UK Online Safety Laws - I, and therefore the site, are at risk

[NauticalGent]

4. Have a new moderator who's specific role is to only moderate the other moderators. It is not for the squeamish. I suggest a new moderator because otherwise it is like the police policing themselves. While moderators police the members, who is policing them? Currently no one, but I suggest this new role be created to tackle that issue.

Additionally, if you want recomendations for this individual, I have a few I would suggest. I am willing to do that in this thread as well as support why I nominated them.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

I have noticed my name taken favorably as an "ethical" moderator. Thank you, those who offered those opinions. However, all of you who offered those thoughts must realize I am quite as guilty as others in bearing a certain bias. Though religiously, I am atheist, I have a cultural background of growing up in a Christian family and ethnically, I am 1/4th European Jewish. It would be very difficult for me to stay out of emotionally charged discussions.

As to the suggestions:

1. Close the Politics forum (until the repeal of The Online Safety Act). Works for me.

2. Create a list of words that will get starred out. Example words could be: Muslim, Islam, Islamist, Jews, Israel, Palestine, nazi. The word list would be more extensive. Probably tedious, but it might help.

3. Increase the moderation threshold within The Watercooler. Do you mean that Watercooler threads need approval before becoming visible, similar to what is happening in the Sample Databases area? If so, then that might help.

4. Have a new moderator who's specific role is to only moderate the other moderators. It is not for the squeamish. I suggest a new moderator because otherwise it is like the police policing themselves. While moderators police the members, who is policing them? Currently no one, but I suggest this new role be created to tackle that issue. I agree it should be a new moderator. But here, I fear that the new moderator would have the problem of being the bearer of bad news and would have to be a strong person to operate in the face of unpopularity. Not only that, but the person in this role would have to be able to resist temptation in choosing sides on the subject matter around any particular moderation action. I saw my name as a potential choice. I explicitly DO NOT volunteer for such a position as I have already developed a reputation regarding my social, religious, and political beliefs and therefore question whether I could isolate myself that well.

Having offered my opinions, I also offer Jon any help I CAN give to get through this situation.

 

[NauticalGent]

All ideas you disagree with are hate speech. Are you the judas?

Wow. Uncalled for. You really cant help yourself, can you?

When the "AWF rogue moderator" is mentioned here and anywhere else, everyone knows who they are referring to. No names have ever been mentioned, yet you reveal yourself , living up to your billing and leaving no doubt.

A hit dog will howl...

 

[The_Doc_Man]

If you knew that Egypt annexed Gaza and Jordan annexed Samara and Judea in 1948 while they were trying to destroy Israel then you're one in a million. And that is just ONE of the many facts of history that the Hamas supporters don't know. If you didn't know, then be honest and say thank you.

Pat, STOP BRINGING THAT TOPIC INTO THIS THREAD!!!!!! I have (with Jon's agreement) shut down two non-tech threads over this topic already. LEAVE IT BE!!!!!!!

I've been on this forum for about 24 years. In the last couple of years you have shown a level of fervency in your discussion that is unfamiliar. I wonder if something has happened outside the forum that is coloring your responses. (No, don't tell me, publicly or privately - the comment is more a request for introspection on your part.) Whatever it is that is bugging you, try to leave it at the door. You are a good person but you have become abrasive.

If at some moment in the forums you believe you are dealing with a fool, may I remind you of Mark Twain's relevant comments?

After the first couple of rounds, this one becomes relevant: "Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference".

When someone could not keep quiet,... "It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear stupid than to open it and remove all doubt".

When dealing with ingrained beliefs: "It's easier to fool people than to convince them they have been fooled".

When STILL dealing with ingrained beliefs: "The truth has no defense against a fool determined to believe a lie".

And this has a certain sting to it: "Let us be thankful for the fools; if not for them, the rest of us could not succeed".

 

[GPGeorge]

Spoiler:

The people who think they know best about how things should be run, went around you.

