[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Again its not a new rule as such. Its always been a rule that threads should stay on topic. Natural discourse is fine, like if the thread ends up going in another direction. The puposeful turning round of every thread onto one subject is not. And that really is how it appears to me, and a lot of members too.

Again though I should say, personally I think it might have been a bit heavy handed in the Mogg thread. But I CAN see why they were deleted as they were basically just 'well you like Corbyn so ner ner ner ner ner' type posts from what I saw. I do think in threads about current politics, obviously Corbyn can be relevant. But it really adds nothing to the discussion at all to be just answering a thread about someones voting record with 'Corbyn is bad' or whatever

I am not going to comment publically on what dezzy does or does not do. Thats totally up to him to explain.

I can't remember word for word as it's been removed. I think it began when I pointed out that if the thread had been about Corbyn and the same words thrown about there would have been a riot. I thought it was a relevant point since there a lot of posts calling Reese Mogg names like scum and rancid. I'm still unsure how that is ner ner ner. It's a fair point on the use of language and personally I don't think it's necessary to call anyone scum etc. I mean I don't like Diane Abbott and I've called her a hypocrite because she sends her son to private school while promoting state schools for everyone else. But I don't think that is the same as calling her scum etc.

I am not a Tory supporter but I often find myself defending the right due to the sheer level of nastiness aimed that way here. It would be different if it was a relevant point but it's just name calling usually.

[bots]

let's call a spade a spade. Throwing around ill considered terms like scum at a person that is democratically elected to parliament and has not done anything close to illegal is purely inflammatory. This is serious debates, and if someone wants to criticize on a topic, it should be thoughtful and accurate. If everyone stuck to that, it would be a lot fairer, and a lot less controversial.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Again its not a new rule as such. Its always been a rule that threads should stay on topic. Natural discourse is fine, like if the thread ends up going in another direction. The puposeful turning round of every thread onto one subject is not. And that really is how it appears to me, and a lot of members too.

Again though I should say, personally I think it might have been a bit heavy handed in the Mogg thread. But I CAN see why they were deleted as they were basically just 'well you like Corbyn so ner ner ner ner ner' type posts from what I saw. I do think in threads about current politics, obviously Corbyn can be relevant. But it really adds nothing to the discussion at all to be just answering a thread about someones voting record with 'Corbyn is bad' or whatever

I am not going to comment publically on what dezzy does or does not do. Thats totally up to him to explain.

No I don’t expect you to, but if these deletions are a new rule of SD it would be good to make it clear before members have posts deleted, otherwise the thread ends up like this

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

I can't remember word for word as it's been removed. I think it began when I pointed out that if the thread had been about Corbyn and the same words thrown about there would have been a riot. I thought it was a relevant point since there a lot of posts calling Reese Mogg names like scum and rancid. I'm still unsure how that is ner ner ner.

I was paraphrasing, and there were a lot of posts removed from there. You seem to think this is all about your post? Its really really not.

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

let's call a spade a spade. Throwing around ill considered terms like scum at a person that is democratically elected to parliament and has not done anything close to illegal is purely inflammatory. This is serious debates, and if someone wants to criticize on a topic, it should be thoughtful and accurate. If everyone stuck to that, it would be a lot fairer, and a lot less controversial.

It's a fair point on the use of language and personally I don't think it's necessary to call anyone scum etc. I mean I don't like Diane Abbott and I've called her a hypocrite because she sends her son to private school while promoting state schools for everyone else. But I don't think that is the same as calling her scum etc.

I genuinely did not know people found the word scum so offensive. This is the first I have heard of it and have seen the word used a lot of times. Both in this section and the BB sections.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

No I don’t expect you to, but if these deletions are a new rule of SD it would be good to make it clear before members have posts deleted, otherwise the thread ends up like this

This is why I have asked admin to comment.

