BOARD TALK
The fastest growing tennis discussion forum on the planet.


Post Reply 
Forum Questions
Author Message
tented Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 11,618
Likes Given: 4,705
Likes Received: 3,392 in 2,108 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
Instead of deleting them, I moved all meta-discussion posts out of the doping thread, and put them here.

Right now, I don't have time to pursue this, but I promise to get back to it later ...
07-Dec-2014 11:32 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
GameSetAndMath Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 12,730
Likes Given: 2,373
Likes Received: 3,305 in 2,330 posts
Joined: Jul 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(07-Dec-2014 02:08 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  
(06-Dec-2014 07:06 PM)tented Wrote:  
(06-Dec-2014 06:18 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  There is clearly a discussion of specific players possibly doping going on in this thread, whether
or not the specific players are explicitly named.

Once again, here's the rule:

"Don't name players unless they have been explicitly implicated through failed or refused test(s)."

Broken named no player(s), nor made any direct accusations. Additionally, his post referenced the phenomena of certain users singling out and accusing a certain group of players, as opposed to others. Again, not naming names or directly accusing.

The rule is really quite straightforward: Don't name names in a way which directly accuses them of doping, unless they have been caught doing so. Don't write: "Player X has used PEDs" -- unless it's someone like Cilic.

If accusing a certain group of players is against the policy of the forum, the solution is to
ban such posts, which you have already done. Two wrongs do not make it a right. The way to fix it is not by accusing everyone around.

Let us face it. You happen to agree with the view of BS and so you are not clamping down
all these discussions of players showing "evidence" or not of possible doping. Whether the
players are named explicitly or not is immaterial. Any regular reader of the forum knows who
the players involved are.

This is my deleted post. I would like to thank the admins for restoring it.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference" - Mark Twain
08-Dec-2014 04:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Riotbeard Offline
Moderator
*****

Posts: 4,790
Likes Given: 5,528
Likes Received: 1,851 in 1,183 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(07-Dec-2014 06:24 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  
(07-Dec-2014 06:03 PM)kskate2 Wrote:  
(07-Dec-2014 05:21 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I was asked whether I did anything to report any posts that I found inappropriate. I did
by posting a message in that doping thread. The answer I got was that the post was indeed
allowed and my contention is wrong.

If everything that went on in that thread was within the rules and policies of TF, then
why are people asked to shut up?

Not every post is read by every admin or moderator. You creating a post in the thread is not the same as reporting a post. You cannot assume that every post gets read, that's why there's a reporting feature on this site.

I agree with you that reporting a post is the best way to get the attention of moderators.
I also agree that it is not possible for the admin or moderator to read every post.

However, as I mentioned (in the post that you quoted), my post was read by an admin
and I was told that my contention that certain posts violate the policy are erroneous.
I even tried to argue against it in vain.

I think you experienced informal moderation. Sometimes I know I (and other mods) try to cool things down with informal suggestions (or teasing) in threads instead of doing formal things like deleting posts or other moderating actions. Obviously it at some point went past informal moderation. Some of the posts you point to do flirt with the line, but I am not sure I think anything needed to be deleted. The truth is the forum is not run like a simple black/white system. We try to moderate based on context and take into account intent before taking harsher actions.

As you must realize, a lot of the restrictions on doping discussion are based on potential legal repercussions, so in thinking litigiously, there is a big difference between implications and direct accusation. And so I think that is why those posts were allowed to slide, not perceived biases. I would say to fans of all stripes, implications will only fan the flames (you know glass houses and such). The truth is none of us know what players put in their bodies (outside of those caught), so all the accusations, veiled or otherwise, do very little for creating interesting discussion within the parameters of doping discussion on the forum.
(This post was last modified: 09-Dec-2014 12:18 AM by Riotbeard.)
09-Dec-2014 12:10 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes Riotbeard's post:
Kieran (12-09-2014)
GameSetAndMath Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 12,730
Likes Given: 2,373
Likes Received: 3,305 in 2,330 posts
Joined: Jul 2013
RE: Forum Questions
I am aware of informal moderation.

My problem was that three other posters were going at it merrily, while I did not even take part in it. Finally, my post was the only one that got deleted while nothing happened to any of their posts.
I have to fight to get it back. Talk about justice here.

Anyway, all is well that ends well.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference" - Mark Twain
09-Dec-2014 12:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
tented Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 11,618
Likes Given: 4,705
Likes Received: 3,392 in 2,108 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 12:10 AM)Riotbeard Wrote:  As you must realize, a lot of the restrictions on doping discussion are based on potential legal repercussions, so in thinking litigiously, there is a big difference between implications and direct accusation. And so I think that is why those posts were allowed to slide, not perceived biases. I would say to fans of all stripes, implications will only fan the flames (you know glass houses and such). The truth is none of us know what players put in their bodies (outside of those caught), so all the accusations, veiled or otherwise, do very little for creating interesting discussion within the parameters of doping discussion on the forum.

Clap

Well put, Riotbeard.

Libel is illegal. Lawyers for the ITF, ATP, and WTA have been known to take action against entities which have engaged in it. I won't let Tennis Frontier get shut down, nor will I go to federal court, because someone here writes something libelous.

(09-Dec-2014 12:27 AM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  My problem was that three other posters were going at it merrily, while I did not even take part in it. Finally, my post was the only one that got deleted while nothing happened to any of their posts.
I have to fight to get it back. Talk about justice here.

Anyway, all is well that ends well.

Kskate2 asked that the thread get back on topic, which was the right thing to do, given what was happening.

When a couple of posts didn't comply with this, they were deleted from that thread (one by her, one by me), and now, as you see, yours was moved to this thread. As you say, all's well that ends well.
09-Dec-2014 03:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes tented's post:
1972Murat (12-09-2014)
Broken_Shoelace Offline
Multiple Slam Winner
********

Posts: 6,174
Likes Given: 915
Likes Received: 2,590 in 1,545 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 12:27 AM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I am aware of informal moderation.

My problem was that three other posters were going at it merrily, while I did not even take part in it. Finally, my post was the only one that got deleted while nothing happened to any of their posts.
I have to fight to get it back. Talk about justice here.

Anyway, all is well that ends well.

To be clear, you do understand that I was actually defending all implicated players from doping accusations, Federer-included, right?

I mean I know you have the thinnest skin known to man, but you can't possibly have missed my point when I asked Front why doesn't he accuse 33 year old superhuman players, and players who dominated the tour for four years? It's not to suggest that Federer is doping, but to highlight the flaw in his accusations towards Nadal and Djokovic (which of course, he never ever named -- not this week at least, but took the bait anyway). As in my whole point is, just like Federer, there is nothing to back up the claim that Nadal and Djokovic are doping. Zero.

Now, the fact that you somehow thought this post should have been moderated baffles me.

As far as your crusade about this topic, I really suggest contacting the authorities. I'm with you. Something ought to be done. And you are by no means constantly blowing this out of proportion for months now. Nope. Never. Ever.
09-Dec-2014 09:44 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
GameSetAndMath Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 12,730
Likes Given: 2,373
Likes Received: 3,305 in 2,330 posts
Joined: Jul 2013
RE: Forum Questions
I want the administrators to pay attention to the following general point, when they get time.

Think about the sequence of events that happened that lead to the TF even having a policy about
what can and what cannot be said about doping. All of this happened during the last month when
britbox was still with the management team. At that time, it was ok to have no holds barred discussion as there was no policy on it. It ended up with Moxie deleting a huge bunch of emails
after the fact.

Now, the recent episode, at least to me looks like the same chain of events. But, the difference this time is that TF had a policy, but the admins seem to have chosen not to clamp down the
discussion because of some vested interests in one persons view points.

The "informal moderation" of letting things develop and then somebody saying "guys cool it down" is simply not the way to go, especially in doping related discussions. There has to be clearly
delineated notions of what is allowed and what is not allowed and one that is implemented in
practice as well (independent of who the posters involved are) all the time, not just only when the
mods feel like imposing the rules. Otherwise, it is going to be emergency management and
fire hose operations. If you do have rules, they should not be selectively enforced.

