Moderating Mapleafweb's Moderation

[bleeding heart]

I thought you claimed to have personally diluted or damaged an online forum?

Or am I misremembering your claim?

[Michael Hardner]

The posters on FD that caused that problem were not notoriously raucous and yet they brought down the forum, and put Connie and Mark in a world of hurt they don't deserve.

http://lawyerbuchanan.blogspot.ca/2014/02/freedominion-case-update.html

They weren't exactly vigilant in addressing Warman's concerns, so the word 'deserve' invites some additional consideration I think:

The trial judge noted that the removal of the materials from the forum didn't occur "until approximately seven months after being served with the plaintiff's Statement of Claim and nine months after being served with the plaintiff's first Notice of Libel." That's probably relevant. And it couples with the finding of malice, and the fact that they have consistently refused to apologize for or retract the statements.

[jbg]

I thought you claimed to have personally diluted or damaged an online forum?

Or am I misremembering your claim?

Here's what happened. On March 8, 2004 I posted, on the old CBC Forums "Happy Purim from the J3ws to the non-J3ws." CBC claimed they were "filtering," i.e. pre-moderating the use of the words "Jew" or "Israel" and were posting acceptable entries. The post was promptly deleted.

I was then on the phone with another poster from Ontario, who definitely did not like the CBC. At his suggestion and with his supplying me with the organization name and contact person, I immediately e-mailed an account of CBC's political correctness to the Canadian Jewish Congress, copied to the people on my e-mail list who were interested in Jewish topics. One of them forwarded my e-mail to Brian Hutchinson, National Post reporter. Maybe I should have used better judgment as to who was on the "cc" list.

Mr. Hutchinson of the National Post e-mailed me, and I organized a conference call with him and that other poster now of blessed memory. He was quoted by name in the article. I was quoted by reference to my posting name, JBG. On March 10, 2004 the National Post ran the story after CBC didn't respond to a request from the Post for comments. CBC began a progressive shutdown of the forum starting on March 12, and finishing on April 4, 2004.

I was not trying to kill off the forum though I am told that the National Post was. I wasn't too sad after they tolerated some personally abusive posts without consequence to the poster. Now I regret that the story destroyed many peoples' enjoyment. I was probably taking my forum life too seriously at the time.

Live and learn.

Edited April 26, 2014 by jbg

[waldo]

I was not trying to kill off the forum though I am told that the National Post was. I wasn't too sad after they tolerated some personally abusive posts without consequence to the poster. Now I regret that the story destroyed many peoples' enjoyment.

Live and learn.

following the lead of your 'Freedominion Closed - A Sad Day For Canada & Freedom' thread, was your involvement in helping to shutter the CBC forum... also 'a sad day for Canada & freedom'?

[jbg]

following the lead of your 'Freedominion Closed - A Sad Day For Canada & Freedom' thread, was your involvement in helping to shutter the CBC forum... also 'a sad day for Canada & freedom'?

I don't have to defend myself to you.

But what I did was to source a news article. The forum died in 3 weeks under the glare of publicity. FD lasted a lot longer.

Both forums ultimately died of posters behaving badly.

Edited April 26, 2014 by jbg

[The_Squid]

[Edited to remove comments that were overly hyperbolic].

Why not just leave the forum if you don't like something? Sheesh.... talk about overreaction!! (If this account is even true)

Edited April 26, 2014 by The_Squid

[bush_cheney2004]

It's true enough for me...I was a member of the CBC Forums and watched this escalation (e.g. post filters) and the resulting demise. We had clever ways to spell "Jew(s)" to defeat the CBC thought police. Really has nothing to do with specific members, but silly or even stupid forum policies that are easily exposed by many members who challenge such policies. The state controlled CBC folded like a cheap suit. We can see the same fragile behaviour in how the CBC moderates reader comments today.

Edited April 26, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[The_Squid]

I'm curious to know how many white supremacist anti-Jewish forums jbg has managed to get taken down... Or was this strictly an evil CBC thing? Funny an American (two Americans) are so concerned with a CBC forum that they would put effort into actually getting it shut down! Certainly highlights the character and sheer hypocrisy of the forum members in question, no?

There may be some better places to direct that effort and energy than a CBC forum!

[waldo]

The state controlled CBC

good on ya! At least this time you didn't include labeling the CBC as a "state broadcaster". Given the many, many past raised concern responses you've solicited from numerous MLW members over your incessant need to continue to label the CBC in this same regard, the "state controlled" regard, why do you persist in this manner? When is the CBC... just the CBC?

