A Conversation for h2g2 FAQ: Moderation

A question of balance:

Post 1


smiley - zen

Does it not seem wise that everything should be "done in moderation"?
Does this not also include moderation?

Lately several of my friends on here, even the older, more respectable ones, who have been on here longer, contributed a great deal to the guide, and so on and so forth, are finding themselves getting censored, on trivial seeming matters, like if the content of a post is about an unpleasant-ish or vaguely 'scary' topic.

If you shallow the depth out of this site by going overboard, won't it ruin the smiley - cool-hip intellectual aspect to it, that helps in hand with the friendly & wholesome side to hootoo?

To quote from out of the McCarthy hearings: "Have you no sense of decency?"

<- I am not blaming the entire editing staff, but merely wish to point out the following:
a. That yes, there are some things which do not appropriately belong on a forum.

& that

b. we are not all oversensitive little babies. We come from a diverse level and area from all across the globe, and from many different wakes of life, as well as all sorts of trades & professions.

If someone is yikesing stuff that was not actually all that rude, would that not also be of concern, if done too much, and 'conveniently' overused.

Hootoo is nice & friendly; it would not do to spoil it with a witchhunt. Doubt that's what DNA would have wanted to see.

A question of balance:

Post 2

Traveller in Time Reporting Bugs -o-o- Broken the chain of Pliny -o-o- Hired

Traveller in Time smiley - tit on his head
"'We are not all over sensitive'

Think you got the point there: _Not_All_ . If you read in from the most sensitive angle, some will already be a little offended. And The BBC has to make sure even the most sensitive person does feel comfortable on their site. There is no need to use bad words the only drawback of the moderation is when you have no idea something is seen as offensive that you did not recognise in that way, you are the weak person yourself in that occasion. And even that is taken into concideration when postings are removed. "

A question of balance:

Post 3


I do not like how they seem to be especially targeting some of the veteran Aces. It is Veteran's Day afterall.

*Stares at you grumpily for a bit*

It isn't like deviant art, where people use four letter and so on, and it is no big deal. *I'm trying not to scoff* Where they may describe various details of what goes on in the outside and on the inside of semi-intimate human biological processes, wouldn't you be likely to agree on that?

Or MySpace, which - let's face it, is quite a convenient way for anybody, nobody in particular, who cares... yes? at any moment, to have for oggling someone's er...
Won't say. You get what I mean. Hopefully I needn't to elaborate further. Won['t be tricked into causing myself to need to get moderated TT. I'm not that dense. And besides, it would be sad to see it get all shallow like how things are like on sites like MySpace.

smiley - erm

A question of balance:

Post 4


I mean, well yeah, that's true too.

And yet...

I was hoping it would not come down to system justification.

Intellectually that's just kind of well...
*Shrugs and takes his glasses off, polishing them a bit on a shirt-corner to remove a spot of dust*

A question of balance:

Post 5


My dear TT, this is a term used in an excellent course I had taken over the summer by an award-winning professor who had 4 master's degrees in addition to her PHD. I was quite lucky to have the fortune of getting a spot to be able to take it. It gets used in relational-school of theory social psychology. Quite fun stuff. Also jarring and a bit disillusioning.

I wonder if there is an entry on here somewhere, perhaps about it.

A question of balance:

Post 6


Traveler in Time, my main concern which is to why I had posted this in the first place,

it is quite simple.

You know how sometimes people will complain about things such as the "data-vandalism" that sometimes goes on in places like wikipedia?

If someone was religiously opposed to the concept of theory of evolution, persay, and they took it upon themselves to be offended by an entry that discussed something reguarding it, then wouldn't he or she find it as grounds to claim that the subject in the post was something of inappropriate content?

I've not been unfairly or over moderated on here myself; partly I think this is due to thanks of the h2g2 team for the most part, being so good about doing things in a manner that is in pretty good taste for the most part.

That's all. What I was worried about. Nothing else really, in so much.


smiley - dontpanic

A question of balance:

Post 7

Traveller in Time Reporting Bugs -o-o- Broken the chain of Pliny -o-o- Hired

Traveller in Time smiley - tit searching for the thread
"We have (several) discussions about 'creationism against evolution' and alike. Sometimes these discussions run out of control, but most times 'we' manage to keep the opinions just what they are: opinions smiley - smiley"

A question of balance:

Post 8


Yes, that is also true.

But, you see... some of why it is...
that I am... wary.

About this whole thing, yes?

It can get messy. Fast.

& rather smiley - skull ugly, sometimes.
If let to get out of hand... too far much smiley - headhurts 'the other way' as well.

Key: Complain about this post