Banned from TGP

Status
Not open for further replies.
AlGrenadine said:
I guess you can tag @scottp

When a people chooses security over freedom he gets none of them
Click to expand...


I don't want this to devolve into an argument about free speech.... but social media generally are private forums.

So, I'm just going to suggest that you read about Constitutional Free Speech and if it applies to private social media. Then think about how the terms/conditions we agreed to enable the moderators to do whatever they want.
 
JRod4928 said:
Moderation is the middle ground.

The issue is usually no one agrees with how much moderation is required. We're seeing this in society today. Generally people are cool with moderation until their ideas (or themselves) are squelched.... personally, I'd rather have open discussions than censorship.
Click to expand...

Agreed. The real issue over there is that some ideas are allowed, and some aren't. And when someone speaks out about ideas they don't like, the will actually delete comments or entire threads. Even when there is civil discussion.

Here's an example. A bunch of us were having an amazing conversation there about "Truth vs. Opinion". It was an extremely civil discourse, and even though a couple of people tried to derail it, it was likely one of the best and most interesting conversations I've ever had online about that topic. Well, there are some people there that either have their way with their ideas, or the report anyone and everyone that disagrees with them. And the mods, rather than looking at the context of the reported content, just start deleting things. Especially if the person doing the reporting is one of their favorites. And as long as you follow their ideologies, even if the topics are "against the rules", they won't moderate that thread until they get a comment that doesn't follow their ideologies.

And then there are those that are extremely passive/aggressive with their comments, trying to incite people to get all riled up. And even if you don't get riled up, but ask that person to stop being passive/aggressive, you get warnings/bans because that person reports you saying you are harassing them. It's unbelievable. And again, it's so blatant that they play favorites, it's unbelievable.
 
Last edited:
JRod4928 said:
I don't want this to devolve into an argument about free speech.... but social media generally are private forums.

So, I'm just going to suggest that you read about Constitutional Free Speech and if it applies to private social media. Then think about how the terms/conditions we agreed to enable the moderators to do whatever they want.
Click to expand...

Which is why any forum/social media site that censors one type of speech but not another, is now acting as a publisher. This is the crux of the issue. If you have rules, they are for everyone. Once you start picking and choosing who to apply those rules to, things devolve.

The other issue is that the owners of TGP own many other music forums. They have become one of the only choices for guitar relates discourse on the internet in the US. And their moderators, across the board, are equally suspect in how they apply the rules they profess.
 
I saw the writing on the wall over there within the first few days several years ago. I left and deleted my account. I understand it's been reinstated but I haven't been back to see. Crap place as far as I can tell.
 
Jason Scott said:
You're equivocating. I was referring to the choice you referenced between moderation and anarchy, not participation.
Click to expand...

Lol. If anything, perhaps I misunderstood your original post regarding having a choice. Sorry if I did. But I agree that we don't have a choice of the type/style of moderation.

.... And aren't we all equivocating to some amount? We're bordering political discussion that is not allowed on the forum, which extremely ironically could get the thread locked. If anything we SHOULD be equivocating.
 
JRod4928 said:
.... And aren't we all equivocating to some amount? We're bordering political discussion that is not allowed on the forum, which extremely ironically could get the thread locked. If anything we SHOULD be equivocating.
Click to expand...
What you're describing is ambiguity, not equivocation.
 
Jason Scott said:
What you're describing is ambiguity, not equivocation.
Click to expand...

I'm avoiding fully committing my opinion for fear of moderation. The only thing I'm concealing is my full opinion, not the truth.

Of all things I hate to argue about, semantics is at the top of the list.

1647958795944.png
 
JRod4928 said:
I'm avoiding fully committing my opinion for fear of moderation. The only thing I'm concealing is my full opinion, not the truth.
Click to expand...
As long as you don't have an attitude and/or aren't an asshole about it, you likely won't get banned.

JRod4928 said:
Of all things I hate to argue about, semantics is at the top of the list.

View attachment 98406
Click to expand...
The fallacy of equivocation (in logic) is the deliberate use of vague or ambiguous language.
 
JRod4928 said:
Moderation is the middle ground.

The issue is usually no one agrees with how much moderation is required. We're seeing this in society today. Generally people are cool with moderation until their ideas (or themselves) are squelched.... personally, I'd rather have open discussions than censorship.



We do have a choice. It's play by their rules, or don't participate.
Click to expand...
The issue with TGP moderation is that it's fairly arbitrary as to when the rules are enforced. Given the volume of posting, moderation is entirely dependent on when someone chooses to hit the "report" button. The place is contentious and striated that it's not really good practice to let the people police themselves.

And the fact that the rules themselves are often applied arbitrarily. Directly calling someone an idiot will always get a slap, regardless of how idiotic the post was. Replying to a post where someone asserts X that "anyone that thinks X is an idiot" however...may or may not.

When you have multiple layers of arbitrary/capriciousness, then you also get people not only not caring about the rules, but overtly pushing the limits of them.

And in terms of commercial-related activity the rules aren't applied arbitrarily at all, but discriminately depending on the size of the vendor.

Also, WBellman will always be Billy Bell-end in my mind.
 
Jason Scott said:
As long as you don't have an attitude and/or aren't an asshole about it, you likely won't get banned.


The fallacy of equivocation (in logic) is the deliberate use of vague or ambiguous language.
Click to expand...

Do you have the authority to make that decision on this forum (I know I don't, and would rather not touch the line)? Perhaps you do under a different log-in............

A lot of baseless accusations being thrown around. I suggest first giving benefit of the doubt, and then seeking to understand.
 
James Freeman said:
Hey y'all Fractal dudes.

I too was banned forever from TGP after a decade of contribution.... for a stupid general poop joke.
Click to expand...
whaaat! no poop jokes? - hmmm, perhaps an avenue of protest: Fractalites go there and tell poop jokes! 1647960403600.png

But seriously, quite strange to ban the voice of the leading modeller device on a guitar forum based on what smells of possible trumped up charges - kinda smacks of (maybe I read too much into it) being signal to Axefx users that they are not as welcome.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom