Is intolerance getting worse on GN?

I can honestly say that the only time I have ever reported a post is when it has been obvious spam. I may disagree with certain posters from time to time, but come on, we're all adults - surely we can agree to disagree without it becoming nasty?

No, it flipping doesn't, Merlot. I think it's possibly people who don't 'know' the whole person.

FGT was open about her political leanings. Well able to express her beliefs and hold her own. I can’t recall other admirers of the Donald. I could never really work out how she stood by the awful Mr T 😁

‘Agree to disagree’ - is one d.I.l.’s favourite and regular expression 😂

Iam64

Why make yourself a grumpy victim, wooden spoon, “permission granted “ is such a passive aggressive and imo unnecessary comment.
I don’t agree with your conclusion that it’s ‘leftie’ posters pressing that button. I’m probably seen as ‘leftie’ except by true lefties😉. I never reported FGT, GSM or any other right leaning posters.
FGT and GSM could be ‘argumentative and refuse to accept an alternative view’. That’s politics - we reach our belief system point and tend to stay there. Bring them back I saw

Nobody who knows me would ever call me a grumpy victim Iam64. Therein lies the problem. Everybody is a stranger on here and views of that person are formed by what they write, or not. And in fact I was replying to LizzieDrip and what she wrote about my post. I’m entitled to do so.

Iam64

FGT was open about her political leanings. Well able to express her beliefs and hold her own. I can’t recall other admirers of the Donald. I could never really work out how she stood by the awful Mr T 😁

Clearly neither could those who reported her.

I rest my case!

I don't remember so much reporting and banning in the early days - or am I wrong?

Not sure. The other day I was reported for saying that laughing about a very serious and tragic was sickening. It was reported for being a personal attack. I never said the person was sick, but that the use of laughing emoticon was 'sickening' in the circumstances.

There were certainly a lot more deleted posts and threads, kitty. Our wrists were slapped but it took a lot for a poster to be banned.

HQ were definitely more tolerant in those days.

merlotgran

MayBee70

I think people are being unfair to gransnet HQ. I honestly don’t think that they ban people because of reported grievances, either personal or political but because of an overview of an individuals posts over a long period of time that they feel put the forum into disrepute.

But that brings us back to the ‘who is right?’ argument.

FGT was a supporter of Reform and Donald Trump. I gather most of us are not.

Does that make her disreputable?

Don’t ask me. Ask HQ. They’re the ones who banned her. Anyway, why is it assumed that people are banned because they’ve been reported? Maybe HQ actually keep an eye on what’s going on? All the other forums I’m on have moderators that occasionally ban people.

I actually think it goes back to the Scottish Referendum, which inflamed some tempers to the point where I heard some families became estranged, and nobody dared show a poster for either side for fear of a brick through their window, then of course clearly Brexit and the GE following it. The repercussions are still a very personal matter to many people.
Attitudes seemed to harden, views were expressed more forcibly and personalities, rather than opinions became the deciding factor.
There has been a similar polarisation in society -black or white, with no shades of grey.
Discussion degenerates into a bunfight at the drop of a hat, tempers flare - and reports and accusations of racism, bullying, intolerance etc follow.

Maybe I too wondered if it’s a reporting thing or if they (the moderators) just keep an eye on the more inflammable subjects

It seems to me that some people pounce on you if you have different views to them, they follow you around and no matter what topic you comment on they have it in for you.

We all have different views and should be allowed to air them. I miss GSM very much as she was honest, very intelligent and extremely helpful to many people on here. She most definitely did not deserve to be banned without warning. I hope one day she will return.

Yes I miss her, we fought like cat and dog on some 'feminist' issues, but I had a lot of time for her.

FGT Is going through heartbreaking times atm..
free speech is a persons right.. we all have opinions…personally I find it disgusting that FGT has been banned

Weren't we told once the GNHQ didn't do 'active surveillance' and relied on reports?

But seriously, if you have been reported by anonymous person(s) and subsequently banned, would you really want to come back? Especially if you have a distinctive style of posting or a particular skill.

Come back and worry in case the anonymous reporter(s) to do so again because they don’t like something you wrote and this time, also because they may also resent your reappearance.

kittylester

Weren't we told once the GNHQ didn't do 'active surveillance' and relied on reports?

