Question re. AGBF's Thread About the Catholic Boys

[Ella]

We had many, very offended users reporting on that thread, and considering that we do have a policy banning discussion on religion, the combination meant that I decided to close the thread.

I would be willing to speak to Andrey about trying out allowing discussion of religion, but if we did that and there were insulting or snotty posts about someone's points of view or religion, there would also be a lot more time outs. If that is something y'all would like to try, I can speak with him.

It would be a zero tolerance policy. You make a snarky or rude post to someone, and you get a time out, probably one of a month or more. Our judgement call on what constitutes rude. If history is any indicator, there would be many, many time outs and offended people. Which is why we decided it was not worth it before.

 

[kenny]

We had many, very offended users reporting on that thread, and considering that we do have a policy banning discussion on religion, the combination meant that I decided to close the thread.

I would be willing to speak to Andrey about trying out allowing discussion of religion, but if we did that and there were insulting or snotty posts about someone's points of view or religion, there would also be a lot more time outs. If that is something y'all would like to try, I can speak with him.

It would be a zero tolerance policy. You make a snarky or rude post to someone, and you get a time out, probably one of a month or more. Our judgement call on what constitutes rude. If history is any indicator, there would be many, many time outs and offended people. Which is why we decided it was not worth it before.

Thanks Ella.
I hope it's okay, I'd like to start a new thread about this.
I'd like to start a poll to take the temperature of the community on giving this important policy change a try.

 

[aljdewey]

I didn't see anything on earlier posts - I haven't been here for at least the past few days.

Having said that, I will say that it does not matter if the discussion was respectful or not if the topic matter is off limits apparently. Some time back, one poster actually reported the post of another person who was on hard times and began a thread to say she was struggling and asked for prayers. It's ok to ask for dust apparently, but this sensitive flower couldn't handle another poster actually saying "could you keep me in your prayers?" and reported the person who was already down and out. Nice, huh?

So, it's not ok to ask for prayers lest another PSer reports you as a violator of the 'no religion' tenet, but it's completely OK for posters who regularly offend people to just keep on keeping on. Mmm hmm.....*that* is a main contributor of the exodus.

Adults shouldn't really need an "OMG, don't let me see anything offensive" button; they have the self-control to just ignore and move on. It's too bad that's a dying skill.

 

[kenny]

People were offended and reported it.

Maybe not.

I see two reasons stuff could get reported.
Taking offense personally.
Just helping admin enforce PS policies since Ella can't read every post in every thread.

 

[missy]

I didn't see anything on earlier posts - I haven't been here for at least the past few days.

Having said that, I will say that it does not matter if the discussion was respectful or not if the topic matter is off limits apparently. Some time back, one poster actually reported the post of another person who was on hard times and began a thread to say she was struggling and asked for prayers. It's ok to ask for dust apparently, but this sensitive flower couldn't handle another poster actually saying "could you keep me in your prayers?" and reported the person who was already down and out. Nice, huh?

So, it's not ok to ask for prayers lest another PSer reports you as a violator of the 'no religion' tenet, but it's completely OK for posters who regularly offend people to just keep on keeping on. Mmm hmm.....*that* is a main contributor of the exodus.

Adults shouldn't really need an "OMG, don't let me see anything offensive" button; they have the self-control to just ignore and move on. It's too bad that's a dying skill.

I agree completely with Alj's post. Kenny started a good thread.
[URL='https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/would-you-like-to-try-allowing-discussion-of-religion-on-ho.218840/']https://www.pricescope.com/community/threads/would-you-like-to-try-allowing-discussion-of-religion-on-ho.218840/[/URL]

 

[hay joe]

My posts on the other thread were reported, both of them.

I am a Catholic.

 

[AGBF]

My posts on the other thread were reported, both of them.

I am a Catholic.

I guess that shouldn't shock me, but it does. It is so ridiculous. I remember that someone took exception to Ellen's sig line, one she had had for many years, because it was religious in nature. As if she had no freedom of speech in putting up her own favorite quotation.

 

[Ellen]

Ellen and Kenny, safe rooms are rooms that we have now on college campuses and who knows where else, could be at work places for all I know. They're where people go when things are discussed or words are spoken that offend them, bother them, cause them some sort of trauma or stress.

Thanks for elaborating, wow. All I can say is, it is really sad the direction we as a society are headed. :/

Kenny, the soy sauce on the taco was hilarious.