Informal moderation works when attempting to control brawling of a small group of
children of the same family. The posters here are not children. They are adults. Moreover, there is a huge diversity here. We have a large number of posters, and they come from various countries, different cultures, different educational levels, different sexes, different attitude towards decent
behavior etc (not to mention different fanbases). I personally, don't see how informal moderation
will work especially on high voltage topics like doping.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference" - Mark Twain
(This post was last modified: 09-Dec-2014 01:11 PM by GameSetAndMath.)
09-Dec-2014 12:38 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
GameSetAndMath Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 12,730
Likes Given: 2,373
Likes Received: 3,305 in 2,330 posts
Joined: Jul 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 09:44 AM)Broken_Shoelace Wrote:  
(09-Dec-2014 12:27 AM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I am aware of informal moderation.

My problem was that three other posters were going at it merrily, while I did not even take part in it. Finally, my post was the only one that got deleted while nothing happened to any of their posts.
I have to fight to get it back. Talk about justice here.

Anyway, all is well that ends well.

To be clear, you do understand that I was actually defending all implicated players from doping accusations, Federer-included, right?

I mean I know you have the thinnest skin known to man, but you can't possibly have missed my point when I asked Front why doesn't he accuse 33 year old superhuman players, and players who dominated the tour for four years? It's not to suggest that Federer is doping, but to highlight the flaw in his accusations towards Nadal and Djokovic (which of course, he never ever named -- not this week at least, but took the bait anyway). As in my whole point is, just like Federer, there is nothing to back up the claim that Nadal and Djokovic are doping. Zero.

Now, the fact that you somehow thought this post should have been moderated baffles me.

As far as your crusade about this topic, I really suggest contacting the authorities. I'm with you. Something ought to be done. And you are by no means constantly blowing this out of proportion for months now. Nope. Never. Ever.

On the contrary, you are the rudest poster around. If I create a poll thread in this forum as to who should be given the rudest poster award, you will win it hands down. The only reason I am not doing so, is because I am here to discuss tennis and to discuss the personalities of other posters.

To be clear, I am for free discussions on any topic. It is the TF that has moderation and boundaries.
All that I am asking for is for the rules to be clear and uniformly enforced.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference" - Mark Twain
(This post was last modified: 09-Dec-2014 01:32 PM by GameSetAndMath.)
09-Dec-2014 01:14 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
kskate2 Offline
Administrator
******

Posts: 15,809
Likes Given: 1,964
Likes Received: 1,914 in 1,356 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 12:38 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I want the administrators to pay attention to the following general point, when they get time.

Think about the sequence of events that happened that lead to the TF even having a policy about
what can and what cannot be said about doping. All of this happened during the last month when
britbox was still with the management team. At that time, it was ok to have no holds barred discussion as there was no policy on it. It ended up with Moxie deleting a huge bunch of emails
after the fact.

Now, the recent episode, at least to me looks like the same chain of events. But, the difference this time is that TF had a policy, but the admins seem to have chosen not to clamp down the
discussion because of some vested interests in one persons view points.

The "informal moderation" of letting things develop and then somebody saying "guys cool it down" is simply not the way to go, especially in doping related discussions. There has to be clearly
delineated notions of what is allowed and what is not allowed and one that is implemented in
practice as well (independent of who the posters involved are) all the time, not just only when the
mods feel like imposing the rules. Otherwise, it is going to be emergency management and
fire hose operations. If you do have rules, they should not be selectively enforced.

Informal moderation works when attempting to control brawling of a small group of
children of the same family. The posters here are not children. They are adults. Moreover, there is a huge diversity here. We have a large number of posters, and they come from various countries, different cultures, different educational levels, different sexes, different attitude towards decent
behavior etc (not to mention different fanbases). I personally, don't see how informal moderation
will work especially on high voltage topics like doping.

GSM,

Thanks for your suggestions on how this forum should be run, but I'm absolutely certain mgmt can handle it from here. And for the record, although most posters here are adults, from time to time we do encounter childish behavior.
09-Dec-2014 02:57 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
kskate2 Offline
Administrator
******

Posts: 15,809
Likes Given: 1,964
Likes Received: 1,914 in 1,356 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 01:14 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  
(09-Dec-2014 09:44 AM)Broken_Shoelace Wrote:  
(09-Dec-2014 12:27 AM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I am aware of informal moderation.