Yes we were.
When I was suspended or received a warning I was told that I had been reported.
Through PMs other members who have been on the wrong end of the report button have been told the same.
What I disagree with are the double standards between GN and MN.
I’m sure those of us who are on both sites have noticed it.
I’m no wilting violet but I’ve sometimes said ouch at some of personal comments.

Mollygo

But seriously, if you have been reported by anonymous person(s) and subsequently banned, would you really want to come back? Especially if you have a distinctive style of posting or a particular skill.

Come back and worry in case the anonymous reporter(s) to do so again because they don’t like something you wrote and this time, also because they may also resent your reappearance.

Many have. You just have to watch your back or have a wingman 😉

I was reported by a someone a few years ago when men twerking in front of toddlers in scanty clothing in libraries was deemed to be acceptable to one or two other posters. I was utterly appalled that anybody could ever think this was ok and said so in the strongest terms.

merlotgran

MayBee70

I think people are being unfair to gransnet HQ. I honestly don’t think that they ban people because of reported grievances, either personal or political but because of an overview of an individuals posts over a long period of time that they feel put the forum into disrepute.

But that brings us back to the ‘who is right?’ argument.

FGT was a supporter of Reform and Donald Trump. I gather most of us are not.

Does that make her disreputable?

Well said merlotgran

Although I don't agree with FGT's views, many people do, here as well as in the USA, and she should be allowed to express those views unless they are against guidelines. How can GN be brought into disrepute by expressing the views of so many people?

As FGT was always polite I fail to see how she broke guidelines unless we are not allowed to express legitimate views.

I started the Glastonbury thread thinking it would be enjoyable not a political football! Unfortunately, due to other commitments, I haven't been able to watch it and hope to catch up soon.

I don't think I recall a time, since Brexit, when there has been as clear a division or split, whatever you want to call it, in our society - I'm thinking of, broadly putting it, those who agree with Reforms POV, versus those who to varying degrees profoundly disagree with their whole "world view", be it on climate, race, "big state" versus "small state".

If one feels passionately about politics as many of us do, I honestly don't think that there are times we can "Agree to Disagree".

That doesn't give licence for personal attacks, I don't if it's specified on this board as it is on another I am familiar with, "address the post, not the poster".

What is happening in Gaza atm, for example, it's not possible to "agree to disagree" when the POV are so strong, so passionately felt. Or those extraordinary days that followed events in Southport - (other examples are available).

I dont think that the moderators comb through someones posts, unless the level of complaints are such that a ban is on the cards, at which point, I would expect them to review all that persons posts, in order to reach a fair decision.

It's certainly not "always the right" that have been banned or suspended for long periods of time. I can think of two posters whose views are left wing who've had this happen in the time I've posted on Gransnet.

I have reported only extreme racist posts (that day when the Southport attacker was at first wrongly identified as a refugee who arrived in the UK by boat in 2023 and unfounded speculation he is Muslim.) is an example. I doubt I was alone that day.

The issue of "looking at the whole person" is should we ban someone who has in the eye of the moderators but who is suffering a great deal in their personal lives?

That is a difficult one. Many posters live with appalling situations but choose not to reveal it. Does that mean that someone who has been very open is therefore given special consideration?

I don't have a view on this, one way or another, btw, I am just making a point about the complexity of the situations that the moderators are dealing with.

So my response to the O/P is that maybe different posters place a different "weight" on the significance of political discussions, for some it is their chief interest in their lives or very significant:
and those who don't feel strongly maybe just cant relate to that passion/level of interest, and take a perfectly reasonable - to them - POV, of "live and let live", agree to disagree".

What’s happened to FGT? I was thinking earlier I haven’t seen her name recently.

So my response to the O/P is that maybe different posters place a different "weight" on the significance of political discussions, for some it is their chief interest in their lives or very significant

Posters should not be telling other posters which musicians they should or should not enjoy listening to, what they should be watching on TV etc.

It's just plain rude.

The only posts I report are the scam ones or people advertising their wares. My sense is that the banned ones are mostly perceived as right wing rather than left wing because,to me, the ‘far left’ is far more prevalent on here than the ‘far right’. Interesting to see if this post is banned, I suppose.
I have never ,ever , come across anyone really far right on here I must say but plenty the other way. And before I am attacked as far right I would say 90% of the time I am a Labor voter though I certainly wouldn’t vote for Starmer, he needs to go.