Is intolerance getting worse on GN?

There were certainly a lot of posters banned/removed/excluded - call it what you like - from GN about a year ago, and we all had to change our names and beg to return. I would have hoped that period was long gone, but it still appears there is still someone sneakily out there trying to exclude people they don't like.
I'm very careful. Even a bit of humour or a daft quip can get purposely misinterpreted or twisted, so sadly I'm not surprised that on the political thread reporting probably happens frequently.

Kandinsky

It does appear to be the rightwing posters who get banned more often, their posts obviously get reported a lot.
GN is predominantly leftwing, and I suppose users want to be surrounded by people who think the same as them.
There was a post on the Glastonbury thread from someone saying they wouldn’t listen to Rod Stewart anymore because she found out he supports Reform. That’s very extreme.
So that’s what you’re dealing with on here. It’s usually political views that get people banned ( unless You’re an out & out troll ) so most people avoid the N&P threads. I certainly avoid them as much as possible these days.

Thank you for your post, I agree with you. It does feel predominantly left wing and as a Reform supporter it does feel that expressing my support is inviting brickbats. Yet Reform are gaining support countrywide.

I am acutely aware of what I post now.

Having been the victim of the report button and a subsequent suspension.

It does appear to be the rightwing posters who get banned more often, their posts obviously get reported a lot.
GN is predominantly leftwing, and I suppose users want to be surrounded by people who think the same as them.
There was a post on the Glastonbury thread from someone saying they wouldn’t listen to Rod Stewart anymore because she found out he supports Reform. That’s very extreme.
So that’s what you’re dealing with on here. It’s usually political views that get people banned ( unless You’re an out & out troll ) so most people avoid the N&P threads. I certainly avoid them as much as possible these days.

I’m with you Kitty. 👍

I often avoid threads where I want to make a comment but know I will be bombarded with nasty comments. What happened to free speech ?

Agree with the OP.

We're on the same Eastenders thread and honestly, posting about a TV soap is a light hearted chatty thing to do, inoffensive and the type of thing you might chat about with a friend over a cup of coffee.

Same with the Glasto thread.

I was quite surprised to see such rudeness on both the threads.

Hello everyone. What happened to FGT...how would we know that someone was banned? Have I missed an announcement or something? Ps would never report someone I disagreed with- only hateful trolls/ spam.
I enjoy GN in that it's a place of textured discussion and opinion. I used to think it would be all about grans boasting about their GC- but not at all !

I have been on Gransnet from the beginning and I think there has been an increase in short posts, making very negative judgements on people and events, without including any reason or evidence whatsoever.
There has also been an increase in opening posts that can only be described as "goady" and set the tone for inflammatory debate from the start.
There have always been posters with strong views on left and right, but there used to be far more evidenced discussion.

Well, takes all sorts to make a world, as the saying goes.

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.

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.

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

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".

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 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.

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 😉

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.

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.

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

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

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

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.

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

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.

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.