Community Forum

[MrFussy]

The term Community is derived from Latin, Communitas, and broadly translates to the sharing of gifts (ideas, interests opinions etc.) when people gather together, as in a Forum.

The Community members on here all share a common bond and that is Escorting, whether you are Punter, Pimp, Escort we are initially drawn here for that same reason. Though the reason we are here is common to us all, different views, likes, dislikes are posted and discussed in a predominantly harmless fashion. I like the wide range of topics available, I like to see differing viewpoints. If there's a thread I don't like I don't read it, if there's a thread I find interesting I may or may not choose to participate and air my views. On an Internet forum such as this degree of democratic choice is key for us to exist on this Forum.

Obviously as with any Forum there will be a heated debate, disgruntled members, disparaging remarks and most importantly an outlet to voice concerns, raise issues etc. away from the main Forum. That is why there are rules and Moderators, I for one totally agree with the need for Moderators and fully support the predominantly excellent role they play in this Forum, albeit in some extreme circumstances. I have not always supported this role but hey, I was wrong.

The point in me posting this is to highlight that with such a community, moderating in a balanced, visible, democratic fashion with clear communication to other members is key...recent events regarding removal and locking of threads and reasons given for actions are not democratic...

- Opinions should be encouraged, so what if they condone the reasons users are banned, or congratulate a banned user, it is an opinion, an opposing opinion can be given, that is the art of debate and moderation
- If decisions are made without clear communication and rationale to members, questions will quite rightly be asked.
- Members asking for help or raising issues to Mods should not prevent them voicing a negative reaction to Censorship actions such as removing comments or deleting threads.
- There may be exceptional circumstances that mean topics cannot be discussed on these boards, but they should be exceptions, not the norm.....

It appears to me that the ability to react in a balanced manner and to debate issues head-on have been forgotten or have been overruled by censorship and dictator type actions.

The current approach to Delete, Lock, Remove opinions is a far easier option than allowing an Adult community to debate or to be privy to decisions, but take note, a moderated democratic forum is not about the easy option, it is hard work and requires the support of the community...the coming together (Communitas).....

[samlad]

It depends on the situation really. I've made a point about last night's events on Lucy's thread she started just after midnight.

If this thread is kept on topic regarding over-moderation that's fine, but if it's yet another continuation thread, it will be removed.

Let me quote you here MrFussy:

There may be exceptional circumstances that mean topics cannot be discussed on these boards, but they should be exceptions, not the norm.....

It's funny really... if it is an exceptional circumstance, would you still want to know why?

I think generally people are pretty much left to say what they want. If it's a thread glorifying the ban of a user, it will just be removed. We don't condone the actions of a banned user and a ban is not always appropriate to discuss publicly.

[City Gent]

I think generally people are pretty much left to say what they want.

That quote must win the 'I don't believe you said that' award Sam


CG

[samlad]

That quote must win the 'I don't believe you said that' award Sam


CG

Why thank you... it's nice to know I'm still full of surprises

[I am evil Homer]

That quote must win the 'I don't believe you said that' award Sam


CG

Why thank you... it's nice to know I'm still full of surprises

And this one wins "I could not give a F*¤k, what you think" award!

[MrFussy]

It depends on the situation really. I've made a point about last night's events on Lucy's thread she started just after midnight.

If this thread is kept on topic regarding over-moderation that's fine, but if it's yet another continuation thread, it will be removed.

Let me quote you here MrFussy:



It's funny really... if it is an exceptional circumstance, would you still want to know why?

I think generally people are pretty much left to say what they want. If it's a thread glorifying the ban of a user, it will just be removed. We don't condone the actions of a banned user and a ban is not always appropriate to discuss publicly.

As I said, there MAY be EXCEPTIONAL circumstances that cannot be discussed. In any democratic forum, the emphasis should be on providing as much information when and wherever possible.....trotting out the line 'we cannot divulge' happens far too often on here...IMHO......if it was an exception and communicated as such, then No, I do not think it right to publicise. (I'm nosy, so may still want to know but that is different)

You bring up the point about 'Glorifying the ban of a user'....to me that means taking pleasure in the fact that they got banned, which seems to be a good case for locking a thread.....

It's not only about over-moderation, it is about the fact that censorship and deletion should be discouraged....debate and moderation supported and encouraged.

It's funny really....you state 'If this thread is kept on topic regarding over-moderation that's fine, but if it's yet another continuation thread, it will be removed'...that is the core issue here...why make a threat to delete a thread, just because you deem it's content unfit for the boards........

[City Gent]

Why thank you... it's nice to know I'm still full of surprises

It's not all your full of Sam

I for one don't want this to get personal, that's what the argument is about.

You obviously read my comments where I said Anita and I had many a verbal battle and I thought 99.9% of what she wrote was the opposite end of the spectrum to my views. I can't say I liked or disliked her I didn't know her, just most of the time her views were different to mine.

My opinion is as long as a debate is not getting personal it should be allowed to run, sometimes it gets heated but so would any disagreement.

You are totally correct when you say you have a duty to close and delete threads where posters are posting personal details, but for a normal discussion sometimes it would be best to let it run in my opinion.


CG

[samlad]

As I said, there MAY be EXCEPTIONAL circumstances that cannot be discussed. In any democratic forum, the emphasis should be on providing as much information when and wherever possible.....trotting out the line 'we cannot divulge' happens far too often on here...IMHO......if it was an exception and communicated as such, then No, I do not think it right to publicise. (I'm nosy, so may still want to know but that is different)

You bring up the point about 'Glorifying the ban of a user'....to me that means taking pleasure in the fact that they got banned, which seems to be a good case for locking a thread.....

It's not only about over-moderation, it is about the fact that censorship and deletion should be discouraged....debate and moderation supported and encouraged.

It's funny really....you state 'If this thread is kept on topic regarding over-moderation that's fine, but if it's yet another continuation thread, it will be removed'...that is the core issue here...why make a threat to delete a thread, just because you deem it's content unfit for the boards........

Perhaps people just enjoy picking on issues that are unfit for the boards. If you see the number of reported posts we get a day from many posters, you'd probably understand that. In most cases, action isn't taken. Last night it was emphasised the tally of threads deleted, but this was only for one topic anyway.

I think we did provide as much information as possible in this situation.

[royaler]

Excellent post Mr.Fussy, obviously one into which you put a lot of time and thought and even a little bit of research!
I have not been paying much attention to this banning issue ...... Anita's banning is the first one really that has caught my attention ....... and even then I think I would just like to know what happened or what was said so that I, in true democratic fashion could decide for myself whether the banning is justified or not!
I think the main point is that in any democratic community the members of that community should be happy to trust the leaders of that community to take certain actions and make certain decisions always for the benefit and protection of the community and its members. However that trust will only be won, no I should say earned, if there is a clear and open line of communication in both directions.
So, I feel that when any sort of censoring or banning has taken place then community members should be told about it ...... in summarised / key point fashion. We as members should be able to confirm to ourselves that decisions have been made in accordance with the agreed policies and principals of that Community.
Now I have to hold my hand up here because I'm not sure, and have never bothered to find out if such policies or principals are laid down, but if they are not they should be. My own guiding principal has always been to have respect for all those around you and I would call on that principal big time around here.
Now just to finish I'd like to refer loosely to the Laws of Natural justice. I am a bit hazy on this but I think they have a relevance here. Firstly a person should always have the right to tell their side of the story. Secondly in a democratic community a person should be given the opportunity to communicate their side of the story to other community members. Thirdly the person should be afforded the opportunity to have representation if they so need and fourthly they should have the right to appeal any decision made. I know this is very selective use of the Laws of Natural Justice but I think its very relevant here!
Thanks for starting this thread Mr.Fussy!

[samlad]

Excellent post Mr.Fussy, obviously one into which you put a lot of time and thought and even a little bit of research!
I have not been paying much attention to this banning issue ...... Anita's banning is the first one really that has caught my attention ....... and even then I think I would just like to know what happened or what was said so that I, in true democratic fashion could decide for myself whether the banning is justified or not!
I think the main point is that in any democratic community the members of that community should be happy to trust the leaders of that community to take certain actions and make certain decisions always for the benefit and protection of the community and its members. However that trust will only be won, no I should say earned, if there is a clear and open line of communication in both directions.
So, I feel that when any sort of censoring or banning has taken place then community members should be told about it ...... in summarised / key point fashion. We as members should be able to confirm to ourselves that decisions have been made in accordance with the agreed policies and principals of that Community.
Now I have to hold my hand up here because I'm not sure, and have never bothered to find out if such policies or principals are laid down, but if they are not they should be. My own guiding principal has always been to have respect for all those around you and I would call on that principal big time around here.
Now just to finish I'd like to refer loosely to the Laws of Natural justice. I am a bit hazy on this but I think they have a relevance here. Firstly a person should always have the right to tell their side of the story. Secondly in a democratic community a person should be given the opportunity to communicate their side of the story to other community members. Thirdly the person should be afforded the opportunity to have representation if they so need and fourthly they should have the right to appeal any decision made. I know this is very selective use of the Laws of Natural Justice but I think its very relevant here!
Thanks for starting this thread Mr.Fussy!

I agree entirely that trust is earned, not immediately expected.

For fear of contradicting my comment about this being a continuation thread that will be deleted, I will summarise the ban:

- Over the past few days, a particular poster has had a slanging match with another poster and PM's were exchanged and the issue was considered resolved

- The poster in question has been one that has been banned several times in recent times and continued to push the boundries

- The poster in question made some serious accusations about certain members of this site elsewhere which reinforced her attitude towards E-I and other members. This was brought to our attention by a poster here. Given the comments, it was felt that she has no respect for this community we are all part of so it was decided that she shouldn't be a part of the community

That's it in a nut-shell.