Discussion about moderation

tross0924

Recently there have been a few threads that have been locked and or removed because they were considered to be "about" topics that are not allowed on the forums. Personally I don't think that a thread entitled "Looking for Republican friends to help me lose weight" is ABOUT politics. (Feel free to substitute Democrat / Christian / or LGBTG for Republican) When other people come into the thread and say I think Republicans are dumb, they are making their post about politics and that one post should be removed, but I think deleting the whole thread is going to far.

The reason they're removed is because it's said they cause to much arguing. Well if that's the case then they shouldn't allow Paleo / Primal, Anti carb, fasting diets, or Muscle weighs more than fat threads either. :-p

What do you all think. Are posts asking for similar friends ABOUT the forbidden issues? Are they ABOUT making friends with similar issues? Should they be allowed?

Trixtabella

I agree, people that are looking for people with similar life style choices or hobbies ect shouldn't have there posts closed down.
As you said if this is the case people asking for friends around the same age to help them loose weight could be seen as ageist.

randa_behnam

people take things too personally...this is a support group. We are all here for the same reason. If those people take things the wrong way then maybe they should find another site to use. Unless obviously if something was aimed at them personally then its ok to report it but otherwise people should just chiiilllllllll :smokin:

Dizzle_65

My quwestion would be is it relevant to weight loss / healthy lifestyle.

Whether you're a Republican, Democrat, Labour or Conservative it has nothing to do with what you eat how much you exercise - therefore irrelevant.

Paleo, low carb, WW, Atkins etc. do so are relevant

katkins3

I'm OK with the moderator keeping the site as it was set up. As long as they are consistent in enforcing their own rules. Topics other than fitness can be explored elsewhere, it's a big internet.

SmartFunGorgeous

There are rules in place for very good reasons, and though they may not apply perfectly to every situation, they certainly aren't there to make our lives difficult. This free website is the best place I've ever found for health and fitness, and a lot of that is because I don't have to focus on anything outside the scope of being healthy. If I have a real-life issue with say, people who like cats, it doesn't affect my weight loss goals one iota, so we can still be friends and support each other. Lame example, I know, but I'm just saying that if this site's main focus is health and fitness (my FITNESS pal) then it makes sense that the forums be focused on aspects of that, rather than lifestyle choices and views that don't really have an affect on that. I think the moderators do a pretty good job.

SmartFunGorgeous

And I didn't know there was going to be a person with a cat as her profile pic when I posted my response! lol :laugh:

katkins3

And I didn't know there was going to be a person with a cat as her profile pic when I posted my response! lol :laugh:

Its OK the cat on my profile picture is doing Tai Chi. Wave paws like moving clouds to be exact. But, I digress badly. Sorry moderator.
I could post on the fitness merits of Tai Chi though.

Atlantique

Recently there have been a few threads that have been locked and or removed because they were considered to be "about" topics that are not allowed on the forums. Personally I don't think that a thread entitled "Looking for Republican friends to help me lose weight" is ABOUT politics. (Feel free to substitute Democrat / Christian / or LGBTG for Republican) When other people come into the thread and say I think Republicans are dumb, they are making their post about politics and that one post should be removed, but I think deleting the whole thread is going to far.

The reason they're removed is because it's said they cause to much arguing. Well if that's the case then they shouldn't allow Paleo / Primal, Anti carb, fasting diets, or Muscle weighs more than fat threads either. :-p

What do you all think. Are posts asking for similar friends ABOUT the forbidden issues? Are they ABOUT making friends with similar issues? Should they be allowed?

If anything, yesterday's fiasco should have proved to you that religious topics do indeed cause arguing and hurt feelings. There must have been at least ten threads that popped up with protests, complaints, etc. and now there's this one the next day.

What more proof do you need that keeping religion off the forums is necessary?

Angellore

My quwestion would be is it relevant to weight loss / healthy lifestyle.

Whether you're a Republican, Democrat, Labour or Conservative it has nothing to do with what you eat how much you exercise - therefore irrelevant.

