Selective moderation and censorship in force again

[rob_k]

The moderators and administrators have been brought to task on their alleged selective moderation of posts and members in the past, to which we were told in no uncertain terms that it didn’t happen, was just a figment of our imagination and that the site rules were applied evenly to all members with no preferential treatment.

I made a reply to Andrejs in this thread responding to the rubbish he posted about EEs not being to blame for anything. The post submitted fine and the asterisk appeared on the thread menu which you get when you’ve made a post in a thread. What should happen from that point forwards is a short period of time for a moderator/admin to approve/disapprove the post (for which the user receives an email either way) and then if approved it populates in the thread. 24 hours went by and no sign of the post, then the asterisk disappeared which indicates that a mod/admin has deleted the post and has specifically chosen not to send out any notification of them doing so. That’s pretty underhand in my book.

Then I see this posted by eagerbeaver in a different thread :

I think the OP is referring to the perception that a higher percentage of EE drivers pulled are ■■■■ cans.

Personally, I think that we have enough idiots driving wagons of our own, so adding a group of drivers who seem to love getting ■■■■■■ and throwing crap all over the place is not going to bode well. As we all know, they will also work for peanuts and have no interest in mixing with the British.

I would be quite happy for them all to ■■■■ off home. Don’t get me wrong, if I was an EE I would be over here like a shot. It’s not their fault individually, it’s the fault of ’ please love me Tony ’ in 2004.

However, that does not mean we should close our eyes. A large percentage of EE’s fiddle the crap out of the British tax system by being ’ LTD ’ companies. Pay FA tax all year then close your ’ company ’ and call it something else the following year.

They pay bollox all tax into OUR country. A lot of them cause untold damage to vehicles. They have no interest in integration. Many love driving ■■■■■■ up. It seems some like smuggling drugs too. They will all work for peanuts and help stagnate OUR wages.

We need to get rid of them. If that is deemed to be racist, well I’m not really arsed. Before you can fix faults, problems need to be diagnosed folks. The truth is the truth, burying your head in the sand will not alter that fact

My post pretty much said the same thing and mine was also backed up with evidence - the only difference being that I added the observation that they are much better at picking carrots and strawberries from fields than they are driving trucks. Harsh, admittedly, but true nonetheless.

Given that eagerbeaver is also on pre-mod that means that a moderator/administrator has deemed his post fit for displaying on the forums, so why are my posts with basically the same content being sneakily deleted by moderators/administrators that don’t even have the balls to put their name to them? It’s pretty clear that there are certain mods/admins that are approving/disapproving posts based on their own personal bias rather than whether they break the site rules.

[saving a copy of this post as I wouldn’t be surprised if the mod with an axe to grind sneakily deletes this one too so it doesn’t see the light of day ]

[albion]

I approved Beavers post. My view it was borderline, and someone was bound to come along and argue with him.

Your opinion that yours was equal, more or less, is an opinion. Someone else had a different opinion.

[rob_k]

albion:
I approved Beavers post. My view it was borderline, and someone was bound to come along and argue with him.

Your opinion that yours was equal, more or less, is an opinion. Someone else had a different opinion.

Why are they “borderline” (to use your own quote) ? Please point out what rule is broken when a person gives their personal opinion on EEs driving standards. The truth is that no rule has been broken, it’s simply a case of snowflake mods not personally agreeing with that person’s opinion and then binning the post purely based on their personal bias rather than accepting or refusing the post based on whether it’s in accordance with the site rules. Such people should not be in a position of power if they cannot perform the task without letting their personal feelings and agenda get in the way.

If this is a new thing then why are we not seeing any posts labelling Stobrats drivers as useless being binned? Why are we not seeing all the posts criticising agency drivers being binned? I’ll tell you why: because those posts don’t upset the delicate sponges of the snowflake mods as those are opinions that they agree with.

EE drivers have a well documented reputation for being useless and working for buttons. There are literally thousands of news articles to support this, complete with photographic evidence. Waberers even have their own dedicated Facebook group illustrating their daily mishaps. Likewise, Stobrat drivers have a well documented reputation for hitting bridges and being useless. Agency drivers have a well documented reputation for being useless too. So why is it okay to ridicule the latter but not the former? What’s the difference? It’s blatant censorship.