 

[missy]

My posts on the other thread were reported, both of them.

I am a Catholic.

I guess that shouldn't shock me, but it does. It is so ridiculous. I remember that someone took exception to Ellen's sig line, one she had had for many years, because it was religious in nature. As if she had no freedom of speech in putting up her own favorite quotation.

Wow this shocks me too. What about hay Joe's posts should have been reported. Ridiculous.
Sorry about Ellen's sig line too.

Ellen and Kenny, safe rooms are rooms that we have now on college campuses and who knows where else, could be at work places for all I know. They're where people go when things are discussed or words are spoken that offend them, bother them, cause them some sort of trauma or stress.

Thanks for elaborating, wow. All I can say is, it is really sad the direction we as a society are headed. :/

I agree.

 

[missy]

I have been thinking about this and I think part of the problem is that people can report anonymously. If a post is egregious enough to report wouldn't the person who reports it feel confident to stand by their action? This goes to what I was saying in the other thread about discussing reasons why certain statements, comments etc. are offensive to some posters.

Let's open the discussion and be transparent and communicate clearly. Before reporting let's discuss exactly what is offensive to some so we can understand and move forward. When we sweep reasons under the rug there is no hope to resolve situations. However when we share the discussion openly and respectfully communicate about specifics that is when we can see the other points of view.

Just sharing some early morning thoughts while working out.

 

[chrono]

My posts on the other thread were reported, both of them.
I am a Catholic.

I'm sorry to read this. It didn't offend me, even as a non-Christian.

 

[purplesparklies]

My posts on the other thread were reported, both of them.

I am a Catholic.

How very sad that someone reported your posts. There is no explanation for the actions of some people.

 

[AGBF]

I have been thinking about this and I think part of the problem is that people can report anonymously. If a post is egregious enough to report wouldn't the person who reports it feel confident to stand by their action?

I disagree with this. People who don't post at all, but read Pricescope because they are shopping for diamonds, should be able to report things, too. Why should they have to identify themselves? The site has to be accountable to everyone. Ultimately, only Andrey's word counts on what is done about reported material.

 

[maccers]

My posts on the other thread were reported, both of them.

I am a Catholic.

I, too, am sorry to read this. It doesn't make sense to me. I appreciated your answering my question without taking offence or making judgment on me. .

 

[missy]

I have been thinking about this and I think part of the problem is that people can report anonymously. If a post is egregious enough to report wouldn't the person who reports it feel confident to stand by their action?

I disagree with this. People who don't post at all, but read Pricescope because they are shopping for diamonds, should be able to report things, too. Why should they have to identify themselves? The site has to be accountable to everyone. Ultimately, only Andrey's word counts on what is done about reported material.

That's OK Deb. We don't have to agree on everything. That is how I feel. If someone takes offense at a post we should be able to discuss why instead of hiding behind the reason and just reporting it anonymously. JMO.

 

[AGBF]

That's OK Deb. We don't have to agree on everything.

Are you sure?

What about everything regarding injured animals?

Deb

 

[Ella]

I have been thinking about this and I think part of the problem is that people can report anonymously. If a post is egregious enough to report wouldn't the person who reports it feel confident to stand by their action?

I disagree with this. People who don't post at all, but read Pricescope because they are shopping for diamonds, should be able to report things, too. Why should they have to identify themselves? The site has to be accountable to everyone. Ultimately, only Andrey's word counts on what is done about reported material.

That's OK Deb. We don't have to agree on everything. That is how I feel. If someone takes offense at a post we should be able to discuss why instead of hiding behind the reason and just reporting it anonymously. JMO.

Just to give you some context, if we receive anonymously reported reports, I take little stock in them if it's simply an "I'm offended" comment, unless I feel the post really is out of line.

When I receive multiple reports, about the same thread/post, that some comments are out of line, making users feel uncomfortable, etc. from longtime users, I take more stock in them.

In addition, I feel that the rules should be enforced, as that is my job. We do have a rule about no discussion of religion, and since that thread was veering into that direction, in addition to the reports, it seemed prudent to close it.

It is also worth noting that when users report a thread, they often pick a random post to report, and then make comments to us about a thread in general. So please do not create a "my post was reported, which is ridiculous" mentality. Your post may have been used as the mechanism for the report, but often the report is not even about the post itself.

