danot Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 But in the open forum similar comments have been made about paedos etc and haven't been removed. I personally understand why someone would claim they wish harm to an individual for torturing a human or a pet. I can find no validation for anyone wishing harm to pets. It shouldn't matter what someone's reasons are for wishing harm on someone. Whether its the wheely bin lady or whether its a paedo, all comments should be removed for inciting violence or none should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) <deleted for parity> Edited January 9, 2011 by sccsux Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 It shouldn't matter what someone's reasons are for wishing harm on someone. Whether its the wheely bin lady or whether its a paedo, all comments should be removed for inciting violence or none should. A valid suggestion.forward it to admin. If the decision is made to incorporate it into the rules then we would follow that. Wishing a pervert falls under a lorry isn't the same as inciting violence against an individual or an animal. I occasionally wish my boss would drop dead and leave me alone but i would never encourage anyone to commit violence against him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 (edited) <deleted for parity> Edited January 9, 2011 by sccsux Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 No they couldn't. Please read what the team are saying danot. The procedures of the Forum have been explained already.Yet here you are prepared to discuss any queries I have. It's a pity the mod on the pet section wasn't prepared to do the same isn't it?. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thunzi Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Actually, the discussion is "Is SF more strict than it used to be?" which covers a whole gamut of topics; including the groups section. This is the final time I'm going to say it, the groups are not part of the moderation aspect of Sheffield Forum. They are managed by users for users. What happens in the pets group has no bearing on what happens in the photo group, or any main section of the Forum. This was all covered as far back as page 7. We will not be implementing rules to the Group Leaders to manage the Groups in a new way, we will not be asking the moderators to take action as the Group Leaders do. The sections are entirely different and will remain so. Line is drawn, discussion over. If anyone has another question please ask it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 This is the final time I'm going to say it, the groups are not part of the moderation aspect of Sheffield Forum. They are managed by users for users. What happens in the pets group has no bearing on what happens in the photo group, or any main section of the Forum. This was all covered as far back as page 7. We will not be implementing rules to the Group Leaders to manage the Groups in a new way, we will not be asking the moderators to take action as the Group Leaders do. The sections are entirely different and will remain so. Line is drawn, discussion over. If anyone has another question please ask it. You could have said that at the beginning GazE, it would have answerd my question instantly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willman Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 Regardless, wishing death on anybody says more about the individual than it does about anything else. Wishing death on anybody (regardless of atrocity commited) says more about the individual than it does about anything else. Any post promoting killing people should be removed, otherwise the forum could be at risk from a criminal act (incitement to comit murder) - more so as SF claims copyright over anything posted on SF. Forward your valid suggestions to the relevant department. I'm sure they'll be taken under consideration. Perhaps the fact that as you say wishing harm says more about the individual is all the response needed. But i'm sure someone will have to reply to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moonbird Posted January 4, 2011 Share Posted January 4, 2011 The mod could have offered a simple explanation, then there wouldn't have been any badgering. You're not breaking any rules are you! I have just been back and read through the entire thread to answer your points as you seem to be so upset about this. I hope that this will answer your questions, but I am not prepared to enter into a big debate about it, you demand answers so here they are...whether you deem them acceptable or not is another thing but I have gone to considerable effort to provide them. Firstly as you already realise your comment was not appreciated by the group members and was inappropriate to the thread. Before you had posted your comment I had posted 3 warnings on the thread including this one which I think explains why your first post was removed so I see no reason for a further explanation. Secondly you did not ask why the comment was removed all that you did was post a series of mocking and aggressive critical (of me) posts, which were deleted by another GL, and then subsequently by 2 separate members of the admin team. So you see it wasn't just one mod that found your behaviour on the thread unacceptable it was several. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danot Posted January 4, 2011 Author Share Posted January 4, 2011 I have just been back and read through the entire thread to answer your points as you seem to be so upset about this. I hope that this will answer your questions, but I am not prepared to enter into a big debate about it, you demand answers so here they are...whether you deem them acceptable or not is another thing but I have gone to considerable effort to provide them. Firstly as you already realise your comment was not appreciated by the group members and was inappropriate to the thread. Before you had posted your comment I had posted 3 warnings on the thread including this one which I think explains why your first post was removed so I see no reason for a further explanation. Secondly you did not ask why the comment was removed all that you did was post a series of mocking and aggressive critical (of me) posts, which were deleted by another GL, and then subsequently by 2 separate members of the admin team. So you see it wasn't just one mod that found your behaviour on the thread unacceptable it was several. In which case please except my sincere apologies Moonbird as I never aimed to upset anyone with the joke I made. This now settles the matter. I do hope my behaviour hasn't alienated me amongst the pet group members as I look forward to rejoining the pet group discussions if that's ok, especially those discussing people that hurt animals, since I too wish a long lingering death upon such people if I'm quite honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts