Why was the 'COVID-19 rant' thread taken down?

[RoyalSeasider]

It was an interesting and fairly constructive and informative thread with people, for the most part, respecting other views.

What posts were complained about?
Why was this thread taken down?

People were posting concerns about the government handling of the pandemic - the concerns about the mix of health and politics - perfectly valid concerns.

People who want to read Facebook posts can go to Facebook.
No need to inflict FB on those who try avoid it.

So was the thread deleted because the poster had started the thread with a post from facebook (even though it didn't sound like one, but then I wouldn't know as I am not on facebook).

Or was the thread deleted because of the complaint about a post about the number of deaths?

I would hope that the complaint about a fact could be corrected, rather than a thread pulled.

If any wants good actual data analysis, I commend the work of 'The Statistics Guy Jono' on twitter. Proper data. All analysed. And he is happy to answer queries about data.

Some of us love data. It's really important that deaths and cases are reported correctly and consistently. I feel passionately that data isn't misrepresented.

*sorry, I started with So. I wish there was an edit button.

(even though it didn't sound like one, but then I wouldn't know as I am not on facebook).

That's the clever things with posts like that though, they are written to sound passionate and personal, and have a faltering sheen of humanity. It's a bit like when the phone rings, and there is a pause and you say 'hello' and a lovely warm voice says, "Hi..it's Sophie here.....I heard that you might have had an accident recently..." and you realise that your talking to a fucking robot.

@RoyalSeasider are you on Facebook?

There is a data thread in the Coronavirus topic.

The original poster was posting about their feelings

No, they were copy/pasting a post about somebody else's feelings. Maybe they felt that also roughly echoed their feelings, maybe they were shit-stirring, we don't know. But how can you have an honest decent conversation like that?

Poster: "OP, why did you say XYZ, this isn't true/is an overreaction/sounds ridiculous etc."
OP: ....
Poster: "Why did you say there were this many deaths yesterday when that's not true?"
OP: ....
Poster: "Why do you say people are complaining that you're a conspiracy theorist, what else have you said, are they talking about other conversations?"
OP: ....

@DoctorYang

There is a data thread in the Coronavirus topic.

It was about politics as much as Coronavirus.

The problem is, OP, that people don't read full threads, so incorrect data in the OP is believed and corrections by other posters aren't read. You're clearly able to articulate your writing, feel strongly about having a discussion similar to the deleted post, AND say you care about providing researched facts and data, so why not just do your own post to start a useful discussion that hasn't been blindly copied and not fact-checked. The reason I reported the post due to the incorrect number of deaths (and it sounds like others reported for similar reasons) is that the data given was being used to support an argument that deaths were not rising. That's not true, although clearly they are not currently rising at the same levels as the last peak yet, nor have they reached similar levels in total numbers. But that false fact was being used to support the rest of the argument in the post, encouraged people to believe something that isn't true (that deaths have been at consistent levels since August and are not increasing at all), and undermined any valid points the OP had copied and pasted. That's not to say there weren't valid points or useful discussion... But they were all undermined by false data. Fix that, and you'll have a useful discussion thread that won't be deleted.

@HazeyJaneII

(even though it didn't sound like one, but then I wouldn't know as I am not on facebook).

That's the clever things with posts like that though, they are written to sound passionate and personal, and have a faltering sheen of humanity. It's a bit like when the phone rings, and there is a pause and you say 'hello' and a lovely warm voice says, "Hi..it's Sophie here.....I heard that you might have had an accident recently..." and you realise that your talking to a fucking robot.

This doesn't make sense. The poster wrote something that people connected with. The replies were real and were useful even if the original post was a copy another post.

I don't have the same connection with a PPI claim phone call ...

But speaking of clever, what is clever is certain articles that claim to 'debunk' (such as a Huff one that I mentioned) which in turn include misinformation and propaganda.