And as I said, its not a new rule. Its something thats been in place for a long time. Just its been abused like hell recently.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I was paraphrasing, and there were a lot of posts removed from there. You seem to think this is all about your post? Its really really not.





I genuinely did not know people found the word scum so offensive. This is the first I have heard of it and have seen the word used a lot of times. Both in this section and the BB sections.

It seems an extreme use of language for just being in politics and inflammatory and aimed to provoke in that context. It wasn't the only word negatively used. For instance if I was going to call someone scum it would be a child murderer. It just seemed odd in context that scum was ok but some of the other things said weren't ok and vanished.

Well it's all about me! But seriously I felt it was me who brought Corbyn up and my posts were removed.

I didn't like to hear people call Ann scum either. It seemed extreme.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by jaxie

It seems an extreme use of language for just being in politics and inflammatory and aimed to provoke in that context. It wasn't the only word negatively used. For instance if I was going to call someone scum it would be a child murderer. It just seemed odd in context that scum was ok but some of the other things said weren't ok and vanished.

Well it's all about me! But seriously I felt it was me who brought Corbyn up and my posts were removed.

I didn't like to hear people call Ann scum either. It seemed extreme.

3 seperate people brought Corbyn up before you did, those posts were quoted numerous times. Then you posted

It's funny, if this was a Jeremy Corbyn thread people would be up in arms and butthurt.

But the other comments may have been removed before you did post...so you may not have seen them.

Took me ages to load those deleted posts for some reason.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

3 seperate people brought Corbyn up before you did, those posts were quoted numerous times. Then you posted



But the other comments may have been removed before you did post...so you may not have seen them.

Took me ages to load those deleted posts for some reason.

I don't remember seeing anything about him before I posted. So maybe they were deleted first then. The posts were leaving that thread really fast.

[Vicky.]

Yes. The first attempt to turn it into another Corbyn thread was just 4 posts into the thread. Yours was waaaay down the thread

[Josy]

Originally Posted by jet

That is nothing to do with what is being asked. I just want an answer to this question as do others:

So in future, the rules are that if a politician or party is being discussed in a critical way, using inflammatory language, it isn't allowed to bring another into it for comparison purposes as they have no relevance and the people should just suck up the inflammatory language, is that right?
Sounds like a blog to me with the comments section closed.

Originally Posted by Brillopad

You have explained nothing - just attempted to justify your biased modding. It as controlling as any politician I have seen on either side. Those in glass houses and all that.

Originally Posted by Brillopad

Tbh honest Vicky I fail to see how the mention of Corbyn in that thread can be described as derailing the thread as it was pretty obvious it was Corbyn supporters who attacked Mogg - so it seems very relevant to me.

It also seems obvious to me that some mods are more able than others to stop their personal opinions from affecting how they react to certain topics. The accusations of derailing the thread are increasing ten-fold and also appear to be a convenient shut-down tactic to me.

So im a bit late commenting on this but completely agree with both Dezzy and Vickys opinion on the derailment of threads with all the Corbyn stuff and its seemingly the same posters that are guilty of this, it needs to stop and these sort of comments that are designed to derail threads will be removed and the posters will be infracted if they continue to do it, no its not censorship its us trying our best to stop threads constantly going off topic and descending into the same old arguments.

[Livia]

I'm only coming in at the end of this for a bit of a comment. I think one of my own posts may have been removed, not sure... but it's a regular thing. So when exactly can we mention the name, Corbyn if not in a thread about politics? And which other politicians cannot be mentioned if the thread isn't purely about them? People have to get away from the idea that his name is mentioned purely to upset other posters. It is not. It is mentioned because he is the leader of one of the two biggest parties in the country. And when you look at some of the things that have been said about the Tories in Corbyn support threads, some of the pictures and jokes that have been posted, it looks to me like censorship. And now we're going to be banned and infracted. This is TiBB, not Momentum. At the moment Mods are claiming to know the workings of people's minds by telling them that they only came in to bait. And that's not true for me. Everyone who doesn't support Corbyn is treated the same, they're all baiting. And I can't see that as true.