My problem was that three other posters were going at it merrily, while I did not even take part in it. Finally, my post was the only one that got deleted while nothing happened to any of their posts.
I have to fight to get it back. Talk about justice here.

Anyway, all is well that ends well.

To be clear, you do understand that I was actually defending all implicated players from doping accusations, Federer-included, right?

I mean I know you have the thinnest skin known to man, but you can't possibly have missed my point when I asked Front why doesn't he accuse 33 year old superhuman players, and players who dominated the tour for four years? It's not to suggest that Federer is doping, but to highlight the flaw in his accusations towards Nadal and Djokovic (which of course, he never ever named -- not this week at least, but took the bait anyway). As in my whole point is, just like Federer, there is nothing to back up the claim that Nadal and Djokovic are doping. Zero.

Now, the fact that you somehow thought this post should have been moderated baffles me.

As far as your crusade about this topic, I really suggest contacting the authorities. I'm with you. Something ought to be done. And you are by no means constantly blowing this out of proportion for months now. Nope. Never. Ever.

On the contrary, you are the rudest poster around. If I create a poll thread in this forum as to who should be given the rudest poster award, you will win it hands down. The only reason I am not doing so, is because I am here to discuss tennis and to discuss the personalities of other posters.

To be clear, I am for free discussions on any topic. It is the TF that has moderation and boundaries.
All that I am asking for is for the rules to be clear and uniformly enforced.
TF will continue to have boundaries and moderation otherwise it could get shut down. If you want to have discussions free from moderation, you should start your own blog.
09-Dec-2014 03:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like kskate2's post:
Kieran (12-09-2014), Riotbeard (12-09-2014), tented (12-09-2014)
Riotbeard Offline
Moderator
*****

Posts: 4,790
Likes Given: 5,528
Likes Received: 1,851 in 1,183 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 12:38 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I want the administrators to pay attention to the following general point, when they get time.

Think about the sequence of events that happened that lead to the TF even having a policy about
what can and what cannot be said about doping. All of this happened during the last month when
britbox was still with the management team. At that time, it was ok to have no holds barred discussion as there was no policy on it. It ended up with Moxie deleting a huge bunch of emails
after the fact.

Now, the recent episode, at least to me looks like the same chain of events. But, the difference this time is that TF had a policy, but the admins seem to have chosen not to clamp down the
discussion because of some vested interests in one persons view points.

The "informal moderation" of letting things develop and then somebody saying "guys cool it down" is simply not the way to go, especially in doping related discussions. There has to be clearly
delineated notions of what is allowed and what is not allowed and one that is implemented in
practice as well (independent of who the posters involved are) all the time, not just only when the
mods feel like imposing the rules. Otherwise, it is going to be emergency management and
fire hose operations. If you do have rules, they should not be selectively enforced.

Informal moderation works when attempting to control brawling of a small group of
children of the same family. The posters here are not children. They are adults. Moreover, there is a huge diversity here. We have a large number of posters, and they come from various countries, different cultures, different educational levels, different sexes, different attitude towards decent
behavior etc (not to mention different fanbases). I personally, don't see how informal moderation
will work especially on high voltage topics like doping.

We are consistent (or at least as much possible). Note that your post was restored, because you made a valid point. Informal moderation can often be a great substitute for draconian measures. There is no reason for a tennis forum to be run like a formalized state as you suggest it should. Sometimes flirting with line is ok, but it also can be useful for a mod or admin to step in and remind people where the line is and to perhaps retreat a little bit. It's a very transparent model better than just deleting every questionable post.

We're just normal people doing our best and attempting to keep the other normal people who graciously own the forum from getting sued.
09-Dec-2014 03:53 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 3 users Like Riotbeard's post:
GameSetAndMath (12-13-2014), kskate2 (12-09-2014), tented (12-10-2014)
Broken_Shoelace Offline
Multiple Slam Winner
********

Posts: 6,174
Likes Given: 915
Likes Received: 2,590 in 1,545 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 01:14 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  
(09-Dec-2014 09:44 AM)Broken_Shoelace Wrote:  
(09-Dec-2014 12:27 AM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I am aware of informal moderation.