Now that they’ve won, they feel emboldened.

Spoiler:

I have no doubt this will continue regardless of the subject matter or who’s moderating. That was never the real issue. The issue has always been that the owner wouldn’t bend to their will, everything else is just an excuse in my opinion.

You have hit the nail on the head.

 

[DHookom]

I recall someone in this thread bringing politics into a technical forum. I should have reported it. Thankfully this has happened only once. Some technical threads get a bit dicey since most of us are stuck in our ways and OPs won’t head to our advice.

I hope for my sake, getting a bit snarky isn’t grounds for expulsion.

 

[Isaac]

You can be held responsible if you knowingly allow illegal content to remain

It does indeed seem like that right there is the main 'meat' of the OSA law. I don't think they're going to jump on you as soon as someone posts something in violation, but rather, if you let it remain there. How picky they'll be about stuff that remained there for a good while but you didn't realize it was there is hard to predict, but the guardian recently reported:
1) a man was notified by the police that he had to remove a sign in his shop that said "due to scumbag thieves, you will need a key to access that merchandise". "Scumbag" might offend thieves, so the sign had to go.
2) not to change the subject, but I've heard the UK has gotten so anti-self-defense that if you so much as carry gardening equipment (which includes a knife) from the store to your house, you can be hassled by the police, because you might be carrying a weapon.

Is it just me or is the UK gone mad? the criminals are the good guys and the good guys are the bad guys. so many thigns these days have been turned upside-down, with the one called the other and the other called the one. Reminds me of Isaiah 5:20

 

[Minty]

The UK or to be more accurate the Media and Reporting from the UK has become almost as polarised as the US.
It is very difficult to find neutral reporting.

A lot of it is clickbait headlines, and biased.

We do still have free speech, contrary to some reports, but in too many circumstances we appear to be heading down the route of "extreme wokeness" where any tiny minority, or more accurately someone claiming they represent the tiny minority, stirs up a load of "opinion" that someone is "Offended/prejudiced/discriminated/belittled/ignored" pick one, there are at least another 20 adjectives that could be used.

When you dig into it (through a number of sources) most of it is bunkum and nothing comes of it, but it's added to the background noise.

Unfortunately, as most of our politicians have the common sense of a deranged baboon and are led by their noses by soothsayers and snake oil salesmen, they think they need to legislate to help the "oppressed", without having the first clue about the consequences or implications.

@Isaac we have had very strict laws about carrying knifes for a long time. They must be below a certain size and shape or considered a offensive weapon. This does mean that some gardening implements fall into that description, and an over zealous policeman might take you to task over it. It doesn't stop 14 year olds stabbing each other though.

To the matter in hand - I've ignored the watercooler for some time. The affliction of TDS (which appears to afflict both supporters and haters in equal measure from the rhetoric and general gibberish involved) and never the twain shall meet stances mean it holds zero interest, so its removal would not affect me from a reading perspective.
However, if it affects the small income stream that keeps the site afloat, then we need some method of keeping those that stoke its fires enabled, and I suspect strong moderation is the only answer.

There... I've managed to avoid answering any of the questions directly, so must now stand as an MP.

 

[NauticalGent]

The affliction of TDS (which appears to afflict both supporters and haters in equal measure from the rhetoric and general gibberish involved) and never the twain shall meet

Brillant!

 

[Isaac]

never the twain shall meet stances mean it holds zero interest

This is profound. Indeed, the most interesting of all cases is when you find two people from opposing sides either finding some common ground or becoming willing to empathize in a meaningful way, and perhaps even move their stakes. That being quite rare, I can understand what you mean about finding it uninteresting. I engage partly because it actually has taught me a thing or two, and partly for no good reason other than a compulsion

 

[Isaac]

That is the rub, if the watercooler is over regulated then fewer people participate, presumably less clicks. Less regulation and we run a foul of the safety act.

