Censorship

[Admin]

I've started this thread so we can have a sensible, adult discussion about what is acceptable, what is not, what will get a thread locked and what will get a member banned.

You can discuss what you believe should be acceptable or unacceptable and what should be done about those threads that become out of order.

But be warned, if there are any personal attacks on anyone, member or not, the offender may well find themselves no longer a member of ShadowMusic.

Bob.

[Twang46]

Hmmmm

Start a debate about censorship....GOOD

Then end the opening statement with a threat..............BAD.

Dick.

[Admin]

Given the way previous threads have gone, allowing it to run unchecked is likely to encourage this one go the same way. Should it do so, moderating, censoring or having to deal with offending contributors would take away the whole point of the discussion.

While members can have their say in the running of the site there are just a couple of things that will never be acceptable even if the entire membership wish it:

Personal attacks, name calling or anything else which is not permitted in an international publication (which ShadowMusic is).

Or posting any comment which is, or could be deemed, illegal.

Rather than risk having to moderate this thread, I added the warning in the hope that it would caution contributors to think before hitting the submit button.

Bob.

[Tab]

Bob,

We've known each other for a long time and you know well my views on censorship - I'm agin it!

However, personally, I agree with Thumper's dad - "if you can't say something nice about someone, say nothing at all", but for goodness sake, we are all adults here and if someone wants to rant on in an incoherent, inarticulate way about something or someone, let them be seen for what they are. We can make our own minds up as to whether we want to be involved or even read it.

After all if personal opinions about something or someone were to be shut down generally, most of the newspapers would go out of business.

Kind regards

[alanbakewell]

You know, if someone who didn't know what this site was about were to read some of the stuff on here they'd be forgiven for thinking it was one of the children's forums.

Bob, as my late and much missed Dad used to say, "I wouldn't have your job for a pension".

Gentlemen, surely the "Rules" are simple. Don't say anything in print that you wouldn't say to a man's ( or woman's ) face.
Children read this forum. Please don't set them the example that the likes of Facebook does.

Dick, someone, somewhere, has to draw the line from time to time. It seems to me that, that is exactly what Bob has done here.
I personally don't see Bob's comments as a threat, merely stating a fact.
A threat? I'll tell you a threat. A threat is when a bloke with a daft haircut in North Korea has control of a few buttons. THAT'S a threat.

As far as who goes where to see which Shadows event.......If you want to go, go. If you don't want to go, for goodness sakes don't tell someone
they're wrong for doing what they want. At the end of the day it is none of your business.

Cheers, Alan.

[Didier]

Being co-founder and co-manager of the French Shadows forum (created in 2004 and inspired by ShadowMusic), I fully support minimum rules of good conduct in forums like ours.
We have a written charter prohibiting things such as personal attacks, name calling and things like that. We also prohibit political and religious discussions.
Those who don't respect our charter may face message deletion, personal warning by managers, temporary ban or permanent ban.

Didier

[noelford]

Locking topics and removing items which break the rules which members implicitly agree to abide by when joining, is not censorship, it is simply enforcing those rules. End of debate!

[kipper]

i think the people who run this forum do a brilliant job 99% of the time, and we are all human and can get things wrong now and again. so 1% is great stats.
locking the last thread was 100 % the right thing to do.
the managment have my full backing in doing a difficult job. even if they get it wrong (in my opinion now and again).
so my view is carry on as you are. peter

[Iain Purdon]

Thanks for the contributions so far.

Working for the BBC as I do, I am accustomed to checks and balances that make sure whatever we publish is fair and legal. There is always a second pair of eyes, the editor who makes sure the writer’s work is acceptable. Facts must be established, all sides of an argument must be balanced, and we must be aware of legal issues such as libel or contempt of court. Whenever there is doubt, and both writers and editors are trained to recognise the possibility of doubt, a third pair of eyes, the duty lawyer, is brought in: yes, we have one, 24/7. The aim of all this is not to stifle publication but to liberate it, so that we can publish the truth safely without ending up in court.

On a website we have no such safeguards, so you can inadvertently drop us in it and we can be held culpable if we do not take reasonable action. The Defamation Act 2013 (England and Wales) covers websites hosted in England or Wales, as this one is. Other countries have their own legislation, for example the Defamation Act 1996 applies in Scotland. But they all point in much the same direction. The relevant section of the new legislation is here if you are interested.
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/201 ... /5/enacted

We are not employed here as journalists or lawyers, we volunteer as Shadows fans, doing our bit to keep alive something that has inspired us all over so many years. So we are bound to err on the side of caution. You may not agree with us, and you may be right, but as long as our names are up there as moderators, we are bound to act where we believe it is necessary, regardless of other opinions.

The vast majority of postings don’t go anywhere near all this, thank goodness. All we ask is that you keep it decent, keep it relevant and, if in doubt, say nowt.

Cheers - Iain

[Twang46]

Hi Bob, Alan

To me it seems quite simple. Publish a set of "rules" & give all members the choice of agreeing or withdrawing from the forum.

The issue that annoys me the most is when a thread on a forum is locked/deleted without explanation. Thankfully that doesn't normally happen here

Or posting any comment which is, or could be deemed, illegal...................... Agree 100%

Personal attacks, name calling..................................Agree 100%

or anything else which is not permitted in an international publication (which ShadowMusic is)................. it's the "anything else" phrase that is unclear to me

Perhaps now is a good time to remind members of the rules that exist at the moment ?

Dick

ps................. I've had look around but cannot find a set of rules. Can anybody point me to them please