[Tom4784]

Right, one last post to mention something I forgot before.

Remember that we'll also remove posts that mention or allude to deleted posts, some posts in that thread were removed because they simply mentioned other deleted posts.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

The biggest issue I have is that posts were removed under the pretense that they were off topic (which they clearly were not) when they disagreed with the political leanings of those censoring. That is perfectly clear from a mod's responses to being questioned on this very thread.

I'd have to take your word for that as I have no idea what posts were removed or of the content / tone of those posts.

I have to be honest and say that I'm inclined to believe that there was probably more to it than that, though, and that sometimes these posts are clearly made with the intent of baiting or point scoring "from other threads" rather than in the genuine spirit of engaging with the debate.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I'd have to take your word for that as I have no idea what posts were removed or of the content / tone of those posts.

I have to be honest and say that I'm inclined to believe that there was probably more to it than that, though, and that sometimes these posts are clearly made with the intent of baiting or point scoring "from other threads" rather than in the genuine spirit of engaging with the debate.

that's up to you of course. I can only speak from my own opinion, and I pride myself in being pretty fair most of the time, and i see it as censorship. It is a private forum, they can make their own rules as they see fit, but I won't engage in future political debate on this forum under the current terms of censorship

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

that's up to you of course. I can only speak from my own opinion, and I pride myself in being pretty fair most of the time, and i see it as censorship. It is a private forum, they can make their own rules as they see fit, but I won't engage in future political debate on this forum under the current terms of censorship

Good for you , I pulled out for the same reason more or less and the unnecessary nastiness towards certain posters. no wonder people don't want to come in here.

[Maru]

Threads being pulled off-topic is an eyesore. It's part of how sections become about the same 6-8 people posting about the same topics time and time again and it makes it very clique-y. It being commonplace on TiBB is what is making it more unwelcome for other folk (not just right-leaning) to post in SD, because they don't want to end up in the same exact arguments all over again.

As long as it is held consistently, then I don't have any issues with that rule and I think it should be strongly enforced. I don't think deletions is necessary though. If it's just a few posts, then a mod can post (bold text and all) a reminder to stay on topic... if it goes sideways, lock the thread or move posts out to a new thread. If it's a real trouble user, then issue a short ban.

If it's a discussion you want to have, then start a new thread. There's no reason you can't link the other thread and start from there. I think that's a pretty fair compromise?

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Ammi

...actually Vicky is an awful moderator...she looked up my file and saw I hadn’t pressed the report button since 2016, when I haven’t really been here for the whole of 2017..that’s how forum aware she is.....(...obviously she’s not awful at all and I’m sure she won’t mind be saying that...)...but I guess it’s showing how difficult the general moderator thing is in trying their best to be objective and observant etc...

I failed slightly there for sure

I do not understand how people are taking this as trying to 'protect a political side' when its been explained literally over and over that this is about multiple threads going offtopic with the same stuff. I mean, if there was someone who liked Corbyn doing this in so many threads, the same would happen (I think from memory this did happen once actually, and that wasn't taken well either)

But y'all keep saying in this 9 page thread about how awful Corbyn and those around him, and his supporters are..that anyone who dislikes Corbyn or is right leaning is being censored. Maybe go say the same thing in any of the other multiple negative Corbyn threads, or threads that are negative about the left in general. Of course we are definitely trying to rid the site of any dissent. As a serious debates forum absolutely can work when all of the posters in there agree

Anyway, I'm not being drawn back into discussions about it as I have repeated myself so many times already and seemingly been ignored if what people are taking away from this is that no negative posts about Corbyn are allowed. Its really just paranoid nonsense, it really is. Maybe pick yourself a left wing figure and start spamming all over the forum, about how much you love them, one line posts, random turning of every political threads into how much you love this left wing figure, and see what happens (actually please do not actually do this, no more offtopic stuff ). As it will be exactly the same thing, which I reckon kind of proves that its not about silencing one side, its about trying to keep SD from being a repetitive load of bollocks.

