In the hope this will be allowed here – re B*rma thread deletion

It seems amusing that a mythical cache of buried Spitfires can make grown men lose all sense of balance and decorum. It appears most of you cannot be trusted to discuss a mythical cache of buried Spitfires without it getting very personal! If only this anger could be directed at something useful…

I think it was a small minority who were having the spats that lead to suspension of the thread. A major problem with any thread that becomes long is repetition by new people coming to the thread not having read previous posts. That is perhaps understandable in this case. The previous time it was suspended I suggested deleting all posts after arounder #2000 which would have left all the valuable well researched posts and the first round of debate. This would have been quick and easy for the mods.

Thank you for those kind words 😀

After discussion and some judicious editing it will reappear in (nearly) all its customary glory.

But this will be days, rather than hours.

This remains the case.

I fear Mr Brockman may now feel it is not worth posting on the forum anymore

This is not the case.

Just bear with us a while longer please.

Moggy
Moderator

I fully support the decisions the moderators make. They have a very difficult job to do.
Pauses to wipe something brown off my nose.

I would prefer to see the thread locked rather than taken down as there were many very well researched posts. These posts are a valuable resource which took the contributors some considerable time to produce and they deserve to remain available.

May I suggest that on this thread that the mods use powers they already have and after one public warning place a temporary ban on the transgressor. Presumably it isn’t possible to ban from just the one thread?

Paul

Incidentally I have posted a thread about possible buried aircraft in a UK quarry 🙂

I reiterate what I said on the other thread.

When the Burma thread is open, the three of us end up monitoring it almost constantly, as without fail it spills over into personal attacks. None of us have the time or energy to be doing so day in, day out, especially when we are trying to earn a crust on our own account. Two of us are self employed, so any time taken looking after that thread is potentially one less meal in my childrens mouths.

There must always be a clear limit on ‘free’ speech. It comes in when direct, personal attacks are made against other individuals, and/or against their professional standards. I have no issue with ‘Robust’, but it never stops there. I know that not all will agree with that, but that is my line in the sand.

I have no intention of taking out insurance for something I do for free. Sorry John, but no.

As to censorship – this does not stop anyone discussing the subject by email, on the phone, in person, or on any other from of social media. That is up to you. As such, it isn’t censorship, or even close. It is us as moderators saying that we are nor prepared to adjudicate the fight any longer.

Bruce

“getting very personal”. That’s rich coming from you.

What makes the Key forums so interesting even riveting, are the entrenched opinions, the vehemently argued aspects of the matter, the ebb and flood of aggressive comment and the irreverence of the occasional contributor. I support it and look forward to it. My life would be the poorer without it for sure.

As for the moderators, I have my ‘run ins’ with them. And I’m sure this will continue but, they do a rather good job of maintaining a balance and more importantly they often maintain it with humour.

If Key are at all worried about the prospect of being embroiled in a legal dispute or, if the moderators think that they might share some responsibility thus making them slightly quick on the censorship trigger then there is, perhaps, a way of dealing with this.

It was possible and maybe still is, to buy a legal expenses, indemnity insurance. It isn’t there to enable you to indulge an excess of legal revenge but it does enable you to defend yourself if you look like being sued in a civil action. Your legal bills or, a large portion of them are paid by your insurers.

If the insurers decide that the risk is unusually high, then the insurance premium will reflect this, which cost could be shared by all the forum members and contributors. Given the huge number of members, the cost per could be as little as £5 per year. Just a guess.

There is another benefit. If the opposition know that you have a legal expenses insurance, strangely, they become less enamoured of a law suit.

Any step that makes it less likely that the mods will exercise their ‘blue pencil’ is a step worthy of consideration. Censorship is detestable.

It seems amusing that a mythical cache of buried Spitfires can make grown men lose all sense of balance and decorum. It appears most of you cannot be trusted to discuss a mythical cache of buried Spitfires without it getting very personal! If only this anger could be directed at something useful…

why was his new thread/post deleted

http://forum.keypublishing.com/showthread.php?134534-VOLTAIRE-ON-FREEDOM-OF-SPEECH-(Actually-Brockman-on-Burma)

Specsavers? 😀

Thanks Moggy.

What that man (above)said …

Totally agree that orginal thread in question had reached the “handbags at dawn” stage for the umpteeneth time too many, and probably required locking and a decent “cooling off period” but I felt Andy Brockmans seperate new post made some valid points re robust argument being a valid part of any process (so long as it does not descend into personal attacks/slanging matches), which now also seems to have vanished – or do I need to visit the opticians?

AB did not, IMHO attack anyone, all he did was ask some valid questions, so why was his new thread/post deleted, and not allowed to run until Mods felt it too had reached the personal attack/total impasse stage…

Whether AB and his team’s report were “right”, “wrong”, “valid”, or “seriously flawed” is irrelevant, so long as the dicussion it provokes is carried out in an adult manner, then it can only help further the discussion/debate. I totally agree that petty nitpicking, or seemingly deliberate “obtuseness” does the posters, nor the forum as a whole any favours, but robust, maturely framed, debate is surely to be welcomed?

I fear Mr Brockman may now feel it is not worth posting on the forum anymore and that, surely, would be a loss to us all, as was the near loss of Andy S earlier on in the saga….

If legal action against Key has been threatened, then Mods, please make that fact clear in any “thread locked” post(s), or in a seperate “Why we locked the “XYZ” Thread” post.

Are those Sp****res that may, or may not be buring under My***ar now beyond any further/future discussion on the forum?

Anyone fancy starting a thread about a hypothetical(of course 😉 situation involving rumours, farmers, and digs to find incarcerated second world war fighters in a State (upper case S) that may, or may not, be in the Far East, and in state (lower case s)that may or may not be factory-fresh and ready to go…..

Thanks
Paul F

P.S. Ah, I see Moggy had replied while I was key-bashing…thanks Moggs….Please ignore most of this post….

Wholly inaccurate.

I don’t know about the moderators answering it. I can. It was brought about by bowing to intimidatory threats.

Despite the Supreme Court’s ruling on the Twitter judgment, free speech seem to be regarded still, as conditional.

I would rephrase it as ‘concern’ over the possibility of Key being open to legal action, nothing stronger than that. There is no suggestion of threats of legal action being made, certainly none have filtered down to moderator level.

After discussion and some judicious editing it will reappear in (nearly) all its customary glory.

But this will be days, rather than hours.

Moggy
Moderator