 

[Ella]

It is worth pointing out that some of the people claiming offense to us removing religious posts are posting in both of these threads.

So if you wish us to stop removing posts like those, stop reporting them and telling us you don't like those types of posts and want us to enforce the no religion at all policies.

 

[chrono]

Ella,
I appreciate the clarification and wanted to say "thank you" again for a difficult job that is rarely appreciated.

 

[kenny]

Ella,
I appreciate the clarification and wanted to say "thank you" again for a difficult job that is rarely appreciated.

+1.

Thanks Ella.

 

[missy]

Ella,
I appreciate the clarification and wanted to say "thank you" again for a difficult job that is rarely appreciated.

+1.

Thanks Ella.

Thank you Ella for the clarification and also for doing a great job at keeping PS a wonderful place to be. You have a challenging job as there are many personalities in the mix and we appreciate all you do.

 

[missy]

That's OK Deb. We don't have to agree on everything.

Are you sure?

What about everything regarding injured animals?

Deb

I love you Deb and I know you have a heart of gold. And I know you love all animals.

 

[MollyMalone]

If someone takes offense at a post we should be able to discuss why instead of hiding behind the reason and just reporting it anonymously. JMO.

Based on my past experiences as a forum moderator (a volunteer job that rivals being president of my condo board for unpaid "fun" ) & also seeing, as a participant, such things unfold on another (less moderated) forum, I doubt there would be a useful discussion. Plus, there is more than one kind of "taking offense": objections may not rest on the underlying substance, but rather the words with which it was delivered or because the post is otherwise outside the designated parameters. The PS administrators have decided that this is not "anything goes" site. That is their prerogative & my own preference for civilized, non-hostile combat conversation is why I agreed to serve as a moderator on the other forum where the founders-administrators had a philosophy similar to PS & wanted to see that policies were more consistently enforced than they could do themselves as the site attracted more traffic.

What I've seen is that the poster who is called out publicly, or his/her supporters, typically responds with a claim of "freedom of expression", wrapping themselves in the First Amendment (altho' the 1st A is irrelevant in this scenario); denounces the person who believed the post was rude, crude, insulting, anti-Semitic or whatever as "overly sensitive"; declares that he/she should "grow a pair." And the thread then goes off the rails, even where any objective detached observer would deem the poster to have been outside the bounds of civilized discourse. If the complained-of poster is a troll, forced public airings give the troll the satisfaction of further roiling the pot... which sure doesn't benefit, in most people's view, a 'net forum.

Lastly, from a more uniquely PS perspective, I very much appreciated being able to privately share with Ella (a) my concerns that a vendor -- very popular on the Colored Stones forum -- had established a "sock puppet" account in order to promote their business, and (b) my reasons why I thought the vendor was shilling. My concerns apparently were borne out because the sock puppet's posts on multiple threads have been deleted. But your proposed MO would require me to publicly lay out my reasons for concern that PS's prohibitions vs. multiple accounts & Trade shilling were being violated . Sure, I could have withstood whatever pushback,or scorn others PSers might have said in response to me raising questions about their fave vendor, but what if I were wrong, the administrators determined that the poster was actually legit, not a masquerading shill? Posted suspicions could have unfairly besmirched the vendor's reputation, even if only temporarily, in the court of PS, if not public, opinion.

These are the major reasons I don't favor eliminating the Report Concern feature (those comminiques, as Ella has noted, do not come through anonymously to her) & requiring folks to broadcast their concern that a PS policy is being violated.

 

[AGBF]

Lastly, from a more uniquely PS perspective, I very much appreciated being able to privately share with Ella (a) my concerns that a vendor -- very popular on the Colored Stones forum -- had established a "sock puppet" account in order to promote their business, and (b) my reasons why I thought the vendor was shilling. My concerns apparently were borne out because the sock puppet's posts on multiple threads have been deleted. But your proposed MO would require me to publicly lay out my reasons for concern that PS's prohibitions vs. multiple accounts & Trade shilling were being violated . Sure, I could have withstood whatever pushback,or scorn others PSers might have said in response to me raising questions about their fave vendor, but what if I were wrong, the administrators determined that the poster was actually legit, not a masquerading shill? Posted suspicions could have unfairly besmirched the vendor's reputation, even if only temporarily, in the court of PS, if not public, opinion.

