What's with this censoring nonsense happening on the forum?

Now the thread is locked again with only quite civil discourse in the new posts...what gives?

If you want a child to learn to play well with others, then you have to let him or her actually play with others. This nervous mommy stuff will never work, whether it's the mommy being overly protective or the kid whining and crying that he doesn't want to play in order to get his way is irrelevant. Instead send him outside to play and not to come back in until dinner.
 
John in CR. You are a very valued member of ES with a long history of posting valuable information based on your real-world experiences.

You've been asked politely to avoid posting in EG's threads (I saved the PM's), and EG has been politely asked to avoid posting in your threads. And yet you just posted in EG's thread. The bigger question regards policy that can have a long-lasting effect on future posts on ES.

Is this censorship?
 
spinningmagnets said:
Is this censorship?
Yes.

I have not been following the John in CR vs ElectricGod battle but in this locked thread Roman Kostrygin - Sur-Ron 16kw outrunner

ElectricGod says "I have 3 Hubmonster motors." As the creator of Hubmonster motors John in CR says "No ya don't"

Really who cares who has what motor? BUT the great thing about arguing on internet forums. Unlike grown people physically fighting. No one gets hurt.

Sorry for the endless copy and paste.
marty said:
From locked topic Moderators deleting forum content?
on May 20 2017 7:12am
marty said:
Suggestion to moderators. Internet forum's are like children playing in a sand box. Might be best to just let the children play, argue, learn, and be children.

I miss DrkAngel's Saturday Night Live YouTube videos about Trump.
Suggestion to moderators. Internet forum's are like children playing in a sand box. Might be best to just let the children play, argue, learn, and be children.
 
Whether or not any particular poster feels that a certain thread is in the middle of a flame-war usually depends on who's thread it is. Any loosening of the customary actions used to slow down and hopefully avoid a flame-war will certainly spread in all directions. Members have often been asked to block someone they don't like, so that they are not forced to see their posts in order to read a threads developments.

Clearly, John and EG are not blocking each other. Then, they have been asked to avoid posting in each others threads, yet...here we are.

I don't believe this is censorship. But, if any members can get a majority of the moderators to agree with some change in ES policy, I will follow the new guidelines.

Off topic posts will be removed.

Personal attacks will be removed.

If you want to be clever, and mix a personal attack with some tech data in a post...the whole post has to go. Of course, you can then claim that I am censoring the tech data you posted, and I'm OK with that.
 
spinningmagnets said:
Whether or not any particular poster feels that a certain thread is in the middle of a flame-war usually depends on who's thread it is. Any loosening of the customary actions used to slow down and hopefully avoid a flame-war will certainly spread in all directions. Members have often been asked to block someone they don't like, so that they are not forced to see their posts in order to read a threads developments.

Clearly, John and EG are not blocking each other. Then, they have been asked to avoid posting in each others threads, yet...here we are.

I appreciate your efforts, I am certainly pro sensible regulation in every facet, however in this case (and others like it) I think you might be over-reaching in your definition of a personal attack or "flame war". As per his pattern, EG posted a 'fact'. Somebody more deeply informed on this topic (hubmonsters in this particular instance, but this is translatable to many other threads) informed him that he was mistaken and politely requested he correct his incorrect statement for the benefit of all. This isn't a flame war, this is functional discourse! Where the wheels fall off is when one party (the one in the wrong more often than not) cries foul, stop attacking me etc etc - then it often does degenerate into flinging poop.

That's the flame war and that's what should be regulated, however the original disagreement is valuable. By blowing away the thread back to the initial response that triggered things, you lose the correction, you lose the net benefit to societal knowledge and EG loses the opportunity to further his personal development because when challenged, he is under no obligation to self evaluate when an easier and more gratifying outcome is 'winning' by having the 'offending' posts removed. In addition, by locking the thread for all, the original topic and content is frozen and much less accessible, reducing whatever good it may have done.

We should be encouraging people with differing opinions to have functional conversations, not pretending they don't see each other. I've tried it with several willfully ignorant forum members and while it does make it quicker to peruse a topic, I often have to read their ridiculous posts on topics I care about just to comprehend the commentary from people whos opinions I DO value.
 