My problem was that three other posters were going at it merrily, while I did not even take part in it. Finally, my post was the only one that got deleted while nothing happened to any of their posts.
I have to fight to get it back. Talk about justice here.

Anyway, all is well that ends well.

To be clear, you do understand that I was actually defending all implicated players from doping accusations, Federer-included, right?

I mean I know you have the thinnest skin known to man, but you can't possibly have missed my point when I asked Front why doesn't he accuse 33 year old superhuman players, and players who dominated the tour for four years? It's not to suggest that Federer is doping, but to highlight the flaw in his accusations towards Nadal and Djokovic (which of course, he never ever named -- not this week at least, but took the bait anyway). As in my whole point is, just like Federer, there is nothing to back up the claim that Nadal and Djokovic are doping. Zero.

Now, the fact that you somehow thought this post should have been moderated baffles me.

As far as your crusade about this topic, I really suggest contacting the authorities. I'm with you. Something ought to be done. And you are by no means constantly blowing this out of proportion for months now. Nope. Never. Ever.

On the contrary, you are the rudest poster around. If I create a poll thread in this forum as to who should be given the rudest poster award, you will win it hands down. The only reason I am not doing so, is because I am here to discuss tennis and to discuss the personalities of other posters.

To be clear, I am for free discussions on any topic. It is the TF that has moderation and boundaries.
All that I am asking for is for the rules to be clear and uniformly enforced.

I can be pretty rude and you can be pretty thin skinned. The two aren't mutually exclusive. The difference is I own up to it.
10-Dec-2014 06:20 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
tented Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 11,618
Likes Given: 4,705
Likes Received: 3,392 in 2,108 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 01:14 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  To be clear, I am for free discussions on any topic. It is the TF that has moderation and boundaries.

"Free speech" is a chimera. It doesn't actually exist anywhere. There are always restrictions on what people can and cannot say. In the US, for example, it's illegal to make threats against the President. With that one law, absolute free speech is impossible.

TF has moderation and boundaries because it wants to remain in existence. People who want to engage in libel, or spread conspiracy theories, or do their "No, I'm not a doctor, but I play one on the Internet" act can do so elsewhere.
10-Dec-2014 08:38 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes tented's post:
kskate2 (12-11-2014)
Kieran Offline
Running around the backhand...
*********

Posts: 11,667
Likes Given: 7,076
Likes Received: 4,634 in 3,059 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(10-Dec-2014 08:38 AM)tented Wrote:  "No, I'm not a doctor, but I play one on the Internet"

Clap Clap

Exactly what it is...

Approved
10-Dec-2014 09:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
GameSetAndMath Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 12,730
Likes Given: 2,373
Likes Received: 3,305 in 2,330 posts
Joined: Jul 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(09-Dec-2014 02:57 PM)kskate2 Wrote:  
(09-Dec-2014 12:38 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  I want the administrators to pay attention to the following general point, when they get time.

Think about the sequence of events that happened that lead to the TF even having a policy about
what can and what cannot be said about doping. All of this happened during the last month when
britbox was still with the management team. At that time, it was ok to have no holds barred discussion as there was no policy on it. It ended up with Moxie deleting a huge bunch of emails
after the fact.

Now, the recent episode, at least to me looks like the same chain of events. But, the difference this time is that TF had a policy, but the admins seem to have chosen not to clamp down the
discussion because of some vested interests in one persons view points.

The "informal moderation" of letting things develop and then somebody saying "guys cool it down" is simply not the way to go, especially in doping related discussions. There has to be clearly
delineated notions of what is allowed and what is not allowed and one that is implemented in
practice as well (independent of who the posters involved are) all the time, not just only when the
mods feel like imposing the rules. Otherwise, it is going to be emergency management and
fire hose operations. If you do have rules, they should not be selectively enforced.

Informal moderation works when attempting to control brawling of a small group of
children of the same family. The posters here are not children. They are adults. Moreover, there is a huge diversity here. We have a large number of posters, and they come from various countries, different cultures, different educational levels, different sexes, different attitude towards decent
behavior etc (not to mention different fanbases). I personally, don't see how informal moderation
will work especially on high voltage topics like doping.

