Where should the line be drawn?

Strict, centrally regulated censorship: no mature/offensive content whatsoever.
0
No votes
Moderate, individually regulated censorship: be yourself, but respectfully so.
14
93%
No censorship whatsoever: anything goes.
0
No votes
Other (please explain)
1
7%
 
Total votes: 15

User avatar
Jun 2nd, '08, 21:24
Posts: 1598
Joined: Jan 11th, '07, 16:13
Scrolling: scrolling
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

Limits of censorship and restraint

by scruffmcgruff » Jun 2nd, '08, 21:24

***Firstly, this has nothing to do with the impersonation issues brought up by the recent IM debacle, and I would like to keep it that way.***

I just wanted to start a (hopefully) non-confrontational thread to get everyone's opinions on what kind of behavior we should allow or restrain on the IM. I get the feeling that there is a lot of tension about this issue, and I hope that we can come to some sort of compromise and maybe introduce a democratic feel to our regulations. At the very least, I hope we can identify the specific problems and eventually hold some sort of vote.

My own thoughts:

As I understand it, Adagio does not seem to have a big problem with moderate amounts of tomfoolery/adult language/etc. On the other hand, I understand that many TeaChat members are sensitive to flirting/cursing/etc, and treat the internet like the Serious Business it is.

I think we should try to speak as though we were in a mature public place; not a private conversation in a home/over the phone/in a frat house/etc., but not necessarily a kindergarten classroom either.

So, if it were up to me, I would allow moderate amounts of innuendo and cursing, as long as it stops short of *freak* and cybersex.

What about you all? Let's try to keep inflammatory comments at bay (at least save them for another thread), so this can remain a useful discussion. So, um, yes, let's censor ourselves in the censorship thread. :)

User avatar
Jun 2nd, '08, 21:34
Posts: 1487
Joined: Sep 25th, '07, 19:51
Scrolling: scrolling
Been thanked: 1 time
Contact: brandon

by brandon » Jun 2nd, '08, 21:34

With the exception of last Friday's little tiff, which I seem to have completely missed, it is incredibly clear who the real problems are. Self rule please.

User avatar
Jun 2nd, '08, 21:48
Posts: 1598
Joined: Jan 11th, '07, 16:13
Scrolling: scrolling
Location: SF Bay Area, CA

by scruffmcgruff » Jun 2nd, '08, 21:48

Brandon just reminded me of something I want to add to my previous comments. I feel that the moderators, Chip in particular, are getting blamed for much of this censorship, and I don't think that is fair. It's not the moderators that are the problem, it's the people who abuse the courteous laxity of enforcement that are the problem.
Tea Nerd - www.teanerd.com

User avatar
Jun 3rd, '08, 11:20
Posts: 552
Joined: Aug 23rd, '07, 00:42
Location: Somewhere in the wilds of Montana, but never without a teacup.
Contact: skywarrior

by skywarrior » Jun 3rd, '08, 11:20

My thoughts are sort of mixed. There are a lot of people who seem to take the slippery slope argument when it comes to interaction. "So and so said X, and X is just like Y, IMNSHO, so we should allow everything..." That's kind of the troublemakers you get on any forum or email list. I know, I've moderated a bunch and got hit as the bad guy all the time.

Basically I feel that the moderators can do whatever they deem appropriate. In most cases, it has to do with preventing flamewars and stopping people from leaving wholesale. It's a fine line and a balancing act that sometimes requires different solutions. Even so, they're human and they're bound to make mistakes.

Let's be clear: the 1st amendment doesn't cover private chat rooms and IMs. It deals with Congress making no law that restricts freedom of speech. A chat room/message board owner can restrict all they want. So, if Adagio wanted to restrict chat on pink elephants, they can do that.

So, I really don't have much complaint about how the IM and boards are run. I feel that if people don't like it, they can start their own somewhere else.
It is a mistake to think you can solve any major problems just with potatoes -- Douglas Adams.

User avatar
Jun 3rd, '08, 12:13
Posts: 1936
Joined: May 22nd, '06, 11:28
Location: Trapped inside a bamboo tong!
Contact: hop_goblin

by hop_goblin » Jun 3rd, '08, 12:13

I agree with most of your comments. I do believe that as a semi-private forum, it is in the rights of Adagio to moderate as they see fit. And as for Chip and Mary, they are agents of Adagio and are only carrying out their duty as mods. However, I do have reservations in placing any restrictions (with in reason) in th ITD. This is a private forum and therefore should not be holden to the restrictions placed on general chat. Can it really be called "Intense" Tea Discussion if we have to wear are white gloves and rememeber to lift our pinkies when we drink tea! MHO

User avatar
Jun 3rd, '08, 17:12
Posts: 1559
Joined: Jan 28th, '07, 02:24
Location: Fort Worth, TX

by Space Samurai » Jun 3rd, '08, 17:12

We've had similar conversatiosn in the past. Adagio has fairly clear rules already in place on this subject that are not overly constricting.

User avatar
Jun 5th, '08, 21:49
Posts: 183
Joined: Oct 6th, '07, 17:17
Location: Denver, CO

by Thirsty Daruma » Jun 5th, '08, 21:49

Truly and honestly I'm simply not empassioned enough by amendment rights and all that in a company provided chat room.

I don't have time in life to hold grudges against my best friends and workers. An online tea buddy just doesn't command enough emotional value to make me angry, sad or stressed in real life.

So, whatever the mods need to do. We almost always talk about tea anyway. Not much to censor in there or otherwise.

Locked