MetaTalk posts tagged with censorship

Why would people think Metafilter censors posts critical of police?

layceepee — Wed, 28 Jun 2017 11:37:18 -0800

Why would people think that Metafilter routinely deletes posts critical of police? Possibly because it says so on Metafilter. In a thread regarding Facebooks's deletion policies, there was a comment that claimed "Facebook (like MetaFilter) routinely deletes posts criticizing police." I didn't think it was the case that Metafilter routinely deletes posts critical of police, so I quoted the comment on the thread and asked if it were true. My comment was deleted with the explanation that "If you want to talk about Metafilter deletions, that's fine but it needs to not happen in threads on the blue -- come to the contact form or take it to Metatalk." But the original comment, which made the spurious claim, wasn't deleted. I don't think this sort of thing is likely to happen often, but the result--that a spurious claim about Metafilter's moderation policies is allowed on the blue, but any pushback against it is deleted--strikes me as sub-optimal.

Trumps comment truncated

layceepee — Sat, 08 Oct 2016 11:53:58 -0800

I was surprised in the latest election thread to see that Donald Trump's "Grab them by the pussy" comment was bowderlerized when it was printed as a link to a video of the comment, but printed in full when a partial transcript of his remarks was reprinted. Is this something that's just at the disgression of the poster? Otherwise, I'd don't understand the inconsistency. (I think I understand the arguments for and against each method of handling Trump's vulgar language, but having both versions in a single post is puzzling.)

What are Meta's Values?

incolorinred — Fri, 06 Feb 2015 16:28:48 -0800

On its face, this site appears to be an instantiation of some of the best promises the internet has for humanity. For example: an open forum for collaboration, exchange of ideas and information, expression of unfettered art, science, and journalism. Central and vital to all of these things is freedom of speech. Anathema to these ideals is the way this site seems to be run, with censorship being a very common occurrence, I have noticed. I even see at the top of the screen "After you submit your post it will need to be approved by a moderator before it appears on the site." (That is kind of ominous, what is that about? There is a backlog, posts are going to be screened and cut rather than the capacity of throughput be increased?) Who would *you* entrust with such a power to decide what is appropriate and not, what deserves to be heard and what does not? Especially in the times we are in now in our society, where freedom of speech and civil liberties are fraying all around us, shouldn't this site be a holdout where democratic values remain vibrant?

Meta Slander?

Gungho — Tue, 19 Aug 2014 13:58:32 -0800

I have had three comments deleted from the thread re the alleged murder of Michal Brown. From the OP Escalating Tensions in Ferguson, Missouri August 19, 2014 2:45 AM Subscribe We are now entering day 10 of protests in Ferguson, MO, protesting the murder of unarmed teenager Michael Brown by local law enforcement officer Darren Wilson on August 9th. I simply pointed out that accusing a cop of murdering a black teen was adding fuel to the fire and in fact is very germane to the whole conversation about the problems not only in Ferguson, but around the country. It seems that the admins also have a shoot first and ask questions later policy when it comes to pointing out the fault in the FPP. They have suggested I take it here...Let's see over in the Blue there are 648 posts and counting...here, not so much. This is not the first time I have been edited for either pointing out something grossly wrong in an FPP or assuming a contraty position. Methinks the editors are a bit aggressive.

Meta Comment Deletion What Fors?

Colonel Panic — Wed, 02 Apr 2014 14:12:58 -0800

Starting this "me too" thread for anyone having their comments quixotically deleted from the main metafilter thread. This is just to get some opinions on the moderation here and if enough people chime in about unwarranted (random?) comment deletion maybe one of the better moderators will give a reasoned reply. I would like Metafilter to improve in this area because censurious tendencies are counter productive to information!

Post about limits to online education out of bounds?

specialk420 — Fri, 19 Oct 2012 08:08:19 -0800

Minnesota attempts limit access to free online education (Cousera) and somehow its out of bounds for the FP? this post? http://www.metafilter.com/121050/State-of-Minnesota-attempts-to-limit-free-acces-to-education Text of post: State of Minnesota attempts to limit free acces to education Apparently the State of Minnesota (formerly a self-styled leader in innovation in education) has decided that like online gambling, free access to online education is illegal (citing an age old law requiring "permission" to offer education) and should stop at the states borders. One wonders what the motivations might be? The threat posed to aging/expensive alternatives based in Minnesota may or may not be one of them. Link to Slate article: http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/10/18/minnesota_bans_coursera_state_takes_bold_stand_against_free_education.html and Chronicle: http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/minnesota-gives-coursera-the-boot-citing-a-decades-old-law/40542 Seems like metafilter is in stifle mode as well.

De mortuis nil nisi bonum?

