Why can't controversial sites be discussed?

[phoenyx]

I've had 2 threads on 2 controversial sites closed by moderators. I have never received an explanation that holds water as to why they can't be discussed. So I thought I'd ask here and see if I get a response.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

I saw one where you were promoting a site hawking vitamin supplements. Is that one of them?

Are any websites like this that allow themselves to be used in that way?

 

[Sunsettommy]

Why are we getting a bunch of public complaints about Moderation actions these days?

Use the PM system instead.

 

[phoenyx]

I saw one where you were promoting a site hawking vitamin supplements. Is that one of them?

I imagine I'm not allowed to mention the site here, so I will have to assume you're referring to the site i'm thinking of. I was never "promoting" this site. I've never even bought anything from them and I've never recommended anyone buy anything they sell. People said they didn't like the site, and I was tired of repeating why I did, so I created a thread so we could have discussions on the site there instead of in various threads where I referenced articles they published.

The other site wasn't even selling anything, but it was still closed down.

Why must people be fettered in regards to the sites they are allowed to discuss in a thread?

 

[phoenyx]

Why are we getting a bunch of public complaints about Moderation actions these days?

Use the PM system instead.

I already did that, I got no satisfactory response in regards to this.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Why are we getting a bunch of public complaints about Moderation actions these days?

Use the PM system instead.

I already did that, I got no satisfactory response in regards to this.

So you did get a least one reply yet because you didn't like the answers you decided to escalate the dispute/complaint by making it public, a bad idea.

Why don't you either stay with the PM system talking about it or give it up?

 

[phoenyx]

Why are we getting a bunch of public complaints about Moderation actions these days?

Use the PM system instead.

I already did that, I got no satisfactory response in regards to this.

So you did get a least one reply yet because you didn't like the answers you decided to escalate the dispute by making it public, a bad idea.

Why don't you either stay with the PM system talking about it or give it up?

I'm actually getting at something bigger- why can't we have a place where we can discuss policies, especially hidden policies? There is no rule stating that threads discussing controversial sites will be shut down, no reasoning as to why, and yet it's happening. Why can't we have a place to discuss if that is reasonable? Why do all these types of discussions have to happen behind closed doors where decisions are made in secrecy?

 

[occupied]

Commercial sites need to buy some ads if they want to be promoted on other sites.

Other message boards can also buy ads if they want to get some new users.

You are probably fucking with the bottom line around here.

 

[phoenyx]

Commercial sites need to buy some ads if they want to be promoted on other sites.

Other message boards can also buy ads if they want to get some new users.

You are probably fucking with the bottom line around here.

The sites I'm taking about weren't even message boards. I frequently cite them as I find that they have good news articles. Some people didn't like them, so I said why I did, frequently. Figured it'd be better to just create threads to them so that I could just refer people to the threads and we could discuss the sites there so as not to distract from the themes of the threads where I'd cite their articles. It seems the main issue is that some of the mods don't like what these sites have to say.

 

[miketx]

I use a site that sells this product and highly recommend it.

 

[Crepitus]

I've had 2 threads on 2 controversial sites closed by moderators. I have never received an explanation that holds water as to why they can't be discussed. So I thought I'd ask here and see if I get a response.

Define "controversial".

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I've had 2 threads on 2 controversial sites closed by moderators. I have never received an explanation that holds water as to why they can't be discussed. So I thought I'd ask here and see if I get a response.

It seems to me that what you've been doing amounts to spamming this forum with advertisements for a fraudulent quack.

If that quack wants advertising, then he should pay for it, on media that accept payment for such advertising; and which have no ethical standards that prevent them from advertising fraud and quackery.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Commercial sites need to buy some ads if they want to be promoted on other sites.

Other message boards can also buy ads if they want to get some new users.

You are probably fucking with the bottom line around here.

All websites we link to sell things. It's the nature of the internet if he wasnt actively promoting something but linking to information, I dont see a problem wither

 

[Sunsettommy]

Why are we getting a bunch of public complaints about Moderation actions these days?

Use the PM system instead.

I already did that, I got no satisfactory response in regards to this.

So you did get a least one reply yet because you didn't like the answers you decided to escalate the dispute by making it public, a bad idea.

Why don't you either stay with the PM system talking about it or give it up?

I'm actually getting at something bigger- why can't we have a place where we can discuss policies, especially hidden policies? There is no rule stating that threads discussing controversial sites will be shut down, no reasoning as to why, and yet it's happening. Why can't we have a place to discuss if that is reasonable? Why do all these types of discussions have to happen behind closed doors where decisions are made in secrecy?

That is what the PM system is for, it to discuss YOUR grievance/complaint about Moderation decisions, and YOU have stated you are getting replies from the Mods IN the PM system.

If you wanted to discuss forum rules and policies in general, by all means start a thread on it and the Mods and members will helpfully answer the questions.

Forum rules says:

No Discussing infractions, bans, banned members, or specific moderator actions or duties on the open boards. Issues with moderation should be taken up privately with moderators in PM

.

LINK

 

[occupied]

Commercial sites need to buy some ads if they want to be promoted on other sites.

Other message boards can also buy ads if they want to get some new users.

You are probably fucking with the bottom line around here.

The sites I'm taking about weren't even message boards. I frequently cite them as I find that they have good news articles. Some people didn't like them, so I said why I did, frequently. Figured it'd be better to just create threads to them so that I could just refer people to the threads and we could discuss the sites there so as not to distract from the themes of the threads where I'd cite their articles. It seems the main issue is that some of the mods don't like what these sites have to say.

Nazi white supremacist stuff? That kind of thing is banned everywhere.

 

[pknopp]

There is a proper way to present a new thread. I have no idea but many get shut down and moved because they are not properly presented.

 

[Crepitus]

Commercial sites need to buy some ads if they want to be promoted on other sites.

Other message boards can also buy ads if they want to get some new users.

You are probably fucking with the bottom line around here.

The sites I'm taking about weren't even message boards. I frequently cite them as I find that they have good news articles. Some people didn't like them, so I said why I did, frequently. Figured it'd be better to just create threads to them so that I could just refer people to the threads and we could discuss the sites there so as not to distract from the themes of the threads where I'd cite their articles. It seems the main issue is that some of the mods don't like what these sites have to say.

You're talking about posting articles from conspiracy theory sites in CDZ to prevent people from laughing at them? I've not seen those removed and I've complained repeatedly.

 

[Crepitus]

Commercial sites need to buy some ads if they want to be promoted on other sites.

Other message boards can also buy ads if they want to get some new users.

You are probably fucking with the bottom line around here.

All websites we link to sell things. It's the nature of the internet if he wasnt actively promoting something but linking to information, I dont see a problem wither

What he's linking to isn't anything you'd really call "information".

 

[Shelzin]

Commercial sites need to buy some ads if they want to be promoted on other sites.

Other message boards can also buy ads if they want to get some new users.

You are probably fucking with the bottom line around here.

The sites I'm taking about weren't even message boards. I frequently cite them as I find that they have good news articles. Some people didn't like them, so I said why I did, frequently. Figured it'd be better to just create threads to them so that I could just refer people to the threads and we could discuss the sites there so as not to distract from the themes of the threads where I'd cite their articles. It seems the main issue is that some of the mods don't like what these sites have to say.

I would like the links to these sites... PM me with them if you would. Nothing more than curiosity of what's going on.

 

[Auld Phart]

I've had 2 threads on 2 controversial sites closed by moderators. I have never received an explanation that holds water as to why they can't be discussed. So I thought I'd ask here and see if I get a response.

Discussing Moderation

Closed