How does this gel with your thread on your moderation policy MNHQ??

[lougle]

Apologies in advance for a thread about two threads - I don't want to derail either thread but I'm genuinely curious as to how you've reconciled your stance on moderation with your response to squishysquirmy's poem about Donald Trump?

On your Moderation policy thread Justine says:

"This doesn't mean that it's a complete free for all. Of course we do and will continue to remove posts that break our rules – for instance personal attacks and those that break the law or promote hate."

Then on Squishysquirmy's Help-What-rhymes-with-cuntweasel? thread you've promoted the thread to classics because it contains a 77 line, very clever, very amusing, poem about Donald Trump, which is

-clearly a personal attack
-encouraging others to ridicule him

I'm absolutely no fan, I have to say, but what was the thinking here?? How does this get promoted to classics when other less offensive posts have been deleted recently?

I do think there needs to be some level of consistency if you want people to accept that you are making rational decisions about what you delete.

Some topics probably need more moderation than others. I've not been on any with the disablist issues, but it seems to me thats an area where stronger moderation generally is required, esp if its cropping up in places like SN support threads. Disablism attacks some of the most vulnerable, parents need to be sure of a safe place to discuss issues. For many other topics, a lighter hand may generate more robust but overall good discussions.

I haven't said it makes me angry and nor am I joyless. I do think that it's not a level playing field if a poem like this is promoted to classics at the same time as posters are told that they shouldn't be writing their distaste for the words of public figures on MN though...and I'm saying that purely from a parity stance, not because I agree or disagree with any of the issues on either topic.

Isn't it OK to have principles?? A straight line in the sand I don't mind at all. I big long wibbly wobbly line that moves every time you look at it, I mind.

Also placemarking for any response....

lougle, the guidelines state that transphobic remarks will be deleted. The PL thread contained misgendering and false statements, as well as attacks on MNHQ. They were not deleted because posters expressed distaste for the words of public figures.

I agree, Errol.

It's perfectly possible for goady fuckers to be disablist/racist/bigoted without actually personally attacking anyone so it's important that there be a certain amount of flexibility regarding deletions.

Lines in the sand don't work because people use them to either stifle discussion or get away with being a dick.

DioneTheDiabolist

To be fair the PL thread had messages deleted because used the word he to describe Donald trump.......

Hi all,

The way that we work is to take things on a case by case basis. This was reported 5 times to go into Classics and only once, earlier today following this thread, in a negative light.

It is a tricky one and we do not have a deadset policy, we judge by the reaction that we get in reports, our guidelines and ethos and sometimes wider media. We tend not to allow nasty parent blaming or vile personal attacks but we do also note when people 'put themselves out there' in the media.

We try to be as fair as possible when it comes to slebs and we can see that we aren't always consistent but it really depends on what pings into our inbox and if there is a general consensus.

We often find that a thread will be enjoyed by many but others will find it upsetting or just plain nasty, they may not post, but they do report. This didn't happen in this case but we will take another look if enough people feel that it should go.

OK. Did anyone read the poem and have any hesitation in realising who it was about?

But Goddamn you to Hell, you fat flacid cock.
You racist, nasty, blistering canker,
homophobic, disablist, dissembling wanker.
Manipulative scumbag, short-sighted scrote.
They're burning us all, you self serving shit.
Upcycle old thinking as "New Nazi-Lite".
But a fascists a fascist you lying gobshite.
You are the obscenity. You are the curse.

Those are the lines that are direct personal attacks, I think. The rest is pretty ranty, but ranting isn't a problem. But I did think that personal attacks weren't allowed. And I do think that this goes 'beyond the pale' as MNHQ put it so frequently.

None of us have to be happy that elections went the way they did, but I do think that MNHQ should be consistent.

X-posted with you Rebecca.

Do you not see these lines as vile personal attacks, then? What would pass your personal attack threshold in that case?

"But Goddamn you to Hell, you fat flacid cock.
You racist, nasty, blistering canker,
homophobic, disablist, dissembling wanker.
Manipulative scumbag, short-sighted scrote.
They're burning us all, you self serving shit.
Upcycle old thinking as "New Nazi-Lite".
But a fascists a fascist you lying gobshite.
You are the obscenity. You are the curse."