Joe in Australia — Sun, 22 Jul 2012 15:09:51 -0800

I can understand closing a thread that becomes vitriolic, but there doesn't seem much point having obituary posts if we have to shy away from controversy - especially when the decedent notoriously embraced controversy himself.

Meta MetaCensorship

charlie don't surf — Fri, 27 Apr 2012 23:41:54 -0800

I was repeatedly censored in a thread while discussing freedom of speech. When I posted again, connecting my censorship directly to the topic, I was censored again. I would like an explanation. A very curious thing happened in the thread "Hanging Judged." The topic was a sophomoric undergrad art project on a college campus, showing flags streaked with bloody red crosses and several nooses. The project was obviously trolling, it was a juvenile attempt to provoke people at best, egregiously naive about the historical and societal implications of the noose symbol at worst. Alongside the usual sorts of discussion of social implications, and the cluelessness of the "artist," comments clearly indicated that this ridiculous provocation was too stupid to take so seriously. The first of those comments: No noose is good noose. posted by jonmc at 8:11 PM on April 27 [7 favorites +] [!] My own response was even more terse, invoking a stupid internet meme to comment on how the project was itself now a stupid internet troll: trollface.jpg Problem? This mode of commenting is becoming fairly common on text-based internet discussion boards. Further discussion appeared in this same mode, invoking that old meme with Freddy Mercury raising his fist: slow noose day YYYEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH posted by GuyZero at 9:06 PM on April 27 [4 favorites +] [!] From all the favorites, it is apparent that people enjoy this mode of communication. A discussion can be serious and not take itself too seriously. So I continued on with another response in that mode, starting with a quotation from 23skidoo that was already being discussed, but I quoted it anyway for specific context. >it's not like every noose HAS to make people think of lynching. close_enough.jpg Both of my comments were removed from the thread, while other remarks such as GuyZero's were untouched. It seemed that the mod who censored my remarks was acting capriciously, illogically. I could not imagine why any mod would do such a thing, particularly since the discussion involved topics of whether artists should be allowed to use provocative imagery, and whether it pushed the limits of free speech. Perhaps the mod merely misunderstood the message. This was also a topic of the thread: If you leave your communication open to multiple, valid interpretations, don't be surprised when people interpret it in one of those ways. posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:58 PM on April 27 [1 favorite +] [!] So I made another comment to tie this act of censorship directly to the subject under discussion. I considered making the post in MetaTalk but this seemed specifically related. But I knew the mod was acting strangely, so I kept a copy of what I posted. >The artist's free speech should be protected. Yes, even sophomore art exhibits that are poorly thought out are protected speech. But nobody guaranteed you a life free of annoying, even sophomoric speech. To wit: When 23skidoo says "it's not like every noose HAS to make people think of lynching." and I respond with "close_enough.jpg", no less authority than the New York Times has declared these sort of shorthand notations for visual images as a new frontier of expressive language. It is unworthy of MeFi moderators to censor and remove such remarks, particularly in a thread discussing the limits of freedom of speech. Using meme/emoticon/verbal imagery like this can work on multiple levels. Other comments in this thread used the same mode to express that we are not taking this outrage too seriously, after all, the art project is a sophomoric attempt at trolling for outrage and deserves a response in the same sophomoric mode. Yet at the same time, when 23skidoo says that not all nooses evoke lynching, I say it's close enough to that symbol that of course it will be recognized as such. So sometimes I just don't know what the hell is going through MeFi mod's minds when they pull relatively innocuous remarks like "close_enough.jpg". Are they protecting the sensitive, paper thin skin of mefites? Or perhaps a stalwart defender of old school online linguistic modes against the depredations of meme based communication? Face it, kids these days communicate in terse symbols. The noose, the white flag with a red cross, these are almost minimalist. They are clearly conveyed without any reduction in impact even in the crude 400x250 pixel jpeg in the FPP link. I responded by invoking similar imagery, with a method that is now becoming commonplace online, when people want to evoke the sentiment of a well-known internet icon without bothering to link to the photo. When I say "close_enough.jpg" almost anyone who has been on the internet recently knows exactly what I mean. Except apparently MeFi mods. This comment was also removed. Discussion continued, with other people making comments "The artist's free speech should be protected." I responded: MY freedom of speech should be protected. I'm taking this to MetaTalk. This comment was also removed. It seemed relevant to the discussion that part of it was censored. Removing that message was unreasonable. So perhaps the unknown moderator who persistently removed my comments can explain their actions to me. It is unseemly for MetaFilter moderators to remove comments from a discussion about the limits of freedom of speech, particularly when the targets are the most innocuous comments in the entire thread, and other similar comments were not censored.

