Site moderation feedback

Censorship is censorship. The site administration can’t claim to operate a free speech platform when it has consistently failed to provide one.

I am aware of 3 instances (1 my own) in the last few days were challenges to racist and homophobic replies to the 'known suspects' weren't published.

I have used this site as an Anon for 17 years or so. I have no interest in becoming a registered user. I pop in, get some info, and generally pop back out again. This changed last summer with the overwhelming influx of racial and homophobic abuse posted by registered users: one who should be well known to most who retains the same user name and two others who have re-registered under ‘new’ user names.

Several users (registered and anon) requested changes to the site rules and offered a number of possible solutions. Davidt moved this discussion to a specific thread and then subsequently dismissed all of the possible solutions provided. His generalised response being: if you don’t like it. leave. Seemingly unaware that non-racists and supporters of LGBT rights leaving wouldn’t deal with the racism and homophobia that was and is rank within his site.

I agree that “Maybe with the new site format, there's a change to moderation also. I think it's a good step, but it needs to be balanced, fair, and most importantly, consistent.” But if previous experience is anything to go by this will not occur.

I would also add that some of the registered user posts don't do the site any good whatsoever, or show it in a good light and that most of the racist and homophobic comments stem from approx. 3 to 4 registered users.

Banning anonymous posters would mean, I believe, the demise of the site.

On writing this there is a total of 291 people using the site:

261 guests
30 members (13 of whom are using the site anonymously i.e. not being tracked)

I just don’t understand that when concerns are raised the response from Solo is to stick its head in the sand? Time and time again issues are raised either directly with Davidt, in generalised threads or in specific threads and time and time again nothing changes; racism and homophobia prevail.

Most of the consistent antagonism on the site is provoked by less than a handful of people (registered users) surely that can be dealt with? I’m not all suggesting that anonymous users are free from blame, far from it, but the racist and homophobic rhetoric is largely from registered users.

Fair comments, all of them.
 
And I find it upsetting that a site dedicated to a gay pop star (albeit one still closeted) allows so much homo/transphobic remarks to be posted and unchallenged. Perhaps the reason for this is that Morrissey’s reticence to come out is the excuse they use to attack those not ashamed of their own sexuality. More than plenty of these comments still remain.
As previously said on this thread, admin are far too cowardly to face down the main culprits. This results in those new to the world of Moz to feel alienated, whilst long-term old-school fans feel reluctance to post, fearing abuse from the known elements. The less said about them, the better.
:tiphat: Well said.
 
Some of the permitted 'anon' posts don't do the site any good whatsoever, or show it in a good light. Maybe it's a steady work in progress. I'd personally ban anons from posting, & have everyone who wants to comment create an account.

Be careful Mozmar. This ground has been trod so many, many times here a path has been worn that ultimately leads to nowhere. Here is David T's thoughts on the subject from the General Posting Policy tab of the site:

"Basically some reasons I like and allow anonymous posting:
  • some users may have something to contribute but are put off by creating a login, especially if they don't use the site often.
  • some users don't want to be associated with an account. Also, given the recent negativity towards the site from Morrissey himself, some contributors may prefer to post anonymously. These are just words on a post, usually it doesn't really matter if 'anonymous' or 'supermozfan' wrote it. The only thing needed for an account is an email address and if it's not obvious, it's pretty easy for people to create an email address without giving any personal information.
  • anonymous people are sometimes the best and most challenging contributors."
The only thing I find to reach a level of blocking would be personal attacks, and those posts are made by registered and non-registered users alike. They add nothing to the discussion, but every other post holds some value in that it gives one something to consider or to reinforce one's own opinion.

These are, after all, simply words on an electronic page and nothing more. It is up to you as to how much and to what extent you let them impact you.
 
Last edited:
Be careful Mozmar. This ground has been trod so many, many times here a path has been worn that ultimately leads to nowhere. Here is David T's thoughts on the subject from the General Posting Policy tab of the site:

"Basically some reasons I like and allow anonymous posting:
  • some users may have something to contribute but are put off by creating a login, especially if they don't use the site often.
  • some users don't want to be associated with an account. Also, given the recent negativity towards the site from Morrissey himself, some contributors may prefer to post anonymously. These are just words on a post, usually it doesn't really matter if 'anonymous' or 'supermozfan' wrote it. The only thing needed for an account is an email address and if it's not obvious, it's pretty easy for people to create an email address without giving any personal information.
  • anonymous people are sometimes the best and most challenging contributors."
The only thing I find to reach a level of blocking would be personal attacks, and those posts are made my registered and non-registered users alike. They add nothing to the discussion, but every other post holds some value in that it gives one something to consider or to reinforce one's own opinion.