I'll make sure to report every mention of every Tory in every Corbyn thread if that's the direction we're now taking.

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Livia

I'm only coming in at the end of this for a bit of a comment. I think one of my own posts may have been removed, not sure... but it's a regular thing. So when exactly can we mention the name, Corbyn if not in a thread about politics? And which other politicians cannot be mentioned if the thread isn't purely about them? People have to get away from the idea that his name is mentioned purely to upset other posters. It is not. It is mentioned because he is the leader of one of the two biggest parties in the country. And when you look at some of the things that have been said about the Tories in Corbyn support threads, some of the pictures and jokes that have been posted, it looks to me like censorship. And now we're going to be banned and infracted. This is TiBB, not Momentum. At the moment Mods are claiming to know the workings of people's minds by telling them that they only came in to bait. And that's not true for me. Everyone who doesn't support Corbyn is treated the same, they're all baiting. And I can't see that as true.

I'll make sure to report every mention of every Tory in every Corbyn thread if that's the direction we're now taking.

This needs clarification, taking this thread as an example there are plenty posts about the Tory's but not so many mentions of Teresa May per se, is that how to get around this new rule, talk about the party rather than the leader?

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Josy

So im a bit late commenting on this but completely agree with both Dezzy and Vickys opinion on the derailment of threads with all the Corbyn stuff and its seemingly the same posters that are guilty of this, it needs to stop and these sort of comments that are designed to derail threads will be removed and the posters will be infracted if they continue to do it, no its not censorship its us trying our best to stop threads constantly going off topic and descending into the same old arguments.

Hi Josy! Ok so you agree with both Dezzy and Vicky and yet they disagree because Vicky thought it was a bit heavy handed to remove all those posts on that particular thread. So can you clarify a bit more who you do agree with?

Can you tell me how my post derailed the thread and point me at how I am doing this often please? My post was removed and if you say it is the same people then you are lumping me in that.

As Livia said should we now be reporting every post about every politician who isn't in the thread OP when it's a political thread now?

Can we talk about Teresa May or is it just Jeremy Corbyn who is off topic?

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Can I ask if the Corbyn censorship will also be applied to those having his face as an avatar? Perhaps if we, as a forum, didn't have to look at him so often he wouldn't get brought up so much.

Are you for real? I didn't even comment on the JRM thread, and often avoid many ones in this section these days because they descend into the same tiresome, repetitive Corbyn mudslinging - so the idea that it's my avatar that's leading you to bring him up is complete nonsense. I'm flattered that you're trying to imply I have that much of an impact on you but seriously, take some ownership for your own actions.

My avatar was and is a JOKE that was combined with my Christmas name change and signature, the only reason it hasn't changed yet is I haven't had the time/couldn't be bothered to find one to replace it. He's wearing a Santa hat for Christ sake

[Vicky.]

Its not discussing seperate politicians. Its the constant turning threads into a singular topic. Like..lets say a member started bring every single politics thread (and some threads that arent to do with politics) round to Rees Mogg. This would be an issue. Where, mentioning Rees Mogg in a thread would not. It would become an even bigger issue if suddenly a couple+ of posters started doing this, and quoting all of each others posts in the derailed threads to keep the derailment going each time. Which would often end up in an argument that is offtopic, samey, and could have been stopped before it even started.

The huge problem we have to sort out now is, that there are now so many members who are bringing all threads round to Corbyn...that any mention of Corbyn turns entire threads into bickering about Corbyn. I ****ing hate the word Corbyn recently, not just for himself, but because I have typed it, and read it way too many times.

