On behalf of site team-a message.

[MARTIN3030]

I am taking the opportunity to respond to some of the comments and threads posted in this forum recently following recent site team intervention leading to unapproved content.

 

Firstly,I apologise if some have felt the need to have an official response posted up more speedily.

Given that there have been so many different threads discussing the rights and wrongs of

Site team intervention,and have included some unfair comments directed at the site team,giving a measured response has taken longer,as all the questions and posts have had to be read and understood.

 

Lets begin with the first 2 threads which started all this,not only were there posts made which were considered to be racist,but the actual tone of the posts were also deemed unacceptable.Warnings were given and posts unapproved.

The second thread included much of the same as the first,but saw a wave of insults exchanged between a number of users.Once again at least 3 warnings were given.

 

The site rules are clear in that racial comments will not be tolerated.

 

Free speech should consider the good order and consideration for ALL users,whether a complaint is made by one member or 20 is irrelevant.

 

The rules are there for good reason and should allow everyone to expect respect from others.

 

It is not site team policy to discuss openly individual moderation actions,and neither should there be an expectation.

Members are notified in private informing of any decisions that affect them.

I saw that one of my messages was posted,which proves that it was done.

 

Contrary to some of the comments posted,the site team DOES collectively engage together,and follow guidelines,which are designed to be fair,and democratic.

Every team member is aware of their responsibilities and every one works hard to achieve that goal.

 

We are not here to work against you-we are here to work FOR you.

There will be times when we don’t always get things right-but we are human and learn from mistakes.

Its accepted that theres always room for improvement-and we strive for that.

 

I hope we can get back to what we are best at,and were chosen to do.

In consideration of calls for the rules to be spelled out insofar as they apply to recent events,you will see a stickie at the top of the forum which gives clarification.

 

I hope this clears up some points.

I do not feel the need to say more,but would like to post an extract from the policy held at MSE in consideration of things.

If any member feels that they have been unfairly treated by CAG, in posting some of the things which began these discussions,then I suggest that you go and post more of the same on MSE,and see if it will be welcome there.

 

 

Martin (Martin3030)

 

Some facts

 

i.” This is a Money Saving site.

ii. Discussion board is an add on board, primarily to discuss related MoneySaving issues, and some news, current affairs and chat issues.

iii. There is a strict anti-racism policy and that includes prejudice against people for their race and religious beliefs

 

Please stop posting discussions about Islamic issues many of which are unnecessarily prejudiced. This site is about Money Saving and has respect for all religions. Let me make this plain too - I am happy to see discussion of Sharia money products, happy to see free products that help Muslims - in the same way as I am happy to see Christian, Jewish, Buddist, Sikh and other specific posts - we are - if you forgive the phrase - a broad church.

 

There are some posters who seem to be on here to simply post and raise debate and potential prejudice against Muslims. I don't want them on this forum. There are many free speech forums which will allow people to voice their views. This isn't one of them.

 

So if you start another 'look at this; more Islamic trouble' type post (or any other religion for that matter) then don't be surprised if its deleted without explanation and those posters who only come onto these boards to post on such a single issue agenda aren't wanted here - find a more appropriate forum - you will be PPR'd here.

 

Im not saying all current affairs discussions are blocked - but this isn't anews site - lets stick to