Paleo, low carb, WW, Atkins etc. do so are relevant

This is true but I think the LGBTQ thread can be relevant to weight loss, after all there is hate aimed at people becuase of their sexuality and this may affect how they eat - that is they may binge or starve becuase of bullying or harrassment due to their sexuality, and no matter how much non LGBTQ people may sympathise, it is difficult to fully understand unless you have been there yourself. Personally, I think that if the thread is clearly marked as LGBTQ/Republican/Christian/Muslim/Hindu/Democrat/Green/Vegan/Pagan WHATEVER then there is no problem, as people with different viewpoints don't need to view it. Unfortunately some people can't leave well alone and have to rock the boat. IMO anyone is entitled to their views or beliefs, as long as they don't force it down my throat, or hurt others becuase of their views (i.e. Racists, sexists, homophobes etc). There are plenty of threads for Mom's who want to lose weight. I don't have or want kids, but I don't throw my toys out of the pram because I can't join the group!

Qarol

I guess I'm in favor of the creators of the site getting to set the rules. It was the title of her post that made me uncomfortable. But for me, I just chose to ignore it and not click on it or respond. Then I saw the "antithesis" post and loved the snarkiness of the title. So I responded there. *shrug* Just because we have freedom of speech (at least in the US), doesn't mean we do so on here. My attitude is probably not very popular...don't like the rules? go somewhere else.

tross0924

Well for the record I didn't see any of the fiasco threads or protest threads yesterday. And also this isn't a protest thread. I was just wondering what other peoples opinions are on people looking for similar friends. If that qualified as being about the the forbiden topic or if it should be allowed?

And while it's true that the Paleo / carb / WW threads do have something to do with weight loss, they are many things allowed that don't. If I'm looking for friends from Utah that's allowed, or if I was looking for other plumbers, that'd be ok. Or how about other married guys? If I posted a thread about any of those things no one would say my thread was about Utah, or about plumbers, or about married guys.

Atlantique

Well for the record I didn't see any of the fiasco threads or protest threads yesterday. And also this isn't a protest thread. I was just wondering what other peoples opinions are on people looking for similar friends. If that qualified as being about the the forbiden topic or if it should be allowed?

Yes, it qualifies as being about the forbidden topic.

myofibril

What members do or do not think is rather a moot point. Privately owned websites, such as this one, are dictatorships not democracies. Admin / Mods will do whatever they think is right to preserve the integrity of the site as they see fit (and largely to have an easy life more than anything else.)

If you go into somebody's house you abide by their rules. Don't like it? Make your point, see if it makes a change, if not and it means that much to you then leave. I can tell you what won't happen though. The website won't fold because an individual or even group leaves, no matter how popular, right or important they perceive themselves to be. I have seen entire groups flounce because their popularity went to their heads only to come crawling back a few weeks later...

skittybang

I'm for the moderation. Sometimes you'll see posters pushing the envelope. And the other posters responding with saying "thread locked in 3,2.." they know what they're saying will be viewed as inappropriate. It's like the kid that fans his hand over the stove .."doesn't burn, doesn't burn, F$#% it burns!!" Everyone has a little punk kid in them who wants to see what they can get away with.

:bigsmile:

Plus, where's the fun if you didn't ruffle a few feathers

MinnieInMaine

I totally agree with you Qarol. The mods get to make the rules. They provide this free to us (yeah, you have to deal with ads, small price to pay) and therefore I say don't complain - follow the rules and if you don't like it, find another site to use.

LorinaLynn

I guess I'm in favor of the creators of the site getting to set the rules. It was the title of her post that made me uncomfortable. But for me, I just chose to ignore it and not click on it or respond. Then I saw the "antithesis" post and loved the snarkiness of the title. So I responded there. *shrug* Just because we have freedom of speech (at least in the US), doesn't mean we do so on here. My attitude is probably not very popular...don't like the rules? go somewhere else.

This.