[jbg]

Why not just leave the forum if you don't like something? Sheesh.... talk about overreaction!! (If this account is even true)

It is true. I did it 10 years ago. I would not do it now. Edited April 27, 2014 by jbg

[jbg]

I'm curious to know how many white supremacist anti-Jewish forums jbg has managed to get taken down... Or was this strictly an evil CBC thing? Funny an American (two Americans) are so concerned with a CBC forum that they would put effort into actually getting it shut down! Certainly highlights the character and sheer hypocrisy of the forum members in question, no?

There may be some better places to direct that effort and energy than a CBC forum

Explained by private message.

[WWWTT]

It's true enough for me...I was a member of the CBC Forums and watched this escalation (e.g. post filters) and the resulting demise. We had clever ways to spell "Jew(s)" to defeat the CBC thought police. Really has nothing to do with specific members, but silly or even stupid forum policies that are easily exposed by many members who challenge such policies. The state controlled CBC folded like a cheap suit. We can see the same fragile behaviour in how the CBC moderates reader comments today.

I doubt there was any money being made from the CBC forum, therefore they cut the waste when hit with government cutbacks or during a re evaluation.

I'm curious to know how many white supremacist anti-Jewish forums jbg has managed to get taken down... Or was this strictly an evil CBC thing? Funny an American (two Americans) are so concerned with a CBC forum that they would put effort into actually getting it shut down! Certainly highlights the character and sheer hypocrisy of the forum members in question, no?

There may be some better places to direct that effort and energy than a CBC forum!

And why I added your comment here Squid is because you give these guys some kind of credit for apparently taking down a forum! I find that freekin hilarious! BC and JBG taking down a forum! It could be true I guess?

I remember talking with Steven Paikin from TVO at the NDP leadership convention. I asked him about their online forum, if they were bringing it back and he told me that there was too much bickering on it and not enough constructive dialogue. I equated that as they weren't getting enough revenue from it because the participants weren't co operating.

WWWTT

[bush_cheney2004]

I doubt there was any money being made from the CBC forum, therefore they cut the waste when hit with government cutbacks or during a re evaluation.

And why I added your comment here Squid is because you give these guys some kind of credit for apparently taking down a forum! I find that freekin hilarious! BC and JBG taking down a forum! It could be true I guess?

That's not what has been posted, as I played no role in "taking down a forum". Ultimately, the state controlled CBC Forum collapsed under its own weight of politically correct moderation policies and inconsistencies.

Fortunately, this private forum is not limited or subject to such ham fisted policies. Plus it is hosted in the United States.

Edited April 27, 2014 by bush_cheney2004

[waldo]

Ultimately, the state controlled CBC

again... when is the CBC, just... the CBC?

is there a particular reason you continue to incessantly label the CBC as "state controlled"? What significance does that particular labeling have to the 2 most recent posts you've used that labeling?

[waldo]

Fortunately, this private forum is not limited or subject to such ham fisted policies. Plus it is hosted in the United States.

hosted in the United States you say? Really? How many times do you feel you need to state that same thing... make that same point? By the by, exactly what is the significance you presume to bring to your post by repeating, yet again, this same point you've made a brazillion times previously?

[jbg]

I doubt there was any money being made from the CBC forum, therefore they cut the waste when hit with government cutbacks or during a re evaluation.

I think from the timing it had a lot to do with the fact that Paul Martin was posed to drop the writ to seek his own majority mandate. Of course he only got a minority and then was turfed during the next go-round.

And why I added your comment here Squid is because you give these guys some kind of credit for apparently taking down a forum! I find that freekin hilarious! BC and JBG taking down a forum! It could be true I guess?

BC had nothing to do with it. It was a now-deceased poster from Ontario.

I remember talking with Steven Paikin from TVO at the NDP leadership convention. I asked him about their online forum, if they were bringing it back and he told me that there was too much bickering on it and not enough constructive dialogue. I equated that as they weren't getting enough revenue from it because the participants weren't co operating.

There would never have been "revenues" from the forum. There were no Internet ads and the forum was free.

And the truth is there was very little constructive dialogue. There were a few spinoff "private" forums where groups of posters organized group attacks on other posters. It was overall very childish.

[WWWTT]

That's not what has been posted, as I played no role in "taking down a forum". Ultimately, the state controlled CBC Forum collapsed under its own weight of politically correct moderation policies and inconsistencies.

Fortunately, this private forum is not limited or subject to such ham fisted policies. Plus it is hosted in the United States.

No I just thought it was funny that Squid thought you did bring that forum down. I give you no such credit at all my friend, lets be absolutely clear about that. I am also starting to find it amusing that you are confirming your position that the CBC forum collapsed because of the moderators/moderation policy itself! Please elaborate further!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

There would never have been "revenues" from the forum. There were no Internet ads and the forum was free.

And the truth is there was very little constructive dialogue. There were a few spinoff "private" forums where groups of posters organized group attacks on other posters. It was overall very childish.

Sorry I wasn't clear.

TVO I believe was trying to use the forum to research new/old topics to use in their programing and in support.

After all, why have paid employees spending time and money in keeping up a forum if it only served the purpose of entertaining a few posters? What's in it for the administration of the forum????

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

I think from the timing it had a lot to do with the fact that Paul Martin was posed to drop the writ to seek his own majority mandate. Of course he only got a minority and then was turfed during the next go-round.

BC had nothing to do with it. It was a now-deceased poster from Ontario.

So you believe the forum was dropped because of a political decision to dissolve parliament for an election? Are do I have that wrong?

WWWTT

[GostHacked]

Looks like this thread is still being trolled. What a shame. And that is representative of the problem on the forum now.

[Charles Anthony]

Guys,

GH is right. Stop derailing this thread with the CBC distraction, please. There is more than enough for us to deal with here as it is. We do not need to be publishing slews of speculation or hearsay about mountainous mole-hill expeditions through other people's frivolous legal hobbies.

Report it and ignore it.

If everyone here did that, wouldn't that make the moderating much more difficult?

No --- quite the opposite. If everybody ignored what they thought was inappropriate, there would be nothing to moderate.

And if everyone always ignored, wouldn't the number of comments decline?

The number of trolling-comments would decline, yes. We are talking about trolling here and what some people perceive to be trolling.

If everybody ignores trolling, then the trolling goes away and the moderator never has to use any discretion.

If everybody ignores what-they-perceive-to-be-trolling, then whatever it is goes away too and the moderator never has to pass judgement on whether the action is trolling or just a difference in perception.

Who feels that making an insulting reference to the cultural sophistication of Afghanistanis ought to get you suspended?

Not me.

However, if you derail a thread by making a rude, foul, obnoxious and insulting reference to the whatever for the umpteenth time then yeah, you run the risk of getting suspended for having derailed a thread. For example, this is the post in question. I opened it up again.

[Argus]

Not me.

However, if you derail a thread by making a rude, foul, obnoxious and insulting reference to the whatever for the umpteenth time then yeah, you run the risk of getting suspended for having derailed a thread. For example, this is the post in question. I opened it up again.

In what way was the post off-topic? It clearly didn't derail the thread, wasn't the 'umpteenth' time, but the first I'd made it, and was accurate insofar as I believe (and no one disputed it). It was not rude or insulting to anyone in this country or on this web site, or to any identifiable person. As for "foul" (foul?) and "obnoxious" those are simply denigrating terms which bespeak your own dislike of my opinion.

Heck, THIS thread was derailed to the extent you had to step in and tell people to get back on topic. Was anyone suspended because of it?

Obviously I don't write posts which I think will get me suspended so I'm trying to figure out your criteria here. I also think it's a good idea to openly discuss posts which draw punishment, presuming the author doesn't mind. As I have written earlier, secret punishments don't enlighten the bulk of posters, only the person secretly posted. Though in this case I'm not really enlightened as to the reasons.

Edited April 27, 2014 by Argus

[WWWTT]

As far as I can tell, this thread is about moderating MLW's moderation.

And some of the recent comments seem to be in line with the topic suggested from the title.( true maybe some of the comments drifted, but nothing way out there)

Beware, the rules are open to interpretation of the moderators!

I think someone here hit a sensitive nerve.

WWWTT

[jbg]

So you believe the forum was dropped because of a political decision to dissolve parliament for an election? Are do I have that wrong?

It was one potential embarrassment the LPC didn't need. After all the CBC was and probably still is an LPC pet.

Stop derailing this thread with the CBC distraction, please. There is more than enough for us to deal with here as it is. We do not need to be publishing slews of speculation or hearsay about mountainous mole-hill expeditions through other people's frivolous legal hobbies.

I brought up both CBC and Freedominion to show what happens if a forum is not kept under some degree of moderated control. Basically I was supporting what you do the same way I support your volunteer efforts. FD shows the legal risks (in Canada, not the U.S.) in allowing libelous insults. CBC shows what happens from the media when the content becomes downright disgusting or the moderation becomes arbitrary. It is very much on topic. Edited April 27, 2014 by jbg

[bush_cheney2004]

It is very much on topic.

Agreed....expanding the scope to include the moderation function's policies and impact on other like minded sites adds to the discussion.