Is GN guilty of bias or just ill-informed?

Opal Some people do have political views akin to the Nazis.

BTW The Nazis weren't Fascists. There were very real differences between Nazis and Mussolini's Fascists.

Fascism is a political ideology just as Communism is. What emotional connotations does it have which Communism doesn't?

Views are views though, insulting or not. Why should certain views be given precedence over others.

Gransnet should not be judge and jury, in my view. Can't we police ourselves?.

I don't think it is bias - more the emotional connotations of the word fascist.

Simple really. Calling someone a communist is not an insult, just a description of their far left political beliefs. However, calling someone a fascist is, in my view, a deliberate insult and provocation, accusing them of being something akin to nazis, and is usually deliberately used by those on the left of politics towards those of us on the right. People who use that term are aware of it, and know exactly what they are doing when they use it. As do you.

oreaume presume

I oreaume it is considered acceptable to imply people are racists too! Or - what was it - embittered old crones?

I think personal insults should not be allowed on Gransnet, but they are. Of course we often disagree with another's posts, that's what discussions are for, but no thread should be allowed to descend into name-calling.

Agree with Ramblingrose Why is it necessary to label anyone - by all means argue against a persons point of view or opinion, should we not have left name calling back in the playground?

Surely the person who resorts to name calling and insults only proves how shaky their stand is and will have lost the argument.

Right wing bias that is hysterical, as a Conservative who after much soul searching and family conversations voted for Brexit I have been called many odious names on GN as have many others in my position.

trisher, they've no doubt got a list of words that flag up problems and trigger deletion, that's all. I expect that there's an assumption of older women being inclined towards right wing views (however outdated) and a wish to remove any potentially insulting terms.

I think it depends on the context.

If a remark is made which is deemed unacceptable by the recipient of that remark, then I think the recipient should be able to ask for the unacceptable post to be deleted.

Otherwise, I agree with trisher.

I don't think it should be up to the powers-that-be at Gransnet Towers to decide what is, or isn't, acceptable.

Without wishing to state the "bleeding obvious", why call people "communists" or "fascists" in the first place?

Surely it would be best to refer to the statement/argument made rather than the person who posted it and say why you disagree with the statement/argument made?

I expect that there is a well-meaning team of people in GNHQ who delete posts and that can lead to some inconsistencies in treatment of posts that include "insults".

Heated or childish when none of us have a clue except going on what someone writes.
However I would rather be called a communist than a fascist which brings to mind evil leaders. Maybe that is why it was removed and nothing to do with left or the right.

I refuse to discuss that remark as it is a direct violation of the GNHQ rule about cross threads and I would imagine an attempt to get the thread deleted. Stick to the subject why is it OK to call me "communist" but not OK to call anyone a "fascist".
You are probably right WWMk2. Sad isn't it?

I think it's a matter of connotation Trisher.
Although we all know that Communist parties & governments in Russia and China have been guilty of terrible atrocities against their own people, somehow the perception is that they are not quite so bad as Nazi Germany was.

I can't really explain it, but personally I wouldn't mind acknowledging a card-carrying Communist as a friend or acqaintance.
But a signed up member of a fascist organisation would be beyond the pale.
Interesting question.

I know nothing about our Admin staff but presume they are volunteers trying to keep things impartial.
Wouldn't it be best if we all tried NOT to make personal remarks at all, especially over political matters? Then Admin wouldn't need to remove posts.
I mean, someone's remarks may come across as 'nasty' and 'embittered' but to call someone one hasn't met names like that is non-productive and pointless. (Which doesn't mean the person who made them is non-productive and pointless).

I think that you Are probably correct trisher

But there will be an inbuilt bias to the right because of the demographics.

Perhaps GN prefer to reflect that in order to keep forum membership.

Is ‘nasty, embittered old crones’ acceptable ? It’s what you
called posters trisher .