@ChocoholicMama

The problem is, OP, that people don't read full threads, so incorrect data in the OP is believed and corrections by other posters aren't read. You're clearly able to articulate your writing, feel strongly about having a discussion similar to the deleted post, AND say you care about providing researched facts and data, so why not just do your own post to start a useful discussion that hasn't been blindly copied and not fact-checked. The reason I reported the post due to the incorrect number of deaths (and it sounds like others reported for similar reasons) is that the data given was being used to support an argument that deaths were not rising. That's not true, although clearly they are not currently rising at the same levels as the last peak yet, nor have they reached similar levels in total numbers. But that false fact was being used to support the rest of the argument in the post, encouraged people to believe something that isn't true (that deaths have been at consistent levels since August and are not increasing at all), and undermined any valid points the OP had copied and pasted. That's not to say there weren't valid points or useful discussion... But they were all undermined by false data. Fix that, and you'll have a useful discussion thread that won't be deleted.

Thank you for your reply.

I would suggest, sensitively, that the sentence about deaths was not the take home point of the original poster and did not negate their feelings or concerns, but from what you've said I understand that if people want to voice their concerns then they have to make sure that they have to be scrupulous in their facts, don't minimise the deaths (obviously) or incorrectly report any data for fear that a false narrative is being spread.

Personally, I think this sort of censorship is too heavy handed (and not scientific) because it would be more transparent and helpful to ask a poster where they got their data from and query the source rather than stifle the conversation). A right of reply, if you like.

But I accept those are the MN rules. Thank you for explaining.

Personally, I think this sort of censorship is too heavy handed (and not scientific) because it would be more transparent and helpful to ask a poster where they got their data from and query the source rather than stifle the conversation). A right of reply, if you like.
I agree

because it would be more transparent and helpful to ask a poster where they got their data from and query the source

But people did do that and the OP didn’t answer, and indeed couldn’t answer because the answer would have had to be “none of this is my words I just lifted the whole post off Facebook”

Personally, I think this sort of censorship is too heavy handed (and not scientific) because it would be more transparent and helpful to ask a poster where they got their data from and query the source rather than stifle the conversation). A right of reply, if you like.

I have found that people who copy and paste ludicrous things on social media are not particularly keen on actually answering🤷🏻 except with even more ludicrous youtube links etc.

Fake news and false information need to be eliminated as much as we can.

The poster wrote something that people connected with.

The poster didn't write anything. They just copied and pasted a wall of text from Facebook.

Perhaps if they had started their post with : "I've just seen this on FB. It raises some interesting points, what do you think?" then it would have been a bit more transparent.

As it is, it was no different from all the posts we saw earlier in the year where posters claimed to have been given important information by "a friend who is a doctor" when what they had actually done was repost a (clearly fake) load of made-up nonsense as fact.

Because so many people don’t like freedom on speech (unless it agrees with their opinion of course) even now MNHQ!

Who cares if it was a copy and paste? That didn’t make any of the points less valid and thought provoking. Ironically the fact it was deleted sums up the issues the OP was trying to make perfectly. But don’t worry... close your eyes it will all go away soon 🙄

We are losing freedom of speech.

Ironically the fact it was deleted sums up the issues the OP was trying to make perfectly.

But the OP wasn't trying to make them! The OP couldn't even be arsed to say "I read this on FB and it sums up how I feel, what do you think?" And the OP didn't stick around to discuss any of it either.

There are approximately 814,352 posts on here saying some variant of 'we all just need to crack on with it now'/'there's something more going on here it's not just the virus'/'time to go for herd immunity'. They're not being censored. You're just not allowed to copy and paste stuff from Facebook and present as if it's your own. That's really not a high bar to meet!

It's interesting which threads have loads of deletions and which let even vile abuse towards a individual stand. Moderation is way out of kilter in many areas on here.

@Soletsgotothepubearlierthen

It's interesting which threads have loads of deletions and which let even vile abuse towards a individual stand. Moderation is way out of kilter in many areas on here.

Agreed. I still think it was bizarre that the thread about legal apprenticeships for black people was pulled. Yes it attracted some racist comments, but also some very educational ones.

It's fine to call someone the misongynistic c word but not ok to learn about racism.

Thought provoking? Maybe I’m thinking of the wrong thread, but in my view it was very contradictory and wasn’t offering a particularly original viewpoint.
If it’s the thread I’m thinking of it deserved to be deleted for repeated use of the word ‘bullshit’ in the OP.