[dieseldave]

Rob K:
The moderators and administrators have been brought to task on their alleged selective moderation of posts and members in the past, to which we were told in no uncertain terms that it didn’t happen, was just a figment of our imagination and that the site rules were applied evenly to all members with no preferential treatment.

I made a reply to Andrejs in this thread responding to the rubbish he posted about EEs not being to blame for anything. The post submitted fine and the asterisk appeared on the thread menu which you get when you’ve made a post in a thread. What should happen from that point forwards is a short period of time for a moderator/admin to approve/disapprove the post (for which the user receives an email either way) and then if approved it populates in the thread. 24 hours went by and no sign of the post, then the asterisk disappeared which indicates that a mod/admin has deleted the post and has specifically chosen not to send out any notification of them doing so. That’s pretty underhand in my book.

You may think that underhand Rob, but it’s within the rules.

When approving/disapproving a post (or topic) a Mod/Admin has two options at first, which are either ‘approve’ or ‘disapprove.’

If ‘approve’ is selected, then there is a further option (as a Y/N) to notify the poster.

If ‘disapprove’ is selected, there is an optional drop-down box to give a pre-formatted reason, AND there is the option to type a reason.

However, if a Mod/Admin has little time (they’re all invited volunteers) then there is no rule that requires any of the options to be used, so it’s perfectly OK to just hit ‘disallow.’

Rob K:
Then I see this posted by eagerbeaver in a different thread :

I think the OP is referring to the perception that a higher percentage of EE drivers pulled are ■■■■ cans.

Personally, I think that we have enough idiots driving wagons of our own, so adding a group of drivers who seem to love getting ■■■■■■ and throwing crap all over the place is not going to bode well. As we all know, they will also work for peanuts and have no interest in mixing with the British.

I would be quite happy for them all to ■■■■ off home. Don’t get me wrong, if I was an EE I would be over here like a shot. It’s not their fault individually, it’s the fault of ’ please love me Tony ’ in 2004.

However, that does not mean we should close our eyes. A large percentage of EE’s fiddle the crap out of the British tax system by being ’ LTD ’ companies. Pay FA tax all year then close your ’ company ’ and call it something else the following year.

They pay bollox all tax into OUR country. A lot of them cause untold damage to vehicles. They have no interest in integration. Many love driving ■■■■■■ up. It seems some like smuggling drugs too. They will all work for peanuts and help stagnate OUR wages.

We need to get rid of them. If that is deemed to be racist, well I’m not really arsed. Before you can fix faults, problems need to be diagnosed folks. The truth is the truth, burying your head in the sand will not alter that fact

My post pretty much said the same thing and mine was also backed up with evidence - the only difference being that I added the observation that they are much better at picking carrots and strawberries from fields than they are driving trucks. Harsh, admittedly, but true nonetheless.

There’s still no rule being broken here Rob, but (whether you know it or not) your style is to use stereotypes and generalisations and words like all/every which tars everybody in a particular group as being the same. It’s unskilled, and even offensive.

Rob K:
Given that eagerbeaver is also on pre-mod that means that a moderator/administrator has deemed his post fit for displaying on the forums, so why are my posts with basically the same content being sneakily deleted by moderators/administrators that don’t even have the balls to put their name to them? It’s pretty clear that there are certain mods/admins that are approving/disapproving posts based on their own personal bias rather than whether they break the site rules.

We don’t usually discuss pre-mod, but I draw a line at discussing another member.
However, it’s fair to say that Mr Beaver’s slating of various groups is usually tempered by him qualifying what he’s saying with words like ‘some’ or ‘most,’ because it seems to me that he’s aware that painting the world with a 6" paintbrush isn’t the answer.

It’s a bit like me blasting away by saying that all Yorkshiremen are bad people because they all cause trouble on internet forums, but that isn’t actually true since only a very small minority of them cause trouble.

