The changing face of Gransnet?

If the offending post were left, even for a short time, with a remark from the moderator that "This post has been reported for [whatever reason] and will be deleted in half an hour" then those who realise that it is "not guilty" would have a chance to object and point that out. A stay of execution might follow. Same with bans, the reason for a bvan could be given.

As it is, many posts are arbitrarily deleted only because they have been reported - the logic seems to be that if someone doesn't like a post, then the person complaining is always right. This is not how it used to be done - I reported something a few years ago (can't even remember what) but was told that it didn't break the guidelines and didn't warrant deletion. So it stayed.

Who decides if its dangerous nonsense janeainsworth or just an alternative viewpoint

But it is not presented as a ^ view^ Vaccine deniers and conspiracy theorists don't preface their posts with "I think ... " or "My opinion is . ." They tell us confidently that the vaccine hasn't been tested or that it kills people, that Covid is not a dangerous illness and it is all hyped so that we can be controlled, that Bill Gates is going to have nano-bots injected into us so that he can listen to every one of us phoning our families, and a whole lot more rubbish that has been disseminated over the unquestioning internet.

Well for example I once followed a link of this nature and it had been disallowed as promoting fake information. I should think that was enough!

Have a go at the game and see how it is done.
www.goviralgame.com/en

Who decides if its dangerous nonsense janeainsworth or just an alternative viewpoint

When it's been repeatedly pointed out to the originator of the thread that their post has been discredited as fake news and the url link that there provided to substantiate their theory is actually blocked as fake news? One particular poster has started a number of such threads recently and it's really not taken much research to prove that what they've presented as fact is actually fiction. When anxieties are already heightened, it's unreasonable to add to those fears by by presenting badly researched rubbish as fact.

This thread has made me feel very sad. I feel like I have lost old friends!

When ‘an alternative viewpoint’ becomes dangerous and harmful misinformation. There are morons on the internet advising people to ‘cure’ an autistic child by getting them to drink a concoction containing bleach, for example.

sodapop

Who decides if its dangerous nonsense janeainsworth or just an alternative viewpoint

Janeainsworth is a trusted poster who has proved time and again to go through any research with a fine tooth comb and only posts factual information. Not something I can say about some other posters who post only, ie, a headline or some such, without searching for facts first and try to pass it off as an alternative viewpoint.

sodapop Who decides if its dangerous nonsense janeainsworth or just an alternative viewpoint

others have already answered your question but I’ll just add that the video I referred to earlier contained the information that one of the Covid vaccines could not only alter your DNA, but also contained a microchip which would enable Bill Gates to track your every movement.

We may think this is so laughable that nobody would believe it, but some people do and I do believe that GN is right to refuse to disseminate such material.

Interestingly, the website which hosted the video is now not visible in a google search for it. I think that tells you something too.

Thank you Kalu

Just to add my two penn’orth to the mix - I agree there are those who make great efforts to verify any information that they post, and others who copy chunks of very questionable data to support their own viewpoints.

Moderating a platform such as this must be, on times, a thankless task - you cannot please everyone. However, some of the decisions taken by Gransnet of late are, to say the least arbitrary. Future monitoring should be far more sensible, we are adults not children.

So some people think the covid deniers shoud have a lifetime ban? It really isnt as simple as saying no lifetime bans.

Chewbacca
The problem seems to be, as has been demonstrated on this thread today, that some posters appear to follow their victim around from thread to thread, provoking them until they get a response and then hit the report button when they've provoked a reaction. It's been noticed by so many people and causes a great deal of resentment when it's the victim that gets punished.
I raised this issue with HQ a while ago about the thin dog lady and a particular poster but they wouldn’t lift her suspension at that time.

No nannytopsy, several posters have tried but GNHQ will not budge. Meanwhile, her stalker continues......

I first came to GN some years ago.. I was a regular poster then and enjoyed good quality debates on current affairs/politics etc. There was a broad spectrum of opinions and we managed to argue the toss like mature adults! I went to various meet ups (those were the days!) as far apart as Guildford and Darlington ( I happened to be visiting family) and enjoyed meeting the people behind the nom de plumes.

