Forum Moderation

[Ghostrider]

2 hours ago, Evil Inky said:

So you wouldn't be too bothered if a rumour went round accusing you of being a child molester?

Is there an echo in here, or is this some sort of initiation question, fixation or something. You asked another poster almost this exact same question five days ago on this thread.

I'd be no more, or less bothered about it than I'd expect you, or anyone else would be if an identical rumour went around about you or them.

Bottom line though. There's no point in sweating it having a meltdown over a rumour, as the subject is usually the last to know about the rumour anyway, and in any case there's nothing the subject can do to close down or run damage limitation on a rumour about them once its out there anyway. Best ignore it, and continue as normal, it blows through and is forgotten quickest that way.

Lastly, this is Shetland, where everybody knows the vast majority of everybody else to some degree. Rumours are flying around about most people most of the time, its something of a local sport, at best they are only partially based on anything factual which is then exaggerated, embellished and moulded in to a 'good story', at worst, they're 100% fake put about by someone with a wooden spoon stirring the sh*t pot. Anybody who even takes the time to listen to them, let alone consider believing any of it really shouldn't be outdoors unsupervised.

As the old saying goes: Fart at the Ness, an you're sh*tten your breeks by the time its reached Lerrik'.

[Evil Inky]

34 minutes ago, Ghostrider said:

Is there an echo in here, or is this some sort of initiation question, fixation or something. You asked another poster almost this exact same question five days ago on this thread.

It's an attempt to show the flaws in this rugged individualist macho persona that certain posters adopt. The implication appears to be that if they don't care what people say about them, then they have the licence to say whatever they like about others. I'm trying to demonstrate that at least some of the time, it can matter a great deal what other people say about you.

[Ghostrider]

2 hours ago, Evil Inky said:

It's an attempt to show the flaws in this rugged individualist macho persona that certain posters adopt. The implication appears to be that if they don't care what people say about them, then they have the licence to say whatever they like about others. I'm trying to demonstrate that at least some of the time, it can matter a great deal what other people say about you.

While some posters may well have that attitude, I wouldn't know, only they can confirm or deny it. It is equally likely that some posters who may appear to have that attitude, actually have their gob filter wound hard against the 'Max' bump stops but are stiil copping flak from time to time, and are simply expressing disbelief at the massive chasm between the standards they and their associates consider acceptable and 'normal' and those some other folk want to demand as acceptable and 'normal'.

 

 

 

 

[Colin]

On 12/04/2021 at 21:10, Fjool said:

In my experience, one is perfectly able to express one's true personal points of view without being called these things. Might it have something to do with the opinions being expressed?

Which rather neatly sums up the claim that we are no longer allowed to voice opinions/views that differ from the 'official', 'politically correct' narrative.

 

[Roachmill]

And that would, Colin, be a false claim. I don't know if folk are intentionally trying to take the hump, but expressing an opinion that not everyone agrees with is normal. Blurting out an ill though, inconsiderate, uninformed etc. opinion can and should be challenged - lest it be taken as factually correct.

[Muckle Oxters]

Dis is a weird discussion - folk who express dir opinions on dis website are claiming dey canna express dir opinions onywhaur.

I wonder if dey joost dunna lik dir opinions being challenged?

[Ghostrider]

38 minutes ago, Roachmill said:

Blurting out an ill though, inconsiderate, uninformed etc. opinion can and should be challenged - lest it be taken as factually correct.

The amount of consideration believed to be owed by one poster to another is subjective, and itself a matter of individual opinion. 'Uninformed', again is rather subjective, it all depends from where any one individual obtains the 'information' they are relying upon.

Challenging each others opinions is perfectly fine, as long as it is done in a polite and respectful manner, and through evidence based debate. Simply dismissing someone's opinion by arbitarily branding them a 'troll', Racist/Homophobe/Islamaphobe etc etc as often happens does not cut it. That's attacking the person, not the point they are presenting.

 

 

[Colin]

I wasn't going to bother responding but, seeing as roachmill seems to be making a point os stalking/trolling my posts, and evil inky seems to making a point of stalking/trolling GR's posts,  it's beginning to look like a conspiracy.  Just an 'opinion' of course... 

[Ghostrider]

21 minutes ago, Muckle Oxters said:

Dis is a weird discussion - folk who express dir opinions on dis website are claiming dey canna express dir opinions onywhaur.

I wonder if dey joost dunna lik dir opinions being challenged?

Oh, I dunno. Opinions expressed on this site, in common with most sites are tempered to some degree, the fact it has Mods who act from time to time is proof of that. So while folk may be expressing their opinions up to an extent, its quite likely some at least cannot express their opinions in full. KInda an 'opinion lite' version only can get through.

Nothing wrong with that per se, site operators make the judgement call and set the bar on content based on where they feel it needs to be to keep their site how and where they like it.

I can sympathise though with anyone who feels they have nowhere online that they can freely speak their mind, as they seem few and far between. Some might say some opinions don't deserve an airing, but I'm more in favour of age restricted entry and a content disclaimer, then let all so-called 'adults' have a free for all on whatever they like behind that.

Shetlink tends to steer a pretty good middle ground IMHO, there are certainly any number of sites out there with both far more lax content standards and far more pandering to snowflake sensibilities, but any I've ever come across who operated zero or minimal moderation policies have by fair means or foul been forced to either get with the program or be forcibly closed down. If not though pressure being put on their third party server or internet connection provider(s) then by petty nitpicking by global financial institutions on their income streams.

[Roachmill]

@Colin Sorry, please accept my apologies for daring to question what, to all intents, gets stated as facts; yet doesn't hold up to scrutiny, goes undefended most of the time and now ends up being a conspiracy. GR does provide context to his opinions (usually after a number of posts) and you may be shocked to hear I even agree with some of what he says or understand where he's coming from as a result. But this latest rash of "we're being persecuted because folk are challenging what we make on as fact" has to be a new low.

Edited April 14, 2021 by Roachmill
GR got a post in afore mine

[Colin]

yawn