Rob K:
[saving a copy of this post as I wouldn’t be surprised if the mod with an axe to grind sneakily deletes this one too so it doesn’t see the light of day ]

Save what you like Rob, it won’t make any difference to the above.

[dieseldave]

Rob K:

albion:
I approved Beavers post. My view it was borderline, and someone was bound to come along and argue with him.

Your opinion that yours was equal, more or less, is an opinion. Someone else had a different opinion.

Why are they “borderline” (to use your own quote) ? Please point out what rule is broken when a person gives their personal opinion on EEs driving standards. The truth is that no rule has been broken, it’s simply a case of snowflake mods not personally agreeing with that person’s opinion and then binning the post purely based on their personal bias rather than accepting or refusing the post based on whether it’s in accordance with the site rules. Such people should not be in a position of power if they cannot perform the task without letting their personal feelings and agenda get in the way.

If this is a new thing then why are we not seeing any posts labelling Stobrats drivers as useless being binned? Why are we not seeing all the posts criticising agency drivers being binned? I’ll tell you why: because those posts don’t upset the delicate sponges of the snowflake mods as those are opinions that they agree with.

EE drivers have a well documented reputation for being useless and working for buttons. There are literally thousands of news articles to support this, complete with photographic evidence. Waberers even have their own dedicated Facebook group illustrating their daily mishaps. Likewise, Stobrat drivers have a well documented reputation for hitting bridges and being useless. Agency drivers have a well documented reputation for being useless too. So why is it okay to ridicule the latter but not the former? What’s the difference? It’s blatant censorship.

I’m busy just now, but I’ve quoted thisnow so I can give it a good answer later on.

[rob_k]

dieseldave:
There’s still no rule being broken here Rob, but (whether you know it or not) your style is to use stereotypes and generalisations and words like all/every which tars everybody in a particular group as being the same. It’s unskilled, and even offensive.

So what? Does it break any rules for a person to make generalisations? No it does not. It’s one person’s opinion. Another person may hold a different opinion. That’s the whole point of discussion forums. It seems to me that your issue (and the mods in general) is that if one posts an opinion that is not inline with their own then you deem it appropriate to censor that person’s contribution and ultimately delete it, thus stifling debate and discussion where other members may well share the same thoughts and wish to expand by adding contributions of their own.

You hide behind the excuse of members using stereotypes and generalisations so why haven’t the tens of thousands of posts about agency drivers and Stobrat drivers been removed? To use your own words : it’s unskilled and even offensive. Seems to me like a clear case of one rule for one…

dieseldave:
However, it’s fair to say that Mr Beaver’s slating of various groups is usually tempered by him qualifying what he’s saying with words like ‘some’ or ‘most,’ because it seems to me that he’s aware that painting the world with a 6" paintbrush isn’t the answer.

Pull the [zb] other one Dave . That’s utter BS and you know it. I can’t believe you’re even attempting to use that excuse to justify your actions. WTF.

Let me spell it out for you :

Beaver:
I would be quite happy for them all to ■■■■ off home.

[…]

They pay bollox all tax into OUR country.

[…]

They have no interest in integration.

[…]

They will all work for peanuts and help stagnate OUR wages.

[…]

We need to get rid of them.

Now my eyesight isn’t what it was, but it’s not that bad and I can see no mention of ‘some’ or ‘most’ in any of those statements. Perhaps you could point them out for me?

Selective moderation and censorship. The proof is right here ^^^^^^^^^^^^

[supermultiblue]

Don’t know why is tolerated on here.

[rob_k]

dieseldave:
I’m busy just now, but I’ve quoted thisnow so I can give it a good answer later on.

I’m asking for albion’s response as it was she that has admitted to performing the role of moderator based on her own personal opinions and feelings rather than remaining impartial which is what moderators should be as their task is nothing more than ensuring members’ posts do not breach the site rules.

[franglais]

SuperMultiBlue:
Don’t know why is tolerated on here.

Well done SMB: a witty, well reasoned post, raising the level of debate to new levels.

[albion]

Rob K:

dieseldave:
I’m busy just now, but I’ve quoted thisnow so I can give it a good answer later on.

I’m asking for albion’s response as it was she that has admitted to performing the role of moderator based on her own personal opinions and feelings rather than remaining impartial which is what moderators should be as their task is nothing more than ensuring members’ posts do not breach the site rules.

Admission implies fault, so no, I did not admit anything.

I didn’t bring my opinions in on it bar making a judgement on if it breached forum guidelines. I looked at EBs post as being borderline racist. Was it racist enough to delete the post, not in my judgement. Had I seen your post first, then perhaps I may have approved it. Racism falls into a spectrum, and there can be no hard and fast rules about what exactly constitutes racism, unless perhaps the mods get together one a week and collectively review every post that a mods decision may trigger calls of impartiality. And that isn’t going to happen.

[rob_k]

albion:

Rob K:

dieseldave:
I’m busy just now, but I’ve quoted thisnow so I can give it a good answer later on.

I’m asking for albion’s response as it was she that has admitted to performing the role of moderator based on her own personal opinions and feelings rather than remaining impartial which is what moderators should be as their task is nothing more than ensuring members’ posts do not breach the site rules.

Admission implies fault, so no, I did not admit anything.

I didn’t bring my opinions in on it bar making a judgement on if it breached forum guidelines. I looked at EBs post as being borderline racist. Was it racist enough to delete the post, not in my judgement. Had I seen your post first, then perhaps I may have approved it. Racism falls into a spectrum, and there can be no hard and fast rules about what exactly constitutes racism, unless perhaps the mods get together one a week and collectively review every post that a mods decision may trigger calls of impartiality. And that isn’t going to happen.

Wait… what? If you seriously see this as being racist then I ask that you hand in your moderator card as you’re not fit to be one when you don’t even know what the difference is between race and ethnicity . Race refers to a person’s physical characteristics, such as bone structure and skin, hair, or eye color. Ethnicity, however, refers to cultural factors, including nationality, regional culture, ancestry, and language. Beaver’s post (nor mine for that matter) makes no mention of the drivers’ colour of physical characteristics so you are acting as arbiter of who gets to post here based on your own misconceptions and personal feelings over what you consider to be racist, even though you don’t even understand what the word means . How is this allowed?

[supermultiblue]

Franglais:

SuperMultiBlue:
Don’t know why is tolerated on here.

Well done SMB: a witty, well reasoned post, raising the level of debate to new levels.

Wasn’t meant to be witty you

[dieseldog999]

SuperMultiBlue:

Franglais:

SuperMultiBlue:
Don’t know why is tolerated on here.

Well done SMB: a witty, well reasoned post, raising the level of debate to new levels.

Wasn’t meant to be witty you

i know its only sunday afternoon,but here we have it sofar.its this weeks,WWWOOOOOOOSSSSHHHHHHHH of the week…

[supermultiblue]

dieseldog999:

SuperMultiBlue:

Franglais:

SuperMultiBlue:
Don’t know why is tolerated on here.

Well done SMB: a witty, well reasoned post, raising the level of debate to new levels.

Wasn’t meant to be witty you

i know its only sunday afternoon,but here we have it sofar.its this weeks,WWWOOOOOOOSSSSHHHHHHHH of the week…

How is it ?

This should be good…

[albion]

Rob K:

albion:

Rob K:

dieseldave:
I’m busy just now, but I’ve quoted thisnow so I can give it a good answer later on.

I’m asking for albion’s response as it was she that has admitted to performing the role of moderator based on her own personal opinions and feelings rather than remaining impartial which is what moderators should be as their task is nothing more than ensuring members’ posts do not breach the site rules.

Admission implies fault, so no, I did not admit anything.

I didn’t bring my opinions in on it bar making a judgement on if it breached forum guidelines. I looked at EBs post as being borderline racist. Was it racist enough to delete the post, not in my judgement. Had I seen your post first, then perhaps I may have approved it. Racism falls into a spectrum, and there can be no hard and fast rules about what exactly constitutes racism, unless perhaps the mods get together one a week and collectively review every post that a mods decision may trigger calls of impartiality. And that isn’t going to happen.

Wait… what? If you seriously see this as being racist then I ask that you hand in your moderator card as you’re not fit to be one when you don’t even know what the difference is between race and ethnicity . Race refers to a person’s physical characteristics, such as bone structure and skin, hair, or eye color. Ethnicity, however, refers to cultural factors, including nationality, regional culture, ancestry, and language. Beaver’s post (nor mine for that matter) makes no mention of the drivers’ colour of physical characteristics so you are acting as arbiter of who gets to post here based on your own misconceptions and personal feelings over what you consider to be racist, even though you don’t even understand what the word means . How is this allowed?

Especially for you Rob, I looked up the definition of racism, first definition I came to:

Prejudice, discrimination or antagonism directed against someone of a different race.

So given EB’s characterization of EE drivers as being responsible for rubbish, tax evasion etc (CBA to che k back), I’m happy.

You won’t be, and will no doubt be outraged. Crack on, I don’t think I’ve anything to add.

[rob_k]

albion:
Especially for you Rob, I looked up the definition of racism, first definition I came to:

Prejudice, discrimination or antagonism directed against someone of a different race.

So given EB’s characterization of EE drivers as being responsible for rubbish, tax evasion etc (CBA to che k back), I’m happy.

You won’t be, and will no doubt be outraged. Crack on, I don’t think I’ve anything to add.

Poland/Polish is not a race. Nor is any other EE country. The word you’re looking for is ethnicity. No-one here is discriminating against EEs because of their race because that would be completely retarded seeing as they have the same skin colour and physical characteristics as the indigenous Brits. Please educate yourself on the difference between the two before binning people’s posts as being racist when the are not.

[supermultiblue]

Diesel dogs arse has fallen out

[rikki-uk]

Rob K:
Poland/Polish is not a race. Nor is any other EE country. Please educate yourself on the difference between the two before binning people’s posts as being racist when the are not.

The legal definition as defined by the Crown Prosecution Service and the basis on which they prosecute

Racial group - this means any group of people who are defined by reference to their race, colour, nationality (including citizenship) or ethnic or national origin. This could include Gypsies and Travellers, refugees, or asylum seekers or others from less visible minorities. There has been a legal ruling that Jews and Sikhs are included in the definition of racial group.

[dieseldog999]

SuperMultiBlue:

dieseldog999:

SuperMultiBlue:

Franglais:

Well done SMB: a witty, well reasoned post, raising the level of debate to new levels.

Wasn’t meant to be witty you

i know its only sunday afternoon,but here we have it sofar.its this weeks,WWWOOOOOOOSSSSHHHHHHHH of the week…

How is it ?

sorry for the late reply.
i was having a session of therapy for being cyber bullied
did you not just give a serious reply to an obviously tongue in cheek sarcastic reply?
or am i reading it wrong…i cant find nobhead in the dictionary,is it a made up word?

[eagerbeaver]

I am bemused by all this If you make a post and it’s deemed to not be acceptable, then it gets binned. No one gets injured, financial losses are not incurred and tear ducts will go on to weep another day.

Just to clarify a couple of things from my end. I have great respect for Dave & Albion. Dave’s posts to me always seem to be truthful & straight. Sign of a decent spine in my book, and also a friend of Maoster’s is a friend of mine.
I have never met Albion despite living quite local to both her home & work. However I find from her posts that she is a knowledgeable, intelligent and often funny member.

So if these two mod’s accept OR decline my post’s, then I am happy either way I have posted on the thread in question regarding EE’s based on my own opinions, observations and verbal discussions. I am far too intelligent a person to blame all the ills of the haulage industry on one group of drivers.

But IGNORING facts serves no purpose. I believe a higher percentage of EE lorry drivers are ■■■■ cans. People who drink drive in ANY vehicle are not welcome on our roads to injure, maim or kill as a result of their own weak and selfish shortcomings. I really CBA going into any other areas of my posts as I am far too busy congratulating myself on being one of TNUK’s greatest ever posters (RobK - Paranoia is getting you mate, fight it with all your might )