I run a forum. Not as big as this one, but after a short time, you come to realize what topics are just plain Bad News.

I like to compare a community like this to a big party at the owner's house. We're all invited, all's cool, but if people start bickering about stupid things, it ruins all the fun. It's easier to just make a blanket statement, like "don't talk about this, this and that," than to pick and choose which of those topics is ok and which are ticking time bombs.

Plus, we have the blogs to talk about whatever we want, with no censorship. That's like the host of the party saying, "Don't smoke in my house, but if you want to go on the porch, you can light up all you want. Here's an ashtray."

All in all, I think MFP has a good thing going.

Grimmerick

I think moderation is necessary, the problem is where you draw the line because someone will always want to toe it. So it's better to just say no to all those topics than confuse people and make them feel discriminated against by saying ok you can talk about this but only in this way and you can't talk about this unless it has to do with that. It's just too much for too many people, so it's better to keep the rules plain and simple.

StaceyL76

I think you have made a great point. It is nice to have support of people with similar interests.

tross0924

What members do or do not think is rather a moot point. Privately owned websites, such as this one, are dictatorships not democracies. Admin / Mods will do whatever they think is right to preserve the integrity of the site as they see fit (and largely to have an easy life more than anything else.)

If you go into somebody's house you abide by their rules. Don't like it? Make your point, see if it makes a change, if not and it means that much to you then leave.

I totally agree that the creators of this site have the right to sensor, ban, or delete anything they want to. I know if it was my site I'd have my own set of rules, that I'd expect people to follow. And I know that nothing is going to change here. I'm not going to leave because I'm so offended by the sensorship. But I am going to complain a little bit

I'm for the moderation. Sometimes you'll see posters pushing the envelope. And the other posters responding with saying "thread locked in 3,2.." they know what they're saying will be viewed as inappropriate. It's like the kid that fans his hand over the stove .."doesn't burn, doesn't burn, F$#% it burns!!" Everyone has a little punk kid in them who wants to see what they can get away with.



Plus, where's the fun if you didn't ruffle a few feathers

See and what may be harder to do, but way more fair to the original poster, is to not delete the thread out of hand, but delete the posts that push the line. If what you're worried about is arguments starting over topics, stop the argumentative people, not the topics. It's perfectly possible to have a discussion about very controversial topics without being rude or insulting. The topic isn't the issue in my opinion. I mean if I were to go into a thread asking for people who are 35 - 40 years old for support spouting offensive trash about 35-40 year olds, it should be the trash that gets deleted and not the entire thread that up until I came in was going nicely.

I think moderation is necessary, the problem is where you draw the line because someone will always want to toe it. So it's better to just say no to all those topics than confuse people and make them feel discriminated against by saying ok you can talk about this but only in this way and you can't talk about this unless it has to do with that. It's just too much for too many people, so it's better to keep the rules plain and simple.

Moderation is completely necessary. But personally I think it's worse to offend people and make them feel discriminated against, by saying you can't talk about a topic at all. So instead of dealing with the person actually causing the problem, the people that are behaving civily get told "that guy over there might not like what you're going to say, we don't want to offend him, so we're going to offend you." Just smacks of injustice to me - which is totally allowed on a private message board.

I think you have made a great point. It is nice to have support of people with similar interests.

Thanks

Atlantique

See and what may be harder to do, but way more fair to the original poster, is to not delete the thread out of hand, but delete the posts that push the line. If what you're worried about is arguments starting over topics, stop the argumentative people, not the topics. It's perfectly possible to have a discussion about very controversial topics without being rude or insulting. The topic isn't the issue in my opinion. I mean if I were to go into a thread asking for people who are 35 - 40 years old for support spouting offensive trash about 35-40 year olds, it should be the trash that gets deleted and not the entire thread that up until I came in was going nicely.

The rules are really quite clear about any mention of religion on the forums. It's just not allowed, period, end of story. The original poster broke the rules and now we're on our second day of fallout because of it.