Can any of you think of a solution here, as I actually am struggling, a lot...to think of solutions beyond deleting posts when they start taking threads offtopic. Given removing the regular offtopic posts (that usually are just sniping...and turn into full blown arguments half the time) is apparently the wrong thing to do I do welcome all suggestions here. Feels a bit..rock and a hard place.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by jaxie

Hi Josy! Ok so you agree with both Dezzy and Vicky and yet they disagree because Vicky thought it was a bit heavy handed to remove all those posts on that particular thread. So can you clarify a bit more who you do agree with?

Can you tell me how my post derailed the thread and point me at how I am doing this often please? My post was removed and if you say it is the same people then you are lumping me in that.

As Livia said should we now be reporting every post about every politician who isn't in the thread OP when it's a political thread now?

I agree with both of them about the thread derailments in general im not referring specifically to this thread.

No theres no need for anyone to be reporting things like that, thats obviously completely over the top and of course it depends on the thread and the context of the replies.

My main point is the offtopic corbyn stuff in most of the serious debates threads.

I havent been around much lately but as far as im aware youre not one of the members thats guilty of doing it.

[jaxie]

Originally Posted by Jack_

Are you for real? I didn't even comment on the JRM thread, and often avoid many ones in this section these days because they descend into the same tiresome, repetitive Corbyn mudslinging - so the idea that it's my avatar that's leading you to bring him up is complete nonsense. I'm flattered that you're trying to imply I have that much of an impact on you but seriously, take some ownership for your own actions.

My avatar was and is a JOKE that was combined with my Christmas name change and signature, the only reason it hasn't changed yet is I haven't had the time/couldn't be bothered to find one to replace it. He's wearing a Santa hat for Christ sake

You aren't the only person who has a Corbyn avatar and it's a fair question. If someones face is there it makes you think of them. If we aren't supposed to mention him then it's going to be harder if, as well as being the leader of the opposition, we have to keep seeing his face. I can't speak for others but I am personally influenced by visuals.

Interestingly talking of mudslinging, I don't think I've seen Corbyn called scum on a thread in recent history.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its not discussing seperate politicians. Its the constant turning threads into a singular topic. Like..lets say a group of members started bring every single politics thread (and some threads that arent to do with politics) round to Rees Mogg. This would be an issue. Where, mentioning Rees Mogg in a thread would not. It would become an even bigger issue if suddenly a couple+ of posters started doing this, and quoting all of each others posts in the derailed threads to keep the derailment going each time.

The huge problem we have to sort out now is, that there are now so many members who are bringing all threads round to Corbyn...that any mention of Corbyn turns entire threads into bickering about Corbyn. I ****ing hate the word Corbyn recently, not just for himself, but because I have typed it, and read it way too many times.

Vicky, with great respect... You must have seem some of the stuff posted about the Tories. Not just May, but any Tory who's in the news that day. Have you had a lot of complaints about that? Because it's looking pretty one-sided at the moment. Like I said, Corbyn is the leader of one of the main parties in the UK. And he is a controversial figure. Discussions about politics always get heated... but it looks like Corbyn is being singled out for special attention? I've seen some pretty crappy stuff posted about the Tories... but you know, that's politics. And if we, as adults, are going to discuss politics, some feelings are going to get hurt. It's the way it is. I don't support Corbyn, but I don't support May either. And I feel like as a 37 year old professional woman I shouldn't be told that" you were only making that comment to upset [insert name of Corbyn supporter] when it is not true. At the moment it looks like Admin is taking sides and not being impartial... otherwise you're going to have to police every mention, of every politician, from every party in case someone feels like their being baited.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

Its not discussing seperate politicians. Its the constant turning threads into a singular topic. Like..lets say a member started bring every single politics thread (and some threads that arent to do with politics) round to Rees Mogg. This would be an issue. Where, mentioning Rees Mogg in a thread would not. It would become an even bigger issue if suddenly a couple+ of posters started doing this, and quoting all of each others posts in the derailed threads to keep the derailment going each time. Which would often end up in an argument that is offtopic, samey, and could have been stopped before it even started.

