Attack the post, not the poster. - Page 2

Number Juan · 12 May 2002, 09:14 (Ref:292257)

i do agree wholey with the opinion of Calais, we are all different however there is a fine line between expressing your point of view in a controlled and adult way and expressing it in way that is out of order.

of course there are going to be different connotations to different words all around the english speaking world however, there are some instances where it is in-appropriate. this thread is a flawed one however. notice: everybody who has posted in here doesnt go around slagging off other members for the sake of argument. the core are still out there and im confident that the moderators are doing all they can to stop any offensive posts.

21 May 2002, 12:50 (Ref:292243)

The problem I have is that sometimes people post in an aggressive manner. Of course, we are all human meaning that emotions can get pushed but I think some people go too far with unecessary aggression (this has happened to me at one point but unfortunatly I forgot to report the post).

Raoul Duke · 21 May 2002, 22:59 (Ref:292248)

I have more or less given up on the F1 forum. ...

The above message was posted by me, and then deleted, I am posting it again in protest of the inane and nazi like cencorship shown by some around here, I think I am more then entitled to express my thoughts and opinions on the subject, especially when a good member, and one of my good friends was banned recently. If the mods can't accept constructive critisism, if they simply expect everyone to pat them on the back and say "well done" they souldn't be mods to begin with

Message editted by Redshoes

redshoes · 22 May 2002, 08:16 (Ref:292268)

Above message snipped and follow-up message moved.

Raoul, before you get on you high horse, I was the one who removed your original post and it was for your use of language. It contained at least 2 hits on the autocensor and further attempt to bypass the the censor by using $$ in place of ss.

Such language is neither acceptable or welcome here. If you are that unhappy here perhaps I can suggest you find another website to air your views on.

Airhead · 22 May 2002, 08:25 (Ref:292276)

Raoul,

The thread that you started in April was about attacking the ideas within a persons written argument, not the person themselves. Why does the edited post above, seem in stark contradiction to these sentiments?

If the reference to the friend contained in the post is concerning the Dr Austin and his fate then email me and we can discuss it further. To continue the self flagellation over the issue is conter productive for all of us.

Raoul Duke · 22 May 2002, 08:26 (Ref:292277)

I think I will do just that.

I used to think this was a decent forum, how wrong I was.

I am henceforth removing my membership from this pathetic excuse for a message forum.

Thanks for nothing, cheers!.

badoer fan · 22 May 2002, 08:31 (Ref:292282)

I don't really know what to say here. I think *disgust* sums it up perfectly. I'll think of something else more consructive later.

Redneck · 22 May 2002, 11:28 (Ref:292423)

I could have sworn I posted my opinion on Freedom of Speech last night. It now appears that someone censored it. How ironic. This site has now sunk to a new low.

While you are at it... why don't you go and pee on the graves of all those soldiers who died protecting that right.

f1manoz · 22 May 2002, 12:28 (Ref:292508)

This is really getting beyond a joke. And I'm not talking about the moderators.

Redneck · 22 May 2002, 13:23 (Ref:292572)

I hate that you think it is a joke. I don't.

Chris Y · 22 May 2002, 14:54 (Ref:292649)

Redneck - your speech is anything but free on this forum. Myself and Craig pay to keep this site running, and your constant moaning about censorship is costing us money.

If you want to exercise your freedom of speech, or just commemorate that soldiers have died for your rights - go set up your own site and your own forums. You won't be subject to any censorship and you can say pretty much what you like.

If you want to stay here, accept that there are rules about what can and cannot be written here, and the moderators have to pull certain posts from time to time. It's not a personal thing, we just don't want to be sued.

f1manoz · 22 May 2002, 14:55 (Ref:292651)

*thunderous applause for Chris Y*

badoer fan · 22 May 2002, 15:27 (Ref:292683)

The 'we don't want to be sued' argument is total ********. Do you seriously think that anyone who matters is going to read the comments? There's much more stuff out on the internet, away from your little world u know.

And redshoes, if you're censoring language, I suggest you patrol the rest of the forum and delete approximately half the posts out there, cos they contain far worse than what Raoul posted.

Redneck · 22 May 2002, 15:31 (Ref:292690)

Just because you and Craig shell out money does not excuse you from your responsibilities. Do you want me to tell you what a great job you are doing and pat you on the back. When in fact I am very concerned about the integrity of Ten-Tenths?

*thunderous applause for f1manoz*

TimD · 22 May 2002, 15:35 (Ref:292694)

Are you seriously saying, Badoer Fan, that not one of the 4,400 members of this forum "matters"?

Or has the financial clout to launch a civil suit?

If so, you are wrong. Bigtime. Any member of the public, from Bernie Ecclestone to my Great Aunt Minnie, has the right, enshrined in law, to expect that they can enter 10-tenths and not find a defamation of their character.

If it was your neck on the line, I don't think you'd be so blase.

And on the subject of language, if I see a four-letter word, I lose it. If a point can't be made without resorting to profanity, it's not much of a point.

Chris Y · 22 May 2002, 15:37 (Ref:292697)

Sorry Redneck, what responsibilites are they? Please write them down here, because I obviously haven't been told about them..

Badoer Fan - there have been cases in recent history where discussion forums just like this one have been taken to court for printing libellous or defamatory comments about individuals. It wasn't the admins that were making the comments, but they copped the flak because of them. We don't want any of that thank you very much, so we WILL remove controversial statements, and offensive language, and we are perfectly within our RIGHTS to do so.

And, you'd be surprised who reads these forums. A lot of quite high-profile drivers do, as do officials involved in all levels of motorsports. Journalists and lawyers too. We do ave to be careful out there.

Piglet · 22 May 2002, 15:51 (Ref:292712)

Chris - you are exactly right, the case of Godfey v Demon will be one of the cases you are referring to. There are two precedent cases in this area.

In the first one the forum provider was found liable for the comments made by a poster because they did not have a system of moderation and did not demonstrate that they did their best to avoid defamatory posts.

In the second case the provider demonstrated that they had a strong policy on moderation and did their best to remove offensive/defamatory posts so they were not held liable for posting. The person claiming defamation then went after the poster who had made the post...

I don't recall which one was the Godfrey case or the name of the other, but can supply them if anyone is that interested!

And you are exactly right - you'd be surprised at the number of people who take action over this type of thing, the motorsport world is a small world and it does not take much to tarnish someone's reputation.

Redneck · 22 May 2002, 15:58 (Ref:292717)

Quote:

Originally posted by Chris Y
Sorry Redneck, what responsibilites are they? Please write them down here, because I obviously haven't been told about them..

You are right and I am wrong. You have no responsibilities and neither do I.

**Craig** · 22 May 2002, 17:36 (Ref:292789)

Please take debate of the 'free speech' issue to this topic:

http://tentenths.com/forum/showthrea...threadid=22921

Thank-you

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New poster	V6+	Formula One	31	8 May 2001 07:28