MissionABS

I didn't see the thread that was removed, but I think you make some really good points. I think it is reasonable to want to take the fitness journey with people you share interests with. For some people on this site, fitness is their life. It is the only topic that seems to interest them. There is nothing wrong with that, but that is not me.

No one seems to take issues with stay at home mom groups, age 50+, singles, etc. etc. Politics shouldn't be any different.

frostiegurl

Tross, get out of my head. I couldn't have said it better. While i understand that there are specific rules to prevent controversy, the fact of the matter is that other non-forbidden topics often cause more vitriol than the ones expressly forbidden.

The deletion of an entire thread doesn't target the offender ( person or persons causing issues) it merely stifles the voices of the folks involved who are wanting to stand on common ground.

catcrazy

As just another user.......

I like this site and I abide by the rules because I want to continue using this site, I have a warped and wicked sense of humour (think B3TA) but I curb it on here because its required in the rules. The way i see it is....you would not going into a none smoking establishment, light up a cigar and expect no one to challenge you and then complain to management how other patrons had challenged you for breaking the rules would you...people complaining about their religious/political/sexuality posts being closed down are doing just that tho, its baffling!

I volunteered as a moderator because I saw some very ugly threads on here when Mike was moderating alone, I wanted to help keep it friendly and supportive and I think overall we (volunteer mods) are doing just that



As a moderator.....

There were very few rules in place in the beginning (before my time) and the religion/sexuality/political topics used to get very heated so Mike put some rules in place.

I've seen first hand some of the results of "forbidden" topics being posted, feelings genuinely get hurt, they could have avoided that hurt by following the site rules.

In an ideal world people should be able to talk freely about their religious,.sexual or political preferences but we don't live in an ideal world and until we do rules are needed and those rules need to be adhered to.

The deletion of an entire thread doesn't target the offender ( person or persons causing issues) it merely stifles the voices of the folks involved who are wanting to stand on common ground.

If this is the LGBTQ thread you are on it would have been deleted because it was against forum rules. I haven't read it but if there were personal attacks on top of the already "forbidden" topic then there really would be no choice but to delete. As for none forbidden topics getting heated, yes they do and they also get locked, edit, deleted just like forbidden topics

There are plans to make private groups but until they are in place is it really that hard to follow the site owners rules?

tross0924

See and what may be harder to do, but way more fair to the original poster, is to not delete the thread out of hand, but delete the posts that push the line. If what you're worried about is arguments starting over topics, stop the argumentative people, not the topics. It's perfectly possible to have a discussion about very controversial topics without being rude or insulting. The topic isn't the issue in my opinion. I mean if I were to go into a thread asking for people who are 35 - 40 years old for support spouting offensive trash about 35-40 year olds, it should be the trash that gets deleted and not the entire thread that up until I came in was going nicely.

The rules are really quite clear about any mention of religion on the forums. It's just not allowed, period, end of story. The original poster broke the rules and now we're on our second day of fallout because of it.

OK again I haven't seen or heard anything about the fallout from yesterday. If you truly want to know, the one that stuck in my throat was from 6 weeks ago when a woman asked for Christian friends for support. Several people said add me. One person said "You don't have to be Christian to be supportive" (not over the line or offensive in my opinion). But then the next person attacked her and was offensive. It went down hill from there. The end result was that a new person to the site who was looking for like minded friends got told post Christian stuff on your wall or in your blog, and the offensive preson(s) had nothing happen. How the new person was supposed to find supportive like minded friends by posting on her wall, was not disclosed.

I understand the rules. I'm not saying they have to change. I am saying in my opinion they are being unfairly applied. I don't think a post asking for like minded friends is ABOUT the similarity. I think the post is about finding friends, and as such should be allowed under the rules.

13) Topics about politics, religion, or sexuality are not allowed and will be deleted. This includes posting images or signatures. Unfortunately, we have seen that topics about either of these subjects are highly likely to result in heated arguments and disputes. If you really wish to discuss either of these topics, please google political forums, religious forums, etc. - there are plenty of other places to express your views.

