I prefer to interpret these actions as rules enforcement.
If I get a ticket for speeding, it is not censorship.
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Political comments on the Binoculars and Spotting Scopes forum (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Hermann
- Start date
- Status
If I get a ticket for speeding, it is not censorship.
Deleting posts is censorship. Taking away your car would be censorship.
They do that for excessive speeding in some countries. In Canada too?
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
Anathema, not 'an anathema', a common error similar to saying 'hence why' when it should simply be 'hence', here endeth the lesson
Andy Adcock
Worst person on Birdforum
Totally agree.Deleting posts is censorship. Taking away your car would be censorship.
They do that for excessive speeding in some countries. In Canada too?
No and no.
Here is the definition for Censorship | Definition, History, Types, & Examples
Deleting spam is not censorship.
Do you have an example of censorship on BF?
It is a 14-day vehicle impoundment at roadside (in Ontario; each province has specific rules). Plus other sanctions.
A fairly harmless example is when I had the word "perfidious" deleted.
I used it to describe the behaviour of another member, who quoted out of context and tried to hijack the thread with his own gobbledegook - oh, hope that doesn't get censored!
Last edited:
Hermann
Well-known member
A couple of remarks:
- I've been on quite a few forums over the years, and I know all too well what can happen once politics is introduced. I've seen more than one peaceful forum go up in flames when the moderators didn't enforce the forum rules with regard to politics. These forums include rather technical forums.
- Birdforum has been lucky in this respect, mainly because people showed remarkable restraint when people posted political remarks, often as an "aside", but also because of the Ruffled Feathers Forum where people can engage in political discussions as much as they like.
- Of course it's best to let any political remarks pass. But you can't (and shouldn't) rely on common sense. At some stage someone from somewhere will feel triggered by some political remark, and write what he/she thinks is an "appropriate reply".
- Deleting political comments on Birdforum is not censorship. The Birdforum's owners have every right to enforce their own house rules. After all, it's their forum. It's not some public utility.
Now that’s funny, and true at the same time!
Not only straightforward and easy to understand, but better and more enjoyable too!
Excellent points all the way through and it would be best if they were deleted rather than left to stand unopposed.
We’ve already heard from one mod that they don’t have the time for it, but at least another here in this thread has suggested that reporting will lead to moderation, so we’ll see how it goes now that we know which one seems more likely to respond.
Seems there are at least a few of us who can agree that rules against verbal littering are not even close to censorship.
How so? The OP requested moderation and a mod indicated that as long as they were notified they’d be more likely to do something. Seems pretty useful to me.
Thank you.Anathema, not 'an anathema', a common error similar to saying 'hence why' when it should simply be 'hence', here endeth the lesson
Off to remove the extra word.
Redundancy is anathema to those who love language.
Last edited:
Binocollector
Well-known member
Censorship is something that only a government can use as a means to oppress free speech. The term doesn't apply to forum rules. Not even to Twitter and the likes, unless the government runs Twitter.
In this day and age, people think they have a right to express their opinions, no matter how controversial, on social media, on forums, on YouTube, you name it. And then whine about "censorship" when they cannot just post anything they want to in violation of rules that privately run (and often moderated by people who don't even get paid for it) forums try to enforce for the sake of even being able to keep things going.
I think many here, myself included, are old enough to remember a time before the internet. The only way to publicly voice an opinion back in those days was to write a "letter to the editor" or climb on a crate at "speaker's corner" or become a politician or journalist.
Did people cry about "censorship" back in those days when their letter to the editor wasn't printed in the next issue of the local newspaper?
In this day and age, people think they have a right to express their opinions, no matter how controversial, on social media, on forums, on YouTube, you name it. And then whine about "censorship" when they cannot just post anything they want to in violation of rules that privately run (and often moderated by people who don't even get paid for it) forums try to enforce for the sake of even being able to keep things going.
I think many here, myself included, are old enough to remember a time before the internet. The only way to publicly voice an opinion back in those days was to write a "letter to the editor" or climb on a crate at "speaker's corner" or become a politician or journalist.
Did people cry about "censorship" back in those days when their letter to the editor wasn't printed in the next issue of the local newspaper?
Last edited:
Probably.
- Status
