA wouldn't have "Beef, it's What's for Dinner" ads in their newsletter advertisements. Schools, churches, employers, governments, etc. all have standards whereby they can and do filter out objectionable material. Heck, when I throw away the latest Pottery Barn catalog before my wife sees it I am censoring. <br /><br />A lot of times people confuse censorship with free speech. I love it when a person says he can criticize his employer because it's America and we have free speech. That just means that he won't be jailed for his comments. But he can be fired.<br /><br />On topic, the owner/moderator of a forum is free to do whatever they want.<br /><br />

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Ken W.</b><p>I want to vote: Willstk - the new KING of we Lurkers!!! Speaks for me.

[Archive]

Posted By: <b>Fred C</b><p>I bet this forum might be able to go 23 hours without an OT thread... is it possible? Possible yes, probable, no...<br /><br />Is it possible to keep a forum that completely focuses on only vintage cards - probably not. There are just too many people and to keep things "human" there has to be a little interaction outside of vintage cards. Things aren't exactly the same as they were before Leon took over but that's not saying they've become worse either. <br /><br />Censorship - wow, there's an interesting topic. As long as the censorship is dished out equally and then there shouldn't be a problem with it. When the censorship begins to fall on those that don't agree with the current leading regime then it's no longer censorship.