The question is - is a topic ABOUT the politics, religion, or sexuality if it is mentioned that I'd like my friends to be religious / gay / or political? I think that the post that starts the argument and attacks first is the post that is about the issue and is the one that should be deleted. Merely mentioning the words shouldn't be enough of a reason to delete an entire thread in my opinon.

Atlantique

See and what may be harder to do, but way more fair to the original poster, is to not delete the thread out of hand, but delete the posts that push the line. If what you're worried about is arguments starting over topics, stop the argumentative people, not the topics. It's perfectly possible to have a discussion about very controversial topics without being rude or insulting. The topic isn't the issue in my opinion. I mean if I were to go into a thread asking for people who are 35 - 40 years old for support spouting offensive trash about 35-40 year olds, it should be the trash that gets deleted and not the entire thread that up until I came in was going nicely.

The rules are really quite clear about any mention of religion on the forums. It's just not allowed, period, end of story. The original poster broke the rules and now we're on our second day of fallout because of it.

OK again I haven't seen or heard anything about the fallout from yesterday. If you truly want to know, the one that stuck in my throat was from 6 weeks ago when a woman asked for Christian friends for support. Several people said add me. One person said "You don't have to be Christian to be supportive" (not over the line or offensive in my opinion). But then the next person attacked her and was offensive. It went down hill from there. The end result was that a new person to the site who was looking for like minded friends got told post Christian stuff on your wall or in your blog, and the offensive preson(s) had nothing happen. How the new person was supposed to find supportive like minded friends by posting on her wall, was not disclosed.

I understand the rules. I'm not saying they have to change. I am saying in my opinion they are being unfairly applied. I don't think a post asking for like minded friends is ABOUT the similarity. I think the post is about finding friends, and as such should be allowed under the rules.

13) Topics about politics, religion, or sexuality are not allowed and will be deleted. This includes posting images or signatures. Unfortunately, we have seen that topics about either of these subjects are highly likely to result in heated arguments and disputes. If you really wish to discuss either of these topics, please google political forums, religious forums, etc. - there are plenty of other places to express your views.

The question is - is a topic ABOUT the politics, religion, or sexuality if it is mentioned that I'd like my friends to be religious / gay / or political? I think that the post that starts the argument and attacks first is the post that is about the issue and is the one that should be deleted. Merely mentioning the words shouldn't be enough of a reason to delete an entire thread in my opinon.

The question has been asked and answered repeatedly. Yes, the topic is "ABOUT the politics, religion, or sexuality if it is mentioned that I'd like my friends to be religious / gay / or political". Your not liking the answer doesn't change the answer.

ladyhawk00

OK again I haven't seen or heard anything about the fallout from yesterday. If you truly want to know, the one that stuck in my throat was from 6 weeks ago when a woman asked for Christian friends for support. Several people said add me. One person said "You don't have to be Christian to be supportive" (not over the line or offensive in my opinion). But then the next person attacked her and was offensive. It went down hill from there. The end result was that a new person to the site who was looking for like minded friends got told post Christian stuff on your wall or in your blog, and the offensive preson(s) had nothing happen. How the new person was supposed to find supportive like minded friends by posting on her wall, was not disclosed.

I'll say two things here, as a mod.

First, we do not publicly discuss moderation. So you have NO idea if "the offensive person" had anything happen. We warn people, suspend posting priveleges and ban people often (the latter only after much consideration and as a last resort) -- but it's not like we post a topic about it. So you cannot assume you know what happened or didn't happen to/with another member regarding what they have done.

Second, I posted Mike's explanation about this rule here... Perhaps this will help:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/296100-will-this-one-last-longer-than-20-minutes

MissionABS

The question has been asked and answered repeatedly. Yes, the topic is "ABOUT the politics, religion, or sexuality if it is mentioned that I'd like my friends to be religious / gay / or political". Your not liking the answer doesn't change the answer.