The huge problem we have to sort out now is, that there are now so many members who are bringing all threads round to Corbyn...that any mention of Corbyn turns entire threads into bickering about Corbyn. I ****ing hate the word Corbyn recently, not just for himself, but because I have typed it, and read it way too many times.

Can any of you think of a solution here, as I actually am struggling, a lot...to think of solutions beyond deleting posts when they start taking threads offtopic. Given removing the regular offtopic posts (that usually are just sniping...and turn into full blown arguments half the time) is apparently the wrong thing to do I do welcome all suggestions here. Feels a bit..rock and a hard place.

What about moving all off-topic discussions of Corbyn (or other issues that derail threads) into specific big threads that have already been created for that purpose? A bit like that thread TS was posting in the other week that he suggested was recreated, if a discussion about x turns into a discussion like 'yeah x is x but CORBYN IS Y', then rather than the posts being removed which seems to be frustrating people, they're moved to a Jeremy Corbyn thread (I think one was created recently, and certainly arista had the original when he first became leader and updated it for about 18 months), where the members involved can then discuss his relation to the original topic to their hearts content, while everyone else continues the original discussion back in the main thread.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Livia

Vicky, with great respect... You must have seem some of the stuff posted about the Tories. Not just May, but any Tory who's in the news that day. Have you had a lot of complaints about that? Because it's looking pretty one-sided at the moment. Like I said, Corbyn is the leader of one of the main parties in the UK. And he is a controversial figure. Discussions about politics always get heated... but it looks like Corbyn is being singled out for special attention? I've seen some pretty crappy stuff posted about the Tories... but you know, that's politics. And if we, as adults, are going to discuss politics, some feelings are going to get hurt. It's the way it is. I don't support Corbyn, but I don't support May either. And I feel like as a 37 year old professional woman I shouldn't be told that" you were only making that comment to upset [insert name of Corbyn supporter] when it is not true. At the moment it looks like Admin is taking sides and not being impartial... otherwise you're going to have to police every mention, of every politician, from every party in case someone feels like their being baited.

No admin arent taking sides livia we are trying to stop derailments of threads in this section with the same old stuff being posted constantly to bait other members and take threads off topic.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Josy

I agree with both of them about the thread derailments in general im not referring specifically to this thread.

No theres no need for anyone to be reporting things like that, thats obviously completely over the top and of course it depends on the thread and the context of the replies.

My main point is the offtopic corbyn stuff in most of the serious debates threads.

I havent been around much lately but as far as im aware youre not one of the members thats guilty of doing it.

By "guilty", you mean that a mod had decided that it's off topic and baiting. Because all mods are always impartial. But still no clear rule about other politicians being mentioned. Only Corbyn.

[Josy]

Originally Posted by Livia

By "guilty", you mean that a mod had decided that it's off topic and baiting. Because all mods are always impartial. But still no clear rule about other politicians being mentioned. Only Corbyn.

Theres wont be a clear rule about politicians being mentioned because like I previously posted it of course depends on the thread context and replies that follow.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Josy

No admin arent taking sides livia we are trying to stop derailments of threads in this section with the same old stuff being posted constantly to bait other members and take threads off topic.

Josy, I don't mean to be argumentative, but some mods are definitely taking sides. I've been pulled up in a thread twice, by the same mod, for baiting a Corbyn supporter. I was told that I'd only gone into the thread because that person was posting. In actual fact, the person in question hadn't been on the thread for hours, and when I signed in, I'd looked at who's online and that person wasn't even on the forum. We are not children.

[Crimson Dynamo]

if anyone is suggesting that the left leaning majority of this forum dont do exactly what is being suggested for Corbyn with May or Trump

that is laughable

[Livia]

Originally Posted by LeatherTrumpet

if anyone is suggesting that the left leaning majority of this forum dont do exactly what is being suggested for Corbyn with May or Trump

that is laughable

That, to my understanding, is what's being suggested.