GSM,

Thanks for your suggestions on how this forum should be run, but I'm absolutely certain mgmt can handle it from here. And for the record, although most posters here are adults, from time to time we do encounter childish behavior.

I guess you misunderstood the point of my "adult" remark. I was simply trying to point out
that given that these are all adults, simply asking folks to cool it down may not work as a
moderation strategy. I do agree with you that adults do act in a childish manner from time to time.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference" - Mark Twain
13-Dec-2014 11:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
GameSetAndMath Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 12,730
Likes Given: 2,373
Likes Received: 3,305 in 2,330 posts
Joined: Jul 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(10-Dec-2014 08:38 AM)tented Wrote:  
(09-Dec-2014 01:14 PM)GameSetAndMath Wrote:  To be clear, I am for free discussions on any topic. It is the TF that has moderation and boundaries.

"Free speech" is a chimera. It doesn't actually exist anywhere. There are always restrictions on what people can and cannot say. In the US, for example, it's illegal to make threats against the President. With that one law, absolute free speech is impossible.

TF has moderation and boundaries because it wants to remain in existence. People who want to engage in libel, or spread conspiracy theories, or do their "No, I'm not a doctor, but I play one on the Internet" act can do so elsewhere.

Again my remark is being misunderstood or misused. I was basically trying to say to BS that
I am not thin skinned and if he chooses to do so he can even name Federer explicitly and
even directly allege him of possible doping as far as I am concerned.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference" - Mark Twain
13-Dec-2014 11:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
GameSetAndMath Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 12,730
Likes Given: 2,373
Likes Received: 3,305 in 2,330 posts
Joined: Jul 2013
RE: Forum Questions
I find the closing of thread "Carlos Bernardes being withdrawn from Nadal matches" to be
without any basis. By and large in that thread people were discussing the issue fair and square.
There were many different opinions expressed by fans of many players as well as by neutral
observers. It sure was serving a good purpose.

Sure one or two posters used foul language (but mostly while discussing foul language used
by players). Also, I did not observe any personal attack of one poster by another. Finally,
there were no unsubstantiated claims or possible libel suits involved here.

This appears to be a clear case of moderators closing a thread because they do not
want further exposure to a specific topic. No No If some posters used bad language etc,
their posts should be deleted and/or they should be warned or banned. But, closing a
reasonable thread based on pure likes/dislikes is violating fundamental freedom of expression.
This kind of thing will not serve good for TF in the long run, IMHO.

"Never argue with a fool; onlookers may not be able to tell the difference" - Mark Twain
26-May-2015 10:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes GameSetAndMath's post:
Billie (05-26-2015)
tented Offline
Potential GOAT
*********

Posts: 11,618
Likes Given: 4,705
Likes Received: 3,392 in 2,108 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
^ And here I was afraid you would overreact. Wink

The thread was only closed for a few hours to allow everyone some time to chill a bit. It's open again.

And for the record, nothing was deleted.
(This post was last modified: 27-May-2015 01:07 AM by tented.)
27-May-2015 01:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[-] The following 1 user Likes tented's post:
kskate2 (05-27-2015)
federberg Offline
Grand Slam Champion
*******

Posts: 3,417
Likes Given: 1,033
Likes Received: 867 in 637 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
(27-May-2015 01:07 AM)tented Wrote:  ^ And here I was afraid you would overreact. Wink

The thread was only closed for a few hours to allow everyone some time to chill a bit. It's open again.

And for the record, nothing was deleted.

Most of us were asleep anyway, so I guess we did chill Lay Down Laughing
27-May-2015 04:05 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Broken_Shoelace Offline
Multiple Slam Winner
********

Posts: 6,174
Likes Given: 915
Likes Received: 2,590 in 1,545 posts
Joined: Apr 2013
RE: Forum Questions
This thread is the most hilarious one on TF. "Violating freedom of expression"...a phrase actually used on a tennis forum.
08-Jun-2015 04:32 AM
Find all posts by this user Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)