Again, went into more than I planned to here but meh. It still won't be listened to and people will continue to have this (false) view that we are 'protecting' the left of whatever. The most left leaning member on here seems to bloody love all of the Corbyn discussions anyway, no matter how they start. It seems to be those who are not that into politics, or are just sick to death of seeing the same stuff everywhere that have issues with the repetitiveness in threads...

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Brillopad

That is all well and good but without members it wouldn’t be around for long so it isn’t completely a one-way thing is it. SD certainly woudn’t get much use if only those with one opinion could post. Debate usually involves the expression of differing opinions does it not.

Or is the site to become just a supporter of one political party - just another Corbynista.

We are well aware of this, and this is why its clearly nonsense that we are trying to censor one side. If we were at the stage of wanting to censor one side (and you have to remember that among the staff there are a range of political stances too) then it would make much more sense to just close down this section fullstop wouldn't it. As the section cannot go on with only one viewpoint..it just would not work. As surely everyone knows. So this accusation that instead of trying to keep threads on topic, we have something against those of a certain political persuasion and want to censor them..its just rubbish.

I keep getting drawn into ****ing posting when I don't want to. So am now actually leaving the thread instead of reading the rest of the posts as I really do not want to get back into arguing about this when I have already gone over this clearly. And doing the same thing again and again and expecting different results is the definition of insanity. Or something.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

Being fair to the mod team, threads have been pulled completely off topic by people who have, essentially, decided that they have no interest in the actual thread topic and have something to say about something else that's far more important or "makes a point". I get the impression that there's been an overall decision to try to stop this from happening, and it's a recent decision, which is going to take some time to "settle" and be implemented in the best way. For example, turning a fairly academic thread about Hitler into "Corbyn moans" I can't accept as anything other than total nonsense. On the other hand, I feel like bringing up Corbyn (or May, or any other high profile politician) in any thread about UK domestic politics is absolutely fair game,so maybe the policy is being implemented too heavy-handedly. I can't say for certain because I can't see which posts were removed.

My only other caveat would be... If its not bringing it up in a way that actually engages with the thread topic, but instead having exactly the same posts and points regurgitated ad nauseum in multiple threads, then is it really adding anything to the debate? If it's just more "whataboutism" then I can't really agree that it does. A full well thought out post, let's say, COMPARING Corbyn to the relevant people mentioned in a thread, whilst still actually discussing the thread topic is totally fine. Completely ignoring the thread topic, making no effort to engage with it, and just saying "Oh yeah well WHAT ABOUT ..." and going off on a tangent, is not really an acceptable part of debate.

EXACTLY THIS.

My god you can put things better than I can. This is what I was trying to say pages back. But was either misunderstood or ignored. I suspect purposely misunderstood.

Corbyn is relevant in many current political threads, of course. But the deleted posts were not comparing, say Corbyns voting record to Moggs or anything like that. They were literally just 'What about Corbyn' and 'You support Corbyn' 'random Corbyn bollocks' which were nothing at all to do with the actual thread. This was the problem in there, not bringing up Corbyn or being negative or whatever. There could be a similar thread about Corbyns voting record...and if people came into it not even acknowledging the topic and just posting 'what about May/Mogg' 'your opinion is crap as you support May/Mogg' or whatever, then those would be offtopic nonsense and removed too. Theres just no need for it. none at all. It adds nothing and takes threads offtopic on a regular basis. Its almost always the same stuff that does it...and it just so happens that its almost always 'but Corbyn' stuff. So its the 'but Corbyn' stuff thats being deleted.

I cannot leave the thread FFS. I am trying

Disclaimer. I do agree it may have been heavy handed removing the posts in that Mogg thread though, as I said over and over. But I understood why they were deleted, which was basically because of TS bold part up there^

The more I have thought about the deletions, the more I do think I agree with them though. Especially given the amount of 'but Corbyn' posts there are elsewhere too and the sheer amount of threads that get taken offtopic by it all.