Nowadays I pop in less often. Quality of debate feels less 'mature' on a number of threads with wild assertions and no evidence /sources offered!

There are more GNers from across the world.. that changes to slant of conversations ... cultural differences are interesting!

I also feel, occasionally , some new posters arrive clearly just to post nonsense and stir up a hornets nest though most new posters feel genuine

A number of posters seem to have become friends which is a good thing. However sometimes it feels like there are partisan groups that rush to defend a 'friend' if another poster gives an opposing point of view, or simply differs in their opinion. Then the whole thing becomes a tedious tit for tat squabble.

I do feel there is more active moderation, though not very consistent!

Personally feel that the only reason to delete an account should be for breaking the law: isms , inciting violence etc.

Disagreements and personal spats might need a cooling off period but not removal from the site.

As have a number of us, Nannytopsy. You would think if so many posters have contacted HQ, they would have at least stopped and questioned why so many are saying exactly the same thing.
Our opinions don't really matter, I think.

Deleted posts, which have alluded to a poster, also lead to speculation about who is banned or not banned. I heard today that a poster has seemingly been banned, when I know for a fact she hasn't. The rumour mill goes into overdrive and posters end up being unnecessarily upset.

May I venture an opinion?
GRANSNET is a discussion forum is it not where it should be obvious that what is being posted represents the opinions of the poster?
Where there are links to websites purporting to purvey information or news there is a clear risk of dodgy websites peddling fake news and these need to be highlighted in the same way that Twitter and Facebook opted not to carry Trump’s clearly deranged tweets.

Our opinions may be well-founded in fact or (if you ‘ll pardon the expression) “bonkers” and no more than fiction, but we are adults and presumably able to tell the difference and to call out invidious posts.

You have a real point Galaxy but from what I have read on this thread we are not talking about racist, sexist, homophobic or offensive contributions by members being deleted, but rather deletions based on the contrary opinions of some others.
If we stick to saying what we would not shrink from saying to somebody’s face -and if course I do not include any form of personal abuse- I think we cannot go far wrong.

This “ it’s turned into a bunfight “ irritates me.

Oh yes - treating us like schoolgirls having midnight feasts and bun fights in the dorms!

And - "do not say anything you would not say to someone's face" is another admonishment:
Well, if someone went on endlessly banging the same old drum I would say "Oh, give over, dear, give it a rest".

Galaxy So some people think the covid deniers shoud have a lifetime ban? It really isnt as simple as saying no lifetime bans

Who has said or implied that?

I have to say, this continues to be a civilised thread, without any acrimony, everyone allowed to post their views without it descending into the proverbial bun fight. Sorry Callistemon

Well, if someone went on endlessly banging the same old drum I would say "Oh, give over, dear, give it a rest".

Well then you're more polite than me Callistemon!

A number of people have said no lifetime bans Jane.

I think we are getting distracted by racism, covid deniers etc. The thing that needs to be done is an open listing of the rules that GNHQ moderate by and an explanation of why a poster has been banned, suspended whatever given to them. Also a right of appeal.
If GNHQ want rules stuck to they need to tell us what the rules are in clear language. At the moment the "spirit of Gransnet" doesn't cut it.
In these days of snowflake mentality it is easy to pull the offended card but we are grown ups aren't we? I speak as someone who was on the receiving end of a posters wrath about a remark on here but we sorted it out by me explaining what I had meant and they accepting they had jumped to the wrong conclusion. Neither of us resorted to reporting each other.
We need the site to be moderated but in an even impartial open way.

Calli Exactly.. I would speak out to someone who was irritating or revisiting the same arguments over and over deliberately to annoy... 'Get of your hobby horse' or 'Let's agree to differ' or in desperation ' FFS .. stop talking nonsense' Do GN moderators see us all as rather delicate Ladies in Lavender?

I have very strong, but minority views, on a couple of topics. I rarely start a post on these as I know what the response will be. I will post if the topics appear on others threads.