Someday we'll look back fondly on the good ole days when online communities were legal.

aniola — Mon, 16 Jan 2012 21:36:06 -0800

Let's do something about SOPA/PIPA. One suggestion would be to have some sort of highly visible notification at the top of all MetaFilter pages/front pages, similar to what Wikipedia and Craigslist are doing.

Blackout

Artw — Tue, 10 Jan 2012 16:17:12 -0800

Reddit will be blacked out for 12 hours on January 18th in protest against SOPA. Will Metafilter be doing similar?

Stop Censorship Banners

pb — Tue, 15 Nov 2011 22:24:35 -0800

What's that black thing on the logo? MetaFilter is participating in American Censorship Day to help draw attention to a bill in congress that could hurt sites with user-contributed content—sites like MetaFilter. The black banners across the logos on the site today are are a way to let people know about the Stop Internet Piracy Act. The EFF has a good round-up of recent news about this proposed legislation: An Explosion of Opposition to the Internet Blacklist Bill. And Matt recently tweeted about an email campaign to let folks in congress know people are opposed. (There's a great video by Kirby Ferguson at that site that explains the many problems with the bill.) The Stop Censorship banner will be up for 24 hours or so.

Let's not put the n-word on the front page please.

empath — Tue, 04 Jan 2011 09:49:15 -0800

The N-word on the front page makes Metafilter extremely not work friendly, in addition to being just plain offensive. Can we do something about that? Thanks. I don't care if this is ironic or misses the point of the post. Whatever point you are trying to make isn't worth dropping that word in 2011. This isn't the 19th century and you aren't Mark Twain.

It's going to start feeling lk bngbngs cmmnts n hr f y kp ths p

Catblack — Wed, 08 Dec 2010 03:47:24 -0800

Cortex, why is it not alright to comment on what I read in the comments that you deleted? And now you've deleted my comments on them twice. I can understand that you didn't take kindly to the original "fuck you for deleting my comments" but to have deleted my comments after I've edited them is a bit frustrating. You've asked me to take this to MetaTalk, so here it is: how were my comments worthy of censorship? I'm *not* the person who bought an account just to post a long personal attack. I just had one small comment that got deleted, and then I reported in brief on what you deleted... and got deleted. Maybe you deal with this sort of thing all day long, but it's come off as heavy handed to me. Am I allowed to post my comments here in MetaTalk without censorship? And, because I have to ask: Is this Jacob Appelbaum a personal friend of yours? Is that why you deleted my comment(s)?

Original Loveparade thread was imperfect but why close it?

Skwirl — Sun, 25 Jul 2010 12:01:25 -0800

Is anyone else weirded out by the closing of the original Love Parade tragedy thread?

This post was deleted for the following reason: This kind of weirdly framed, and you need to maybe not argue with people in your own post twoleftfeet. -- cortex

It's a tragedy and some people deal with tragedy by fleshing out the controversy. I don't think it's healthy site moderation to shut down threads because there is some minor, reasonable disagreement in an organic discussion. Is it really the end of the world if the poster comments in their own thread and there's no derail? Sometimes MeFi culture is trying way too hard to be polite. Not every tragedy should be responded to with nothing more than empty .'s. And yes, it was a poorly worded newsfilter, but that's what I sometimes expect from a community written blog. I'm not necessarily looking for explanation from the moderator. I do think it's worth discussing the often controversy and imperfection adverse culture here.

Further China-like Censorship

peter_meta_kbd — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 09:27:36 -0800

Don't Believe In Sex Before Marriage? Don't Bother Saying it in a Comment, It'll Be Deleted The admins (and possibly the comment-flagging readers?) here apparently continue their insistence on censoring viewpoints based on content. About a week ago, there was one not-so-young lady who was asking for tips on how to have her first kiss etc. In my answer, I encouraged her to remember that anything she gives away to a passing stranger is a gift she can never give to a life partner, although I don't remember the exact wording. The admins deleted it (or maybe it was lost in the database?). So I sent a question about this to the admins through the contact form. It was not answered after 2 days. So I sent a personal email to the owner. He asked what was the problem and said that contact form entries are usually answered within a few minutes. I explained to him, and there was no further response from him in 2 days. I'm not saying that this website "should" respect freedom of speech in a different way, of course it's the owner's site and he can do whatever he wants as long as its legal, and I'm not saying his way of running the ship is illegal. I'm just pointing out what goes on here. Typical of the illiberal state of affairs in reactionary left wing contemporary circles.