[bots]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I failed slightly there for sure

I do not understand how people are taking this as trying to 'protect a political side' when its been explained literally over and over that this is about multiple threads going offtopic with the same stuff. I mean, if there was someone who liked Corbyn doing this in so many threads, the same would happen (I think from memory this did happen once actually, and that wasn't taken well either)

But y'all keep saying in this 9 page thread about how awful Corbyn and those around him, and his supporters are..that anyone who dislikes Corbyn or is right leaning is being censored. Maybe go say the same thing in any of the other multiple negative Corbyn threads, or threads that are negative about the left in general. Of course we are definitely trying to rid the site of any dissent. As a serious debates forum absolutely can work when all of the posters in there agree

Anyway, I'm not being drawn back into discussions about it as I have repeated myself so many times already and seemingly been ignored if what people are taking away from this is that no negative posts about Corbyn are allowed. Its really just paranoid nonsense, it really is. Maybe pick yourself a left wing figure and start spamming all over the forum, about how much you love them, one line posts, random turning of every political threads into how much you love this left wing figure, and see what happens (actually please do not actually do this, no more offtopic stuff ). As it will be exactly the same thing, which I reckon kind of proves that its not about silencing one side, its about trying to keep SD from being a repetitive load of bollocks.

Again, went into more than I planned to here but meh. It still won't be listened to and people will continue to have this (false) view that we are 'protecting' the left of whatever. The most left leaning member on here seems to bloody love all of the Corbyn discussions anyway, no matter how they start. It seems to be those who are not that into politics, or are just sick to death of seeing the same stuff everywhere that have issues with the repetitiveness in threads...

Vicky, I appreciate your well meaning explanations, I really do and I know you believe what you are saying to be true, but my perception is completely different and I'm not alone in that. The people raising criticism are not stupid people. They feel an injustice is being done. I've made my decision, that's what works best for me in the circumstances, time will tell how things go in the future

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

Vicky, I appreciate your well meaning explanations, I really do and I know you believe what you are saying to be true, but my perception is completely different and I'm not alone in that. The people raising criticism are not stupid people. They feel an injustice is being done. I've made my decision, that's what works best for me in the circumstances, time will tell how things go in the future

Yeah well thats totally up to you. I am not saying those criticizing are stupid people either.

[Jack_]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

The most left leaning member on here seems to bloody love all of the Corbyn discussions anyway, no matter how they start.

that would be me, and I hate them!

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Jack_

that would be me, and I hate them!

Sorry, I was thinking of kizzy

[Jack_]

Oh she's definitely not as big a loony liberal lefty as me tho

[Vicky.]

I actually think I am more centre these days. Which worries me as people do say as you grow up you get more and more right wing. I have shifted from left to close to centre since turning 30 I could never be totally right wing though, I am sure of it. Especially as someone who is actually disabled..I couldn't be all for removing my own bloody rights and seeing myself as a parasite!

I am not sure if I actually have shifted or if its just Corbyn (its fine in this thread, its on topic clearly) that I disagree with. The whole identity politics rubbish seems to be what did it to start with, then it all went downhill from there. I would say I lean more to the left with most issues but I just cannot get behind this oppression olympics thing that seems to be going on. And I disagree with Corbyn on a fair few things, so not sure if its Corbyn I disagree with, or if I really am moving over slowly to 'the other side'

[Niamh.]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I actually think I am more centre these days. Which worries me as people do say as you grow up you get more and more right wing. I have shifted from left to close to centre since turning 30 I could never be totally right wing though, I am sure of it. Especially as someone who is actually disabled..I couldn't be all for removing my own bloody rights and seeing myself as a parasite!