These are, after all, simply words on an electronic page and nothing more. It is up to you as to how much and to what extent you let them impact you.

Yes, thanks for the reminder. Dead end.
 
Perhaps some of the thought energy being expended here to guess at what happens behind the scenes and ascribe cowardice, where there is none, would be better spent in thinking: 'is there anywhere more appropriate I could be making this type of point other than a gig thread?'
Regards,
FWD.
 
These are, after all, simply words on an electronic page and nothing more. It is up to you as to how much and to what extent you let them impact you.

In theory, yes. However, some individuals can and do take some of the hateful comments made directly about them, or about other groupings, personally. It affects their mental well-being and they take actions they may not otherwise have taken had they not been continually bombarded by "simply words on an elctronic page". In the UK laws has been implemented - not particularly strong laws - which seek to offer additional protection for people affected by stalking, bullying, hate and other crimes online. You only need to look at the number of lives affected by, or lost to, online abuse.

To seek to reduce the impact of "simply words on an electronic page" is where I think Solo is. It doesn't understand that people are affected by these comments and that actions can ensue. The actual perpetrator is the individual who is, for example, stalking but the site if it let's this behaviour go unchallenged is complicit.

It's perhaps worth noting that the key area for radicalisation is the internet "simply words on an electronic page" that change lives forevermore. Words can and do have consequences.

Racism and homophobia become acceptable behaviours when they are normalised. For the shortest of times it seemed that racism and homophobia were diminishing .... this is no longer the case. Increased numbers of racist and LGBT hates crimes (UK) have been reported over the last few years (figures all stated in the website in other threads) and the figures just keep rising.

Racism and homophobia is normalised within this site. The site administrators do not challenge either the hateful rhetoric or the perpetrators of that rhetoric. Since 2017 it has become a haven for those that wish to propogate a right-wing agenda that embraces racism and homophobia. No matter what the topic of the thread it is often hijacked and reduced to a sewer of hatred and bile.

The response ... if you don't like it, leave ... is indication enough of an admistration that has no interest whatsoever in the health and well-being of it's users or it's active normalisation of racism and homophobia.

This is not a Free Speed platform. It is a platform that has consistently censored and it continues to do so.
 
Perhaps some of the thought energy being expended here to guess at what happens behind the scenes and ascribe cowardice, where there is none, would be better spent in thinking: 'is there anywhere more appropriate I could be making this type of point other than a gig thread?'
Regards,
FWD.
Do you mean address it in a specific thread, have all the comments dismissed and begin again? That seems to be the routine and one you're more than aware of.
 
Perhaps some of the thought energy being expended here to guess at what happens behind the scenes and ascribe cowardice, where there is none, would be better spent in thinking: 'is there anywhere more appropriate I could be making this type of point other than a gig thread?'
Regards,
FWD.

Totally agree FWD...much of these 52 pages could be dragged off elsewhere...& into the dustbin if I had to make the choice.
 
I'd also add that the censorship took place in this thread and it's therefore relevant to this thread. And ... my comments are not based on guesswork they are based on active censorship that I am aware of - whatever the reason for that censorship is immaterial as this is allegedly a free speech platform.
 
There have been many redundant anonymous personal attacks unrelated to the topic (Leeds concert) removed from this thread. If you feel you are being censored why don't you simply create an account?

Ask yourself if anything in your post may have violated the posting policy here:


I'd also add that the censorship took place in this thread and it's therefore relevant to this thread. And ... my comments are not based on guesswork they are based on active censorship that I am aware of - whatever the reason for that censorship is immaterial as this is allegedly a free speech platform.
 
You might also like to consider: if you're a banned user trying to circumvent your ban by posting anonymously, then don't be surprised if your posts are removed.
But that wouldn't be you would it... ?
FWD.
 
There have been many redundant anonymous personal attacks removed from this thread. If you feel you are being censored why don't you simply create an account?

Ask yourself if anything in your post may have violated the posting policy here:


I guess that you refer to: "In general, an anonymous post is not approved if it is off-topic, redundant, or personally abusive." but my point is that the most significant amount of racism and homophobia comes from your registered users for whom you have no such policy. They can post whatever they like and some of them do. On one hand you state free speech as your argument and on the other you state anonymous users will be penalised but registered users who are off-topic, redundant, or personally abusive will not be penalised.

