Censorship over-reach ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

FFF you also insinuated that it was illegal to call Trudeau names, which it is not. My post was done in fun. I should not even have had a warning, at best an email just saying were taking it down as we don't want people calling the Prime Minister names.

** Please not I have not posted any of our conservation as I believed it to be private between myself and you the Mod.

---

We have a process when items are moderate. Post reported, decision made, action taken. The warning was decided upon as it sends the pm just saying were taking it down as we don't want people calling the Prime Minister names without penalty. This process is used to maintain a record of interactions with members.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

And in all fairness. I weighed in without realizing the thread was locked. I took my lumps.

---

Your post was balanced and realistic. Nothing offensive and non-inflammatory.

Shall we add “WOKE” to the list of swear words and get the soap ready for our mouths ? (Grin)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 73hunter

Your post was balanced and realistic. Nothing offensive and non-inflammatory.

Shall we add “WOKE” to the list of swear words and get the soap ready for our mouths ? (Grin)

---

But in the interest of fairness, mods shouldn't post on locked threads, effectively having the last word....it can be perceived as an abuse of power. ( And apparently was).

Well , if nothing else this has been a good discussion to pass the holidays.

Happy New Year to all ��

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers

Its always easy to be an armchair critic.
How would you handle someone that after explaining several times why the decision was made and upheld and continues to badger the issue?

---

No offence-but why you are thinking i am acting as an armchair critic?
I tried to offer a solution, and also highlighted that i do not know all the details.

Even the Cops many times let the driver go off the hook/cut the speed to save demerit points to a driver-in good faith/good will/showing that we are all human/to make a point that cops are not always out to get someone..........

I am not sure how to answer Your second question anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gbk

Even the Cops many times let the driver go off the hook/cut the speed to save demerit points to a driver-in good faith/good will/showing that we are all human/to make a point that cops are not always out to get someone..........

.

---

You are right cops will do that if the offender has a clean record and is contrite, understand, and respectful.
However if the offender already has a history or is disrespectful, argumentative, and defiant what outcome would you expect?
No different here with the option of warning or demerit points.
Hope that clears it up for you.

More and More FFF you seem to be defending yourself against everyone, maybe it's time to look in the mirror.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers

You are right cops will do that if the offender has a clean record and is contrite, understand, and respectful.
However if the offender already has a history or is disrespectful, argumentative, and defiant what outcome would you expect?
No different here with the option of warning or demerit points.
Hope that clears it up for you.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by greatwhite

More and More FFF you seem to be defending yourself against everyone, maybe it's time to look in the mirror.

---

No, just a few that seem not to get it.
Never was a fan on soft policing where those that don't follow the rules expect to slide while in effect punishing those that choose to follow them.
Strange as seems to be the theme championed about on other threads.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by finsfurfeathers

Care too give it a shot?
To those who complain how unfair it is I'd say walk a mile in these shoes.
Add your voice to the mod team if you feel its biased.
Make the change you want to see or accept the way it is.
Be part of the solution
If you can't be bothered than follow the rules and accept the tough decisions that are made to keep the forum running smooth.
I for one am enjoying the cessation of the constant cries of trolling that used to plagued this site.

---

If I was more computer literate and if I was more middle-of-the-road politically, I would certainly be tempted to try,but,I'm not,so,in all fairness,I'll sit back quietly unless I'm sure I can offer honest critique with the very best of intentions. Thanks for the offer,though. Happy New Year.:moose:

This is my opinion on the matter. If the forum is going to have a off topic section, then off topic post should be acceptable. I often don’t agree with Gilroy, but I still appreciate being able to see his opinions on matters. Also unless I’m wrong this forum is not owned by the moderators so if you think there over stepping contact OOD. Btw I have nothing against the mod squad even though I disagree with there recent censorship. I was unable to respectfully disagree with Gilroy because the thread was locked. Lastly (kinda repeating a point I made already) unless I’m wrong the mods don’t own this site, so how does the illustration of house guests make any sense?