True point, however, I think the watercooler-type forums could still maintain a fairly good traffic if heavily moderated.
Now we'd just need to find more people willing to do the moderation.
And I for one, (and I say this 100 percent honestly), I'd be a bit confused about which posts needed to come down. Obviously some would be easy to determine, but I suspect many would not, with reasonable people on both sides of the opinion of 'does this violate the act or not'.

Defaming? Ok, I understand that, but would we delve into the legal (usa or uk) definitions of that? What if I just said "So-and-so is a nutcase".
Offending? Heck, that's an incredibly wide net. Any Democrat would hate most of what I say, and many Republicans would hate much of what I've said in the last few months. But it's not blanket statements that degrade a person based on race or gender etc., I don't think.

I can see moderating it being pretty confusing. NOT that I am voting for a complete shut down, that would ruin the fun and by the way, there is plenty of non-technical forum discussions that are not political or social issues - ranging from google voice to linux to plenty of random stuff, and I'd hate to get rid of the baby with the bathwater.

 

[Jon]

I have now removed the Politics section.

 

[Isaac]

Probably a safe bet, thanks Jon for working so hard to try to determine where to draw the line in a way that preserves as much freedom as possible - tough decision and just the time and effort it's taking you to use a scalpel rather than a hatchet is noticed and appreciated by us!

 

[NauticalGent]

What Isaac said...

 

[Steve R.]

BBC Director General Resigns over Alleged Fake News About Trump

The director general of the BBC announced his resignation over a documentary which was accused of misleading viewers about President Trump.

www.breitbart.com

'Very Dishonest People': Trump Slams BBC Bias Crisis as Top Execs Quit

The BBC, which justifies its existence on quality and impartiality, is dishonest and antidemocratic, Trump says, as senior executives resign.

www.breitbart.com

The director general of the BBC and the head of its news division have announced their resignations over a documentary which was accused of spreading fake news about U.S. President Donald Trump.

Recently there have been stories emerging in the press of (ordinary) people, in England, being arrested for trivial instances of "disinformation" and "hate" speech. Now a major news organization, the BBC, edited a story to maliciously denigrate Trump. Would this constitute "disinformation" that should be prosecuted under the current speech policies of the British government?

PS: As an aside one has to wonder how honest the media is. An interview of Harris, when she was running for president, was edited to make her look good just before the election. Then there was the infamous 60 Minutes interview of Trump where the interviewer said Trump was lying and it turned out that he was telling the truth and the interviewer was lying to set him up.

 

[amorosik]

You have hit the nail on the head.

Sorry, but I'm still collecting 'saying'
What exactly mean "..You have hit the nail on the head.." ?

 

[GPGeorge]

Sorry, but I'm still collecting 'saying'
What exactly mean "..You have hit the nail on the head.." ?

"100% correct."

Professional carpenters drive nails accurately; they always strike nails exactly so that they go into wood smoothly and correctly.

Amateur carpenters don't do that. They frequently strike nails at an angle or not quite squarely. The nails bend.

So, if you hit the nail on the head, you have done it 100% correct.

 

[The_Doc_Man]

@amorosik - since you collect sayings, every now and then on YouTube you might find a comedy routine by George Carlin (now deceased). He could be vulgar, but sometimes he was quite astute, and he LOVED the oddities often found in English.

One of his observations that really got me was that ... "We park in a driveway and drive in a parkway."

One of his philosophical questions was "If you try to fail, and succeed at it, is that a success or a failure?" (paraphrased)

Then, there is this point to ponder: “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

He loved to point out verbal redundancy such as "subject matter", "total abstinence" (if it ain't total, it ain't abstinence), "honest truth" (as opposed to "dishonest truths"?) - commonly used phrases, generally with that redundancy as a form of emphasis.

 

[Isaac]

Then, there is this point to ponder: “Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that.”

I've been thinking about this sentence for about 4 minutes straight....Hmm

 

[CJ_London]

There is also
If a stupid idea works, it’s not stupid