You offer anonymous access to your site and that access shouldn't mean that I as an anonymous user can be abused by registered users - that's currently how your general posting policy works . I think it better you ban anonymous users from your site rather than, as things stand, allow registered users to abuse others without compunction.

As had often been discussed the general posting policy does not work and hasn't been updated since 2011.

There is a good deal to be proud of about this site and it's longevity but moderation has never, in my experience, been one of them. Yes, I'm frustarted. When I pop in for a little bit of news about Morrissey, I'd really rather not see some of the repulsive comments that have appeared over the last few days or indeed the last few years. I just don't believe these types of comments have a place in a fan site - it's like watching a on-street brawl and I'd much rather not.

One possible solution (not sure of the IT practicalities):

Keywords
if a user posts something with certain keywords it is pinged to either a Bin folder or Politics folder.
This doesn't deal with the existence of the hatred but it lessens it's visibilty and may discourage those that posts such nonsense from posting such nonsense in the future.
 
There have been many redundant anonymous personal attacks unrelated to the topic (Leeds concert) removed from this thread. If you feel you are being censored why don't you simply create an account?

Ask yourself if anything in your post may have violated the posting policy here:

I still come to this site, but very rarely post here these days, when you get systematically trolled almost immediately. It doesn't matter what you type, certain individuals troll at will. I guess grinding down others is the only power in life they must have, in the absence of nothing else. I see one post directly addressed to me recently was deleted. Thanks. I've seen no other posts by them since. I guess they like to "troll and run," as they get big jollies that way.
 
You might also like to consider: if you're a banned user trying to circumvent your ban by posting anonymously, then don't be surprised if your posts are removed.
But that wouldn't be you would it... ?
FWD.
My last comment for today (work y'know) ...
I am not nor have I ever been a registered user. I have not been banned and I have not attempted to circumvent anything but thanks for the uncalled for character assaination.
 
I tend to dismiss those that suggest banning anonymous posts by those that post... anonymously. It is incorrect to state the policy hasn't been updated since 2011, it has been updated as recently as after the recent site upgrade a couple weeks ago.

I guess that you refer to: "In general, an anonymous post is not approved if it is off-topic, redundant, or personally abusive." but my point is that the most significant amount of racism and homophobia comes from your registered users for whom you have no such policy. They can post whatever they like and some of them do. On one hand you state free speech as your argument and on the other you state anonymous users will be penalised but registered users who are off-topic, redundant, or personally abusive will not be penalised.

You offer anonymous access to your site and that access shouldn't mean that I as an anonymous user can be abused by registered users - that's currently how your general posting policy works . I think it better you ban anonymous users from your site rather than, as things stand, allow registered users to abuse others without compunction.

As had often been discussed the general posting policy does not work and hasn't been updated since 2011.

There is a good deal to be proud of about this site and it's longevity but moderation has never, in my experience, been one of them. Yes, I'm frustarted. When I pop in for a little bit of news about Morrissey, I'd really rather not see some of the repulsive comments that have appeared over the last few days or indeed the last few years. I just don't believe these types of comments have a place in a fan site - it's like watching a on-street brawl and I'd much rather not.

One possible solution (not sure of the IT practicalities):

Keywords
if a user posts something with certain keywords it is pinged to either a Bin folder or Politics folder.
This doesn't deal with the existence of the hatred but it lessens it's visibilty and may discourage those that posts such nonsense from posting such nonsense in the future.
 
I tend to dismiss those that suggest banning anonymous posts by those that post... anonymously. It is incorrect to state the policy hasn't been updated since 2011, it has been updated as recently as after the recent site upgrade a couple weeks ago.
You'll have copies of both policies would you care to publish both and walk us through the changes made and clarify how those changes answer the points in the previous post?

Your own post indicates the contempt in which you hold anonymous users and that's been most illuminating "I tend to dismiss those that suggest banning anonymous posts by those that post... anonymously."
 
No... You're pretty demanding for a person posting anonymously.

You'll have copies of both policies would you care to publish both and walk us through the changes made and clarify how those changes answer the points in the previous post?

Your own post indicates the contempt in which you hold anonymous users and that's been most illuminating "I tend to dismiss those that suggest banning anonymous posts by those that post... anonymously."
 
My last comment for today (work y'know) ...
I am not nor have I ever been a registered user. I have not been banned and I have not attempted to circumvent anything but thanks for the uncalled for character assaination.
'You' were not directly replied to.
Please feel free, however, to take things as personally as you'd like.
When your post is actually quoted - then it's probably ok to assume any motive behind my posts (even if people are incorrect in their conclusions).
Regards,
FWD.
 
Back
Top Bottom