I read the poem, it doesn't bother me in the slightest. As others have said it's a bit of satire.

I do agree with whoever said it feels like it's being used to make a point about HQ being hypocritical/catch them out.

Will site stuff soon be full of threads like this?

Some topics probably need more moderation than others.

This!
This is what I've been trying to explain i completely agree with it.

I am behind keeping the thread and the poem.

No protection on MNHQ for misogynist disabilist sexual predators.

Especially those who wield power.

He is fodder for the fire.

Well, it's a bit Lower 6th and shouty, but we are allowed to call people wankers and shits on here unless they are a fellow poster or someone MNHQ doesn't want to upset because of a backlash or death threats.
I very much doubt Donald Trump is going to know or care about it, even if it has made Classics.

I once complained about comments aimed at a vulnerable mentally ill person on one of those dreadful reality documentaries. Because he was neither a member or in any position to do anything about it MNHQ let them stand.
This was several years ago. They've never really gone in for a dead straight line. Which is fine, even if you find some instances personally annoying or even upsetting. It's part of what keeps it a relatively free flowing place for discussion.

Thanks Rebecca.
I understand that you have a difficult balance to maintain, and I know that it is impossible to keep everyone happy.

I also understand that if you come under pressure to delete, you may have to. If you do, I will try to write something which will not offend anyone at all.

The poem was meant to be a bit unpleasant to read. That is why the swearing is in there - it is a lazy, "shortcut to shock" but in this instance it was the only way I could even come close to articulating the strength of my opinion. It is titled obscenity.

It's not particularly clever to use that language, or diplomatic, but it wasn't supposed to be. I am not a diplomat or a politician. Yes, I made up a crude poem about a foreign leader but I am never - for example- going to be foreign secretary.

OP

Donald Trump needs no protection; he is about to become the most powerful person in the world.

Today he called for the cast of a Broadway show to apologise to Mike Pence for publicly calling him out on his dubious attitudes to minorities. No. He can't stifle debate.

The way debate is being shut down in scaring me. Which is why we should be able to criticise Donald Trump, even in a facile way.

It's an interesting point though, isn't it? I'm not arguing about Donald Trump per se.....people are considering this on the basis that they don't like him or what he stands for. I'm arguing that it shouldn't matter whether we like him or what he stands for, if we don't allow PA against public figures, then don't allow it.

Why does it matter whether you like him or not? I have a disabled daughter. I don't like his disablism. But I can separate that from what I think is right and wrong in other areas.

squishy your poem is really clever. Truly. If it had slipped on by with no comment from MNHQ, fair enough. But I think that giving it MN Classic status was endorsing it, taking a stance and saying that they thought that it was a Good Thing, which I don't think they can do (in any credible way) when they are willing to delete posts so freely that are deemed personal attacks on other public figures.

lougle honestly? I can see a time in the near future when we won't be allowed to criticise Trump because he's banned criticism of himself/his inner circle/his administration. Which is why we shouldn't take the poem down.

lougle can you not understand that some people do not deserve protection? They do not deserve respect.

What do you mean by this?
I don't like his disablism. But I can separate that from what I think is right and wrong in other areas.

No, I think everyone deserves some level of respect.

"What do you mean by this?
I don't like his disablism. But I can separate that from what I think is right and wrong in other areas."

It means that I can separate my dislike of his behaviour from my decisions around my own behaviour and my views of what correct behaviour is.

YokoUhOh criticise all you want. Use words that are meaningful and contribute to a sensible debate. Don't just fling insults at him left right and centre (or anyone - I'm not 'for' DT at all).

But where does that leave satire in general, not just on here?

Do you really want MN to become somewhere where we can't mock Peter Andres orange hue?

Or more seriously where most of the threads Regarding Ched Evans would have to be deleted because people were (quite rightly) far from kind about him and he's a public figure?

It's an absurd proposition that the OP is making and clearly there is an ulterior motive that the OP just isn't making clear. You are using this as a sounding board for a specific point but you just aren't coming out and saying it, are you OP?

What is the point that you want to make here OP if it isn't about Trump?

What about the women he groped, that he raped, the POC in the USA who are facing violence as the result of his election? What about respect for them? You disrespect them when you defer to Trump.