I am not sure if I actually have shifted or if its just Corbyn (its fine in this thread, its on topic clearly) that I disagree with. The whole identity politics rubbish seems to be what did it to start with, then it all went downhill from there. I would say I lean more to the left with most issues but I just cannot get behind this oppression olympics thing that seems to be going on. And I disagree with Corbyn on a fair few things, so not sure if its Corbyn I disagree with, or if I really am moving over slowly to 'the other side'

I think it's probably the transgender V's Womens rights issues that's probably shifted how you lean a bit more, I'm the same but I've not changed because I've always been more left leaning and also a feminist but before feminism was more "left" now however it seems womens rights a re"right" because transgenders are the new left womens rights cause

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Niamh.

I think it's probably the transgender V's Womens rights issues that's probably shifted how you lean a bit more, I'm the same but I've not changed because I've always been more left leaning and also a feminist but before feminism was more "left" now however it seems womens rights a re"right" because transgenders are the new left womens rights cause

Yeah thats probably right tbh. I feel I could not vote for labour in their current state, with them refusing to acknowledge that women are even a real ****ing thing and a group that really do require their own rights seperate from male people. I can see how that may colour a lot of my opinions. You are very right that feminism appears to now be a more right leaning thing

[Vicky.]

Also having 'the wrong view' I have realised quite how 'the left' behave if you dare to have the wrong opinion on something. Which is a bit scary. This whole thing has really woke me up in so many ways.

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

I actually think I am more centre these days. Which worries me as people do say as you grow up you get more and more right wing. I have shifted from left to close to centre since turning 30 I could never be totally right wing though, I am sure of it. Especially as someone who is actually disabled..I couldn't be all for removing my own bloody rights and seeing myself as a parasite!

I am not sure if I actually have shifted or if its just Corbyn (its fine in this thread, its on topic clearly) that I disagree with. The whole identity politics rubbish seems to be what did it to start with, then it all went downhill from there. I would say I lean more to the left with most issues but I just cannot get behind this oppression olympics thing that seems to be going on. And I disagree with Corbyn on a fair few things, so not sure if its Corbyn I disagree with, or if I really am moving over slowly to 'the other side'

Politics is a sport of judgement, so we tend to equate the worst views with left/right aspects. I think many more people are centrist than they are right/left if we were just to judge that definition by it's worst views. Being right-leaning is not a "bad" word... maybe it is different in the UK, but here, it just means you stand for more traditional values, for self-responsibility, for a laws and an economic system that reflects this... but charity is encouraged

I don't know any politician here that has spoke of removing disability. Vicky, I am with you. We have a movement disorder in our family (unknown at the time) and I could never see their care stripped away. I think some welfare is reasonable and actually in society's interest.

[Vicky.]

Originally Posted by Maru

Politics is a sport of judgement, so we tend to equate the worst views with left/right aspects. I think many more people are centrist than they are right/left if we were just to judge that definition by it's worst views. Being right-leaning is not a "bad" word... maybe it is different in the UK, but here, it just means you stand for more traditional values, for self-responsibility, for a laws and an economic system that reflects this... but charity is encouraged

I don't know any politician here that has spoke of removing disability. Vicky, I am with you. We have a movement disorder in our family (unknown at the time) and I could never see their care stripped away. I think some welfare is reasonable and actually in society's interest.

They don't outright say it, that would be political suicide. But they are chopping and chopping away at support for people like me. They changed DLA to PIP in an attempt to, not help the disabled, but cut down how many people were on the benefit. My cousin was on a lifetime DLA award as he has a progressive illness that specialists have said will never ever be cured and it affects his life in a huge way. When being 'transferred' over to PIP, his award was stripped away completely. The 'assessor' was an ex midwife, with no experience in his illness at all and they lied left right and centre ontop of that (this is a common experience for these assessments). He is now having to go through tribunals and stuff to get any award.

With DLA, you got the higher rate if you could not consistently mobilize over 50m. PIP has changed this to 20m. So these people who have had it cut away, they are still as ill as they were, just the government has randomly decided that they do not get the help. That kind of thing.

