Deceased Personalities.

That is certainly my impression. The question is: If true – why ?

Despite being a contributor, previously regularly, but more recently, occasionally,.

A dam sight more than Regular Charlie 😀

Moggy Mod 19,500 posts in 16 years.

Charlie 11,000 Posts in just over 3 years.

Lets face it to you and a few others it’s just a chat room LOL

A question which I was going to ask. My impression is that there are far fewer threads, far fewer contributors and far fewer observers than a year or so ago. Do the statistics support the impression?

It’s ‘repression’ if large numbers of contributors demonstrate by their numbers a continuing use for GD

If ever large numbers of contributors post on GD rather than the current handful then I’ll change my mind quite happily.

Moggy

I make no apologies that I have pressured, and will continue to pressure, the Webmaster to take down this General Discussion forum. It rarely serves any constructive purpose and is just a home for circular bickering which needs almost constant monitoring…

I must admit that I had no idea that you felt that way or that the General Discussion forum was under any threat!

In my view it does serve a purpose but I don’t envy the job of moderating here. As one of the more regular posters here I’ve tried to keep my posts civil and well within the forum’s code of conduct, I’ve even tried to inject a bit of humour into my arguments…

…but it looks like I will have to redouble my efforts (if not my ‘output’)! 🙁

There’s more than a hint of contradiction there ! It’s ‘repression’ if large numbers of contributors demonstrate by their numbers a continuing use for GD but are then denied because of the actions of some who find their personal beliefs and values challenged in a way not to their liking.

The purpose of GD is to permit an exchange of views that will, from time to time, be contentious, outrageous and feature sentiments and expressions that perhaps will not sit comfortably in polite society. That is to be expected. People who hold strong opinions will occasionally resort to intemperate language. An admonition should be sufficient unless the offence becomes persistent.

I supported the proposal for a ‘Britain at War’ forum and thought that at the least it could have been put to a forum vote. If any of us have criticisms of the way the forums are run then we should vote with our feet. As you have written, there are plenty of alternative sites to GD that would welcome more members, particularly if the arrival of the new members meant they were buying into a wider commercial activity as part of the ‘alternative sites’.

It’s not repression, what total nonsense.

We have recently had the excellent proposal for a “Britain At War” forum rejected on the basis that it isn’t aviation related enough.

On that basis this forum does not warrant its continuing existence.

You are perfectly free to go and air as many of your views on celebrities, politics, immigration and the rest on the thousands of fora and Facebook pages designed for that purpose.

Much as we’d like to believe it, the Key forums are not the only discussion area on the internet, nor even a very important one.

Moggy

I think this part of the forum serves a useful purpose. Nasty things don’t go away when you turn your back on them.
Although from the moderating perspective, it can’t be easy knowing where to draw the line. Both legally and morally.

I used to think so, too, Alan. But in more recent times it has seemed to lack the numbers of intererting and well debated threads of the past and certainly lacks much of the humour it was once invested with. As for shutting down argument, well there are plenty of other fora offering GD and when the quality of debate is diminished so is the threads raison d’etre.

That’s an excellent idea ! If something doesn’t square with your personal views and beliefs – get rid of it! That way we take a short cut to improving things; making life better; more harmonious; less fractious; more benign.

If one takes issue with something that many others find useful, then the answer is not to resort to repression but, either avoid or, resign.

I can honestly say that there are no celebrities dead or alive, whom I envy.
I certainly don’t believe that when you die, you should automatically be Canonised. Irrespective of your past life.

As far as our recent celebrity death is concerned. I bear that person no ill feeling. I didn’t particularly like them,
and in all fairness, one or two of the things they did were quite amusing.

My main criticism was that they didn’t act in the face of overwhelming evidence, to alleviate the suffering of others.
Nobody wanted to “Rock the Boat”. That is a known fact, as many others have testified.

I think this part of the forum serves a useful purpose. Nasty things don’t go away when you turn your back on them.
Although from the moderating perspective, it can’t be easy knowing where to draw the line. Both legally and morally.

Despite being a contributor, previously regularly, but more recently, occasionally, I’d support your case to the Webmaster. I wonder what other members feel.

My tuppence

Unlike Alan who claims all his negative comments are based on ‘fact’ others, and we have had a classic example lately, post misconceptions / falsehoods / lies based on their own envy and general maliciousness.

I have to read this stuff and I don’t enjoy it.

I make no apologies that I have pressured, and will continue to pressure, the Webmaster to take down this General Discussion forum. It rarely serves any constructive purpose and is just a home for circular bickering which needs almost constant monitoring.

So post away with unwarranted character assassinations, thinly veiled racism, regurgitation of ill-supported facts and all the rest. It just makes my case stronger.

Moggy

I wasn’t necessarily referring to the very recently deceased, more the subject in general.

To reiterate. A Eulogy Thread would serve that purpose perfectly. Otherwise threads are for freedom of expression within the Forum’s CoCs, as far as I am aware. Spite? Good grief! I have read the most chillingly spiteful exchanges on all manner of subjects here…..

The original thread started as a means of recording expressions of regret and sorrow at the passing of a much liked media personality. It wasn’t meant to provide an opportunity for sniping character assassination to even the slightest degree.

If you’re so inclined then start another thread with ‘spite’ as its central theme.

Very well said, Alan. And there was I thinking this was a discussion forum. We all have idols others will take down. So be it.

Perhaps someone should start a Eulogy Thread which would be exactly that. It would certainly be better than locking threads because sensibilities have been hurt.