All non-dispassionate responses will be culled. That is all.

wfrgms — Sun, 12 Apr 2009 15:32:32 -0800

Why were my answers removed from this AskMe? I put a lot of time and thought into my responses to that question. True, like many of the respondents there, I didn't suggest a book, but rather addressed the underlying problem of trying to 'fix' a relationship in this way. Jessamyn's lame explanation: [few comments removed - if you can't answer somewhat dispassionately, please don't] "Dispassionately" Excuse me? So now the "tone" of an answer has to pass muster with the mods? Give me a break. If my comments were deleted because they were somehow "non-answers" that's first and foremost ridiculous, because they were legitimate answers to the overall problem. Second, if that's the case why aren't all the other non-book specific comments gone also? Dispassionate? Please.

Nude Removed?

geos — Sat, 06 Dec 2008 07:12:42 -0800

Why was this painting's image removed from this question? Is there some new policy to save everyone from bad art? It seems to me that it would be helpful to see the painting to pick a frame for it... even if it is in bad taste the painting isn't grossly offensive. Really.

I must really rank

Rafaelloello — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 06:54:32 -0800

Outright censorship? I was super-censored by Jessamyn. You won't even find this on Deleted threads with GreaseMonkey. http://www.metafilter.com/75263/Documented-History-of-the-Bubble All the supporting docs are in the second link and Jessamyn super-deletes it because it's "kind of sketch"? Smacks of censorship. I didn't think she rolled that way. Raf

censorship on Metafilter

msquare — Wed, 18 Jul 2007 17:42:51 -0800

My post titled "The Most Dangerous Video on the Internets" was pulled after appearing for a mere 10 minutes or so. In addition to that, jessamyn's posted "reason" was a cheap resort to name-calling. The video to which I was linking is 2 hours long. How can you possibly have decided that it was worth censoring after a mere 10 minutes? Are Metafilter readers really unable to decide for themselves whether or not they should view the video? I've received an email reply from jessamyn which I appreciate, but believe her reasons to be without merit. I like Metafilter a lot (it's my homepage), but really don't like censorship which is exactly what this smells like. I'd like to know more about this decision.

Censorship anyone?

melangell — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 13:47:10 -0800

My post "Hollywood or Bust" was deleted because someone thought it was too much like a chat topic. However, you allowed a post on MetaFilter that linked to an article describing the narcissism that threatens to lead a whole generation into the illusion that fame is not only within their reach, but is an unquestionably desirable goal. As someone who lives in this world and is as exposed to the media as much as anyone else, I wished to question this prevailing assumption and thought others might wish to share their thoughts as well. I am not the only one who has had their posts censored. I see a lot of pretentious bullying going on and it will ruin this web community. Have a little more imagination and tolerance, maybe see where things go before you jump in and pull the plug. Perhaps I will not be missed if I leave this site and never return (you have my $5 right?), but I doubt I will be the last one to do so.

Is there a MetaFilter watchlist?

persona non grata — Fri, 11 Aug 2006 21:46:42 -0800

Matt: Do you have a "watch list" like the Department of Homeland Security apparetly has? I mean a list of potential offenders in terms of breaking the MeFi code. Dumb posters like me. Do you look out for certain types of threads and within them do you purge threatening content? Do you profile? What does the "War On Terror" mean to MetaFilter in terms of spying stuff and administration people? Has George W. Bush's adminstration had an impact on MetFilter in a concrete way? Beyond NewsFilter have you been seriously pressured at any time beyond the five bucks? Sorry for the double query. has Karl Rove or his proxy knocked on your door?

It's not ok to link to NAMBLA

matteo — Fri, 22 Jul 2005 11:54:43 -0800

"A link to NAMBLA is just wrong". I agree. At least on the front page, it's wrong. (more inside)

Deleting MetaTalk threads?

Ynoxas — Thu, 09 Oct 2003 12:00:35 -0800

Deleting MetaTalk threads?

Deleting blue threads, I understand and support. But deleting a metatalk thread is unexpected. Of course I'm not on the grey much. Maybe this happens all the time. This has been the first time in a very long time I've been interested in anything going on here so maybe I've just not noticed.

I would think a MetaTalk thread might be closed, but deleted too? That seems counter to what the grey is for, why it even exists. Maybe I just don't understand.

The grey is to discuss things you shouldn't discuss/don't belong on the blue. So now things in the grey are to be slashed as well?

I would prefer it not to be, but of course it is not my say. But I would like clarification, because there are other threads in the grey that have gone FAR BEYOND what I can only assume caused the demise of the affected one and survived.

(Deleted thread purposefully not mentioned so as to perhaps increase the lifespan of this question).

Censored?

waxpancake — Mon, 18 Nov 2002 11:42:20 -0800

"Once again, for the fourth time, I have been banned from, and censored by, metafilter.com for politically incorrect speech."

Metafilter: reported as inaccessible in China.

Steve_at_Linnwood — Sat, 16 Nov 2002 12:58:39 -0800

Testing complete for http://www.metafilter.com. Result: Reported as inaccessible in China