Honestly, if not for the treatment of the poor and disabled, I could maybe bring myself to vote Tory.

But right now, I am politically homeless for the first time in my life.

I cannot vote for Labour with Corbyn in charge..unless he sorts his **** out
And I cannot vote Tory for personal reasons
Any other vote is a waste, but all other political parties bar UKIP support this ridiculous 'self ID' (changing sex by ticking a box on a piece of paper) thing. I could not vote UKIP as I disagree with them on most matters too

I agree that most people are probably centre. I think people feel like they HAVE to pick a 'side'.

[Livia]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

They don't outright say it, that would be political suicide. But they are chopping and chopping away at support for people like me. They changed DLA to PIP in an attempt to, not help the disabled, but cut down how many people were on the benefit. My cousin was on a lifetime DLA award as he has a progressive illness that specialists have said will never ever be cured and it affects his life in a huge way. When being 'transferred' over to PIP, his award was stripped away completely. He is now having to go through tribunals ajnd stuff to get any award.

With DLA, you got the higher rate if you could not consistently mobilize over 50m. PIP has changed this to 20m. So these people who have had it cut away, they are still as ill as they were, just the government has randomly decided that they do not get the help. That kind of thing.

Honestly, if not for the treatment of the poor and disabled, I could maybe bring myself to vote Tory.

But right now, I am politically homeless for the first time in my life.

I cannot vote for Labour with Corbyn in charge..unless he sorts his **** out
And I cannot vote Tory for personal reasons
Any other vote is a waste, but all other political parties bar UKIP support this ridiculous 'self ID' (changing sex by ticking a box on a piece of paper) thing. I could not vote UKIP as I disagree with them on most matters too

I agree that most people are probably centre. I think people feel like they HAVE to pick a 'side'.

This sums up how I feel about it all right now. If there was a general election tomorrow I would have to write on the ballot paper, none of the above.

[Vicky.]

Indeed. All parties seem to be going to ****. I don't get it at all. There have always been little things I disagreed with about each party. But these seem to have morphed into absolutely huge things that I cannot ignore. We need a new sensible party, who are centrist also.

But realistically, even a new party would stand no chance anyway. Its always going to be Tories or Labour. Lib dems were climbing up slowly, but Clegg ****ed that by going back on the one promise that won him the votes in the first place!

[jet]

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

A full well thought out post, let's say, COMPARING Corbyn to the relevant people mentioned in a thread, whilst still actually discussing the thread topic is totally fine. Completely ignoring the thread topic, making no effort to engage with it, and just saying "Oh yeah well WHAT ABOUT ..." and going off on a tangent, is not really an acceptable part of debate.

I get that, but once again the whole point I and others were making yesterday is being missed. On THAT thread, at least initially, there was no effort to engage the actual topic, it was just one or two word name calling of Ree Moggs (not that I care for him myself). So why is it not okay for others to respond and post about Corbyn in a similar vein (and many were NOT of that variety), comparing one future possible PM to another possible future PM? The tone of the thread was set already by the Ree Moggs detractors, it wasn't in any way a
discussion that was being derailed.

If the thread had contained well thought out posts and we had come in saying 'but what about Corbyn's shortcomings!!!', with disparaging one word this or that's then yes, I see the problem here. But that's not what happened, so it was unfair to delete all of the mentions of Corbyn and leaving all the posts that many considered started off the thread in a baiting manner intact.

Am I making any sense here because it doesn't seem to be understood and I really don't want to say any more about it or start it all up again, I really don't.

So really I think the TONE of a thread is all - important and what I really want to know is what happens going forward using the Ree Moggs thread as an example because obviously many of us were unhappy about the way it was handled.

Can a mod make it clear what the future policy on the type of thread like the Ree Moggs one is going to be please?

[Maru]

Originally Posted by Vicky.

They don't outright say it, that would be political suicide. But they are chopping and chopping away at support for people like me. They changed DLA to PIP in an attempt to, not help the disabled, but cut down how many people were on the benefit. My cousin was on a lifetime DLA award as he has a progressive illness that specialists have said will never ever be cured and it affects his life in a huge way. When being 'transferred' over to PIP, his award was stripped away completely. The 'assessor' was an ex midwife, with no experience in his illness at all and they lied left right and centre ontop of that (this is a common experience for these assessments). He is now having to go through tribunals and stuff to get any award.

With DLA, you got the higher rate if you could not consistently mobilize over 50m. PIP has changed this to 20m. So these people who have had it cut away, they are still as ill as they were, just the government has randomly decided that they do not get the help. That kind of thing.

Honestly, if not for the treatment of the poor and disabled, I could maybe bring myself to vote Tory.

But right now, I am politically homeless for the first time in my life.

I cannot vote for Labour with Corbyn in charge..unless he sorts his **** out
And I cannot vote Tory for personal reasons
Any other vote is a waste, but all other political parties bar UKIP support this ridiculous 'self ID' (changing sex by ticking a box on a piece of paper) thing. I could not vote UKIP as I disagree with them on most matters too

I agree that most people are probably centre. I think people feel like they HAVE to pick a 'side'.

That's ridiculous. You are actually screwed no matter which way you go then..

I can't say I can vote right-leaning across the board, as I tend to vote independent, but it is on a candidate versus position kind of deal. Sometimes it's a "no confidence" write-in, but it really depends.

The US does try to get people taken off disability, but it's not really a political platform, it's always been designed that way. It is also difficult to get in. Takes at least a year and a half and fighting almost certain soul draining appeal after appeal to get in. My family had a difficult time due to their disorder not being in the official list. But the US/state came back several years later and retroactively added them out of the blue, so they paid them what they were owed over the course of that time. They were lucky to have family care for them in the meantime, but they've been in since, so nearly 30 years.

We can't have any sort of income over a certain number if we apply. I think it is like $300/gross monthly... but they want you to see doctors so you can provide all sorts of documentation. That's why a lot of people get lawyers to expedite the process, but not everyone can afford them. They do it to reduce fraud from people applying because they are pregnant, have an ingrown toenail, etc, but it obviously has the effect of creating all kinds of hardship.

The one thing I like about the US being so geographically diverse and separated in powers per state versus federal, is that if we wanted to ignore national, we easily could (and many do). I just focus on local politics/matter, where my vote really counts... whereas national is just a grudge match and we are unwilling participants of that cockery.

[Vicky.]

I get what you are saying jet.

Can you explain what exactly you mean by

Can a mod make it clear what the future policy on the type of thread like the Ree Moggs one is going to be please?

This though? What kind of thread? Like, an actual discussion thread about his voting record for example?

I think maybe, I might just start deleting threads that are not clear about what they are about and have absolutely no thought gone into them too. So that thread would probably be gone. As would the many many threads that literally just have a link to a news story in them and nothing else. Like, if you want to discuss that news story, discuss it? No need to just make a title and post a link with maybe a little quote of what they story says. Add your own actual opinion to it.

Would people be happy with this btw? As I don't want to be doing it for people to still moan

As as I can see it, if this is done, then it would be fine to delete the random 'but what about Corbyn' 'what about Mogg' or whatever, as obviously your actual opinion would need to be given in reply to the OP, rather than one word/line (sometimes snipey) posts.

Basically, how would people feel about serious debates actually being serious debates again. With one word/one line stuff pretty much gone completely and discussion threads actually being discussion threads rather than snipey rubbish?

I may make a thread about this, as many will be avoiding this thread as they think that its yet another Corbyn argument going on

[jet]

Oh, and I see you are all in the middle of an interesting discussion, so what I asked above can wait until later...It Just took me ages to post that as I have a hell of a migraine which isn't easing up yet...carry on

Edited to add: That was quick Vicky - a reply already! I'll have a proper read of it later after I lie down again for a while.