If you look at both of the contested threads, there are many posts from John and others that remain in the thread. So..."the original disagreement" remains in both of those threads.

If you re-read those threads, it becomes very clear what Johns position is, and clear what EGs position is.
 
spinningmagnets said:
John in CR. You are a very valued member of ES with a long history of posting valuable information based on your real-world experiences.

You've been asked politely to avoid posting in EG's threads (I saved the PM's), and EG has been politely asked to avoid posting in your threads. And yet you just posted in EG's thread. The bigger question regards policy that can have a long-lasting effect on future posts on ES.

Is this censorship?

You need to read my post. Exactly for that kind of reason I will never agree to such a restriction. I am not the problem, he and his name are.
 
efMX Trials Electric Freeride said:
Ok, plz feel free to go outside and play with yourself for awhile lol..

..and in pops the only type of supporter that ElectricTrump has...LOL. Please tell us more.
 
Also, just to clarify something now. Since he insists his chosen name was done in jest, then jokes related to that name can't be personal attacks.

On the subject of personal attacks I don't think anyone other than ElectricTrump himself has posted language worthy of threadlock in any of the numerous threads HE caused to be locked, and without question in the most recent threads he was the only one making any personal attacks. Like Ohbse said ElectricTrump made a complete fool of himself and 100% of that content should have been left for the world to see.
 
I really don't like censorship,

spinning magnets mentioned that either person can just block the other person.

why not just put the 2 offenders in the doghouse for a week or two. offender 1 cant see offender 2 posts and o2 cant see o1 posts.

I don't know if thats possible
 
efMX Trials Electric Freeride said:
how petty can one get.. just call you Richard??
it's not about supporting anyone, but operating without the forum rules and etiquette;)

Spoken as a true ElectricTrump fan. Are you sure you got the wording right in that last sentence? Throw in some whining about being attacked to go with your weak name calling and you could graduate to apprentice.


****To the mods, this kind of stuff is just friendly jabs for fun on both parts and definitely not worthy of any kind of censorship.****
 
just another pissing contest, yawn..
i once pissed on my brother (windy day)..
it was an accident but he wasn't too happy about it.. haha or how bout this one "better pissed off than on".. :p :lol:
 
spinningmagnets said:
You've been asked politely to avoid posting in EG's threads (I saved the PM's), and EG has been politely asked to avoid posting in your threads. And yet you just posted in EG's thread. The bigger question regards policy that can have a long-lasting effect on future posts on ES.

Is this censorship?

This is the case for me also, as you know. I find it to be censorship because then there is a general rule created that people can choose who posts in their threads - so the limitation is on posters and not on what they post. Suddenly ES promotes flat earthing and free energy guys.

This will, in some cases (this one) destroy the forum quality.
 
i'd rather stay out of stuff like this, mostly because it ends up devolving into crap like the above, but this is about information loss, and that's too important to just ignore.

technically, the rules don't allow us to talk about moderators/moderation in public...but at least in this case, i think we should.

at one time, there was no ownership of threads. one could start a thread, but could not choose who could or could not post in it, or what they could say in it. if something was off topic, it could be reported and moved to a new thread, and if it was an argument or whatever, it could be reported and moved to other toxic discussions, etc.

while that can be annoying at times, it's much better than the present system, where not only is technical information lost, pattern-of-behavior information is also lost, showing how members behave towards each other, which is important in choosing who one might wish to listen to / trust.

i recall a fair bit of stuff in some of the threads referenced in this thread, that i don't really see a reason to have been removed. moved to another thread, perhaps, as not relevant to the topic at hand..but not deleted from the forum completely.

not connected directly, but relevant: it's been a while, but there have even been members that were not simply banned, but completely deleted, which removed great amounts of useful technical information from the forum (some of which i needed to use, but found is no longer there, some in my own threads, replies to me.


having been a moderator, i know it's tough to decide what to remove and what not to. no matter what you do, you're always wrong to someone.

if the "post history" feature hadn't gone away (probably during a forum upgrade?), then a moderator could simply edit out the rule-breaking material, while additionally sending a warning / pm to the poster about the specific rule being broken, and teh origianl would still exist for reference in the post history versions.

the warning and the post history would leave a written record for other moderators to be able to see patterns of behavior, so that once there's been enough problems with a particular person, the moderators as a group could decide to take further action if deemed necessary.