These are the major reasons I don't favor eliminating the Report Concern feature (those comminiques, as Ella has noted, do not come through anonymously to her) & requiring folks to broadcast their concern that a PS policy is being violated.

Thank you for sharing this experience, Molly. I did not even envision a situation such as this one, involving a vendor, when I posted my opinion about continuing to have an anonymous (to the public) "report concern" button. I believe that people must be held innocent until proven guilty, but if we cannot report allegations, we will never be able to uncover things we say that we want to...such as child abuse. The need to uncover child abuse is the reason that there are anonymous tip lines for reporting an event to be investigated. In my opinion this (reporting abuses on a forum) is analagous. One should be able to do it "in safety" so that it can be investigated.

 

[hay joe]

My earlier post was not a complaint. I was just surprised. I take no pleasure in offending anyone. My post on the closed thread used language relevant to the topic, directed toward the accused and a description of myself. It had no other meaning.

I think the owners/operators of PriceScope should run their site as they please. Their site has given me an opportunity to become highly informed about several topics and to share my experiences. For that I am grateful.

Again, I take no pleasure in offending anyone.
Joe

 

[lulu]

It's pretty pathetic when someone gets reported for asking for prayers. There are some militant atheists out there. If it's not for you just look away.

 

[monarch64]

I spoke up in Deb's thread. I was worried that it would turn into something that would go against PS rules, and I was also unhappy that people had already taken it in a religious direction. I did NOT report any post or that thread. The only times I have EVER reported posts have been spam or obvious violations of the TOS. Again, I did not report anyone in Deb's thread nor the thread itself. I spoke up there only because I thought the thread would go south. Looking back, I should have kept my mouth shut.

Deb/AGBF: I am sorry that I possibly took your thread off-track. It was not my place to do so, and looking back, I took a very arrogant and unnecessary position by inserting myself into your thread. I hope you'll forgive me.

 

[AGBF]

I spoke up in Deb's thread. I was worried that it would turn into something that would go against PS rules, and I was also unhappy that people had already taken it in a religious direction. I did NOT report any post or that thread. The only times I have EVER reported posts have been spam or obvious violations of the TOS. Again, I did not report anyone in Deb's thread nor the thread itself. I spoke up there only because I thought the thread would go south. Looking back, I should have kept my mouth shut.

Deb/AGBF: I am sorry that I possibly took your thread off-track. It was not my place to do so, and looking back, I took a very arrogant and unnecessary position by inserting myself into your thread. I hope you'll forgive me.

Oh, Monnie. I would say, "Don't be silly", except that it sounds patronizing. So how about, "Don't be a ninny"?

Big hugs,
Deb

PS-You know I love you!

 

[packrat]

It's one thing to report when someone is breaking the rules, you think they're shilling etc. That's not necessarily something that should be made public, in my eyes. I feel it's different when it becomes something that offends someone's tender sensibilities. Like I've been talked down to and demeaned on FB for typing "God" when talking about religious things on people's walls--those that have a come apart about it feel that it is blasphemous and I guess means I'm going to hell..*they* prefer you type "G-d". That's the sort of thing I'm talking about.

Or if we were to be allowed to have a discussion about religion and I volunteered about how I grew up, people are at times offended by that. Then in my estimation, you need to have the gumption to raise your hand and say "it offends me that you don't believe what I do", rather than refusing to contribute and refusing to ask questions to learn about things, and rather than hiding behind the screen. Own it. We should be adult enough to accept our own thoughts. And if you *can't*-if you can't contribute, if you can't ask questions, if you can't act like an adult, then I fully believe your offense should be duly noted, and dismissed. "it offends me that so and so said Christmas is a pagan holiday, it should be deleted and so and so should have a time out" "Have you contributed to the thread and stated your thoughts so you could discuss them rationally and like an adult? No? Ok then" End of story. Or, "Oh, you have? And so and so said you were an idiot for believing otherwise? Well, that's a whole 'nother thing, we'll take care of it, thanks for letting us know"

I like to learn, I like to grow and expand my knowledge. If I hadn't been allowed to have discussions-adult discourse, adult talks, adult conversation, with others, I would have an entirely different mindset than I do right now. Talking with other people is what made me understand that gay people are not scary. Atheists are not scary. I like to talk and ask questions.

 

[hay joe]

I did not, nor will I ever report a concern. I understand that most people aren't like me and they are happy for that. Isn't freedom wonderful!