Censorship explanation request

A couple months ago, the following response post was flagged and deleted, with only this vague explanation from “system”. I asked “system” for more explanation, but it did not reply. It’s one thing to hide a post, leaving it available, but deletion is another. Could a moderator explain what about this post rose to the severe level it needed to be cancelled completely?

“Your post was flagged as inappropriate: the community feels it is offensive, abusive, or a violation of our community guidelines.”

1 Like

Took me some time to search for this but given the moderation history and reports and all:

  1. People reported this and follow-up posts as “inappropriate” for just escalating tensions
  2. A fellow moderator cleaned up this post and some replies to it

We’re not here to censor, in fact from what I see in the moderation queue most community-reported posts are left on the forum and not deleted. This specific case just seemed to be a flamewar between you and someone else escalating further and further that was spamming the topic.

Please know that moderation is difficult, there are always so many nuances. We just try our best to keep the forum a decent place and keep it from just being people yelling at each other over and over. Sometimes the team may delete one post too much, or leave one post up that should’ve been removed. It is really tiring to be accused of censorship every single time for just trying to keep topics from being nothing but people yelling angrily at each other. Please cut us some slack, we’re not perfect but we’re all just volunteers trying our best :frowning:


Define " Yelling at each other " through a computer screen?

I’m not trying to be a smart ass, but I think it begs the question about this whole “speech” problem from the get-go since we can’t physically “yell” at each other over a computer screen to begin with.

By the very nature of this technology we are limited to just neutral text, therefore, what is the problem with letting people argue/“yell at each other” in a post considering valuable information can almost half the time: come out of it.

I can’t tell you how many times I got great technical information from other forums because there was a slug fest of opinions and the only thing that settled it was someone getting fed up with all of it and finally deciding to invest hours if not days, or MORE, to investigate & research the subject down to the quartz/molecule level to then post it up for the world to see and then some people were left to STFU and others confident that their ground was solid & true all along (Including me, I’ve been on both sides * sad face *).

At the very least, we can get the information that someone is dead wrong and can only just start talking sh** to other person because he/she has no valid information/facts to support their comment.
Yea, I get it: we can’t have anarchy.
But If insults (real insults like F***, Sh**, Bi***, Ni****, etc etc etc) are kept out of it, I don’t see why we don’t just allow arguments to just run there course since they can provide the results I mentioned above.

I mean, if it is “with out a shadow of a doubt” obvious that the thread is unfruitful and just verbal diarrhea, then couldn’t there be some kind of " Sewer " page where all those posts get moved to, but not deleted/censored?

Newly joined, and based upon my browsing around, there seems to be precious few of “us” here. I joined expecting that the intent is to learn, and to teach, and to share. If a post adds no educational value to the topic at hand nor otherwise serves to celebrate our commonality, yep, that’s “inappropriate”. Trash removal, with attention toward community hygiene, is not “censorship”.

The exchange mentioned in post #1 here, imagine the difficulty it would introduce for non-native English readers who will clicked on the topic with intent to learn…


This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.