I totally disagree. The OP is clearly stating that the new member was just looking for friends with similar interests. The thread was not about discussing those interests. Those discussions could have taken place on each others walls or via private messaging after the fact, but the new member has no way of identifying similar interest friends without asking for them in a post.

I saw nothing in the OPs well written reply to suggest he was just trying to change the answer.

bluemist248

I usually stay out of these kinda discussions for fear of offending, but I thought I'd add my two cents since it's partly related to my degree.

I can see both sides of this argument. I can understand people feeling a need to connect to others like them whether that's through race, politics or sexuality. Whilst I agree it has NOTHING to do with fitness or weight loss.... with the exception of religions that promote fasting or certain dietary restrictions (that's actually quite a lot of religions) I can understand people seeking others like them and discussing sensitive topics, I think this has something to do with the hidden nature of this site, i.e. being honest with yourself and others, exposing ourselves (progress pics, weight, age, diet etc.. all issues many people wouldn't broadcast in an everyday environment.

I just think this makes people more likely to expose the rest of their personalities and their opinions and lives. It's mostly to seek company and support. I don't see anything wrong with that, until it becomes a heated argument. Which it usually does as not everyone can look at things from both points of view.

For me (so feel free to disagree) the general rule to prevent heated controversial topics would be to allow threads that are exclusive groups providing they are related to fitness. I did see a comparison today which although I agree with the sentiment, the logic is flawed. This comparison was that a LGBTQ thread is the same exclusivity as a 'mom's over 40' thread. It simply isn't. One is related to health and fitness, one isn't. "mom's over 40" does impact health at fitness (age and childbirth, and having a busy life come to mind here, thus it is related. Sexuality has little impact on fitness or diets (yes, I have seen the argument of it causing comfort eating, but comfort eating is comfort eating, whatever the cause). Now before anyone accuses me of being homophobic, I'm actually bisexual myself, I just understand that this, much like politics does not affect fitness or health DIRECTLY.

tross0924

The question has been asked and answered repeatedly. Yes, the topic is "ABOUT the politics, religion, or sexuality if it is mentioned that I'd like my friends to be religious / gay / or political". Your not liking the answer doesn't change the answer.

Please allow that your opinion is not "the answer". I do disagree with your opinion and am hoping to get more opinions either for or against, but unless Mike posts there is no answer. The main reason I disagree with your opinion is because a topic about looking for friends from Utah is not about Utah. A topic about Utah would go something like Utah is great because . . .

I'll say two things here, as a mod.

First, we do not publicly discuss moderation. So you have NO idea if "the offensive person" had anything happen. We warn people, suspend posting priveleges and ban people often (the latter only after much consideration and as a last resort) -- but it's not like we post a topic about it. So you cannot assume you know what happened or didn't happen to/with another member regarding what they have done.

Second, I posted Mike's explanation about this rule here... Perhaps this will help:

http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/296100-will-this-one-last-longer-than-20-minutes

You're right. I do have no idea what if anything happened to the attacking / offensive individuals. I'm sorry. I do know that the apperance is that nothing happened. The appearance is one of discrimination soley against the original poster who in my opinion again didn't violate any rules by asking for like minded thread.

As a moderator do you feel that my asking for friends from Utah is a post about Utah? If not then why is there a difference, and if so can you explain why you feel that way? Or is the rule meant to read any mention of politics/religion/sexuality will be deleted?

Qarol

The question has been asked and answered repeatedly. Yes, the topic is "ABOUT the politics, religion, or sexuality if it is mentioned that I'd like my friends to be religious / gay / or political". Your not liking the answer doesn't change the answer.

Please allow that your opinion is not "the answer".

The answer is, by merely starting a thread about religion (especially if you could have seen the title, but I gather you didn't actually see it), that was a violation of the rules. Deleting only some responses would be an incredible amount of work by the moderators. If the rule is "don't start a thread about religion," then expect for the entire thread to be deleted if you do.

If the moderators wanted to create a rule against posting about Utah, they are well within their rights to do so. But there is no rule about posts and Utah, so that's why that would be OK.