(btw, losing the post history lost a fair bit of info itself, because prior versions of at least some of my own posts contained technical and other info that was edited out to make the post clearer, but left in the post history for reference, and now that's all gone. other info was also lost from other members, such as those who "tantrum deleted" their stuff, but was still available in the post histories when it was needed.)
 
goatman said:
I really don't like censorship,

Or speed limits, or. . . .

Not so much ownership of threads but if someone started a thread and someone else seems determined to disrupt if you gotta put the brakes on them. Simply delivering bad news they don't want to hear is not disrupting it, but some people act like it is. So there's no way for moderators to go into it with clear answers, especially when there are certain people looking for the chance to make trouble with certain others. (Wow, listen to all that throat clearing sounding like names.)

Instead of the doghouse, out them in the Octagon. Their own private thread where everyone else can watch them burn themselves out on it before they're allowed to post anywhere else. . . .
 
Dauntless said:
... especially when there are certain people looking for the chance to make trouble with certain others. (Wow, listen to all that throat clearing sounding like names.)

Instead of the doghouse, out them in the Octagon. Their own private thread where everyone else can watch them burn themselves out on it before they're allowed to post anywhere else. . . .

Not looking for trouble, just at a zero tolerance threshold, and I believe Larsb and Ohbse are at the same point. Despite the fact that their posts to correct factual inaccuracies have been far more softly worded than my blunt prose, they've repeatedly been met with the same loss of control by ElectricTrump who immediately runs to mommy for protection and to make everything go away as if nothing happened.

The Octagon idea is a fine idea, but ElectricTrump is afraid to enter as he knows he's unarmed, yet maintains the attitude that he can do or say anything he wants without consequence.
 
nicobie said:
When did the idea of the original thread poster having control of who and what gets posted in the thread come from?...

That's a new concept to me too, and one I completely disagree with.
 
Amberwolf was just noting that it used to be certain people (Dang, more throat clearing) used to start with 'My thread, MY thread' and immediated get met with SO WHAT? Now there seems to be some sympathy. I dont agree it should be 100% 'So what?' But I'm sure not saying they deserve their own echo chamber.
 
The ES forum is known for beeing a source of knowledge for almost everything around e-bikes and electric vehicles, be it motors, controllers, BMS or anything else thats related to this.
I for myself have learned a lot here and probabaly other members will learn from here too in future, thats why i have the opinion that obviously wrong statements from the OP should be allowed to put right by others without getting personal attacks or arrogant answers.

Regarding this there seem to be alot of trouble with mentiond member, or better say the reason why this thread does exist.

I am with John and other members who got treated like sh** by this guy, and i am also for a name change.
Just wondering why the moderators wants to defend and fulfill the wishes of this user, giving him a preference as mentioned because of the OP thing, yes even if the initial statements which were the reason for those "escalations" were more than wrong. I cannot get it.
 
marty said:
]Suggestion to moderators. Internet forum's are like children playing in a sand box. Might be best to just let the children play, argue, learn, and be children.
That's fine; I am all for that. But you don't let children spraypaint cuss words on the front of your house, or break the windows, with the rationale "well, kids will be kids." There have to be limits, to safeguard the house they live in (or the forum they inhabit.)
 
That is the way society is becoming, in general terms society is becoming pussified.
Dont hurt no ones feelings
Social Justice
No grade marks in school, everyone passes
No winners, no losers, everyone wins

No one knows the true age of any of the posters, one person could be very young at pre-teen age where they cant take a little light harded jabbing in a kidding manner, where another is retired and seen it all.
Also sense of humors are different and can be hard to discern online.

Lots of factors, like no one wants to be cut down or talk backed to and look inept or have their online reputation hurt. Must be a faceplant thing, thankfully I never signed up for that jazz. The big one is no one wants to look stupid.


John in CR said:
who immediately runs to mommy for protection and to make everything go away as if nothing happened.
 
Back
Top