Why Are Some Discussions Stifled / Censored?
It seems that any potentially contentious subjects that Amind don't agree with are soon censored by Admin?
This has happen again with the thread about Head Measuring at the Game Fair being locked....DG and the British CIC committee have both put them selves forward into the stalking public eye by doing what they do, but a legitimate discussion about them is quashed and locked by the Admin..
This is the same Admin team who are happy to run down BASC at every opportunity and have no qualms with negative or derogatory threads aimed at BASC or its members?
I can't help but see double standards here...
I have always found this forum to be amongst the best for sensible contributions and moderation and would regret any change to this.
Threads ahould only be locked or pulled if there has been a breach of the rules, particularly those relating to abuse and foul language.
If members want to debate an issue they should be allowed to do so without interference from moderators unless they break the rules. Other members are adult enough to choose to view it or not according to their level of interest.
The fact that Admin don't like the subject matter or disagree with the views expressed is not a good reason to lock or pull a thread in my view and any proliferation of this is going to lose me as a contributor which would be very sad for me, ......but maybe not for others.
I have to say that I am not a member of BASC, and I really dont care about the attitudes of some people, but, if you are going to try to tear a thread off someone it is better to have the facts and not just make a possible horrid statement about someone that is trying to be genuine and helpful.
If it is necessary, I could make a phone call to stop all this through first party.
I will give you my slant on this. I have spent a couple of days this week with Dominic in the classroom on a deer course. He strikes me as the sort of individual that is honest and helpful, and he is also very informative.
Aren't Fridays great
I don't know DG or the CIC Committe, nor do I know any "facts" around the issue except the scant details that have already appeared in the shooting press.
My point is not so much the rights and wrongs of this particular issue, but why was the thread locked during a discussion that was both relevant to the stalking community and did not breech any rules on abusive language or personal attacks?
In this particular case, I would again point out that both a DG and the British CIC committee have put themselves into the stalking public eye by carrying out the service they do; a paid service I might add..
I see no reason why the circumstances of this "parting of the ways" shouldn't be discussed as long as it doesn't deteriorate into personal attacks???
I offered to invest in this site!!
offered about 3 years ago but got no reply!
would still be interested!
haven't seen the thread you refer to ,but agree with you entirely,there should be no censorship of any form, only if it becomes abusive or personal should it be stopped.
Moderators should be impartial and not let their personal allegiances dictate censorship..Sorry guys but if this site is to grow then there can be no censorship, you have to be totally neutral.
Originally Posted by sikamalc
I'm glad you reconsidered your collective position on this...I in no way condone personal attacks /abuse nor foul language, but I do support free debate.
Yes I think this site is truly excellent and my urging for posters to be allowed free debate is so that it continues...
Right now it’s my turn, I locked the thread because I could see that it was sliding down hill towards libellous accusations against Dominic Griffiths. Now if this had happened, this site not the individuals making the comments would be held accountable for them in a court of law because the site would have been seen to validate these comments by allowing them to remain. Trust me we have two legal experts working behind the scenes making sure that we steer well clear of such mine fields.
Both Stag 1933 and 300WSM could see that the thread had come to its logical conclusion and were in an agreement with me on this matter.
Now it is rather unhelpful when members only quickly read or don’t read at all a thread and don’t try to understand the gravity of the situation before posting in a half cocked manner in reply.
This thread was politically charged and could have started another great big argument that would have carried on not only on this site but throughout the deer stalking community. Why would it? You must be asking. Well because we have certain people who on this site that are in the position to know the full facts of the matter, they are considered to be ‘higher echelon’ members of well known and well established Deer Management organisations. These people already know the answers to the questions and know of the problems and possible ‘high level’ investigations taking place. It could then be considered that they are using this site as a political platform for their collective or personal views on this matter without having to actually stick their necks out due the anonymity that sites like this provide its membership.
This site is moderated and will remain so, it does listen to its membership and relies on this input to move forward. However we consider it necessary to put down a firm hand and say enough is enough. Sometimes these decisions will puzzle the members, “why pull that? It seemed okay!” Admin have intelligence gathering resources set in place and are in the position to act upon any post before they cause offence.
We are not the mouth piece of any deer management organisation and nor will it ever be. Our strength comes from the very fact that we are independent of the Deer Worlds’ kiss and tell politics.
The very idea that we can run a non moderated site is a naive fantasy. This site would collapse into anarchy within a week, I for one have invested the greater part of my time and energies into this site over the last six months are not willing to see this happen. May I also point out that if some members would think before posting of the implications of what it is they are alluding to in that post, moderation wouldn’t be so heavy. Believe me moderators don’t want to come down heavy on anyone, why should they spend all their time ‘poop a scooping’ up after certain site members.
This site has never been so strong; its membership is up four fold on last year, its hit figures rapidly moving towards a third of a million hits per month. This is progress, this is growth, and this has been brought about by a small group of volunteers that have poured time, money and passions into the site. We expect to get the occasional knock, but the constant sniping by people who make it their hobby to question and second guess everything the Admin team do is getting very tiresome and time consuming.
If you are not prepared to give a positive along with a negative, if your only input is a moan or try to bring this site into thinly veiled political arguments well maybe you need to go away and start your own site not force your minority views on a majority lead site such as this.
Having read constant moans about censorship....it is a free world, free sight and people that don't like the way the admin team work are "free" to leave. In my humble opinon I would rather see topics blocked than loose the site all together. Again lets thank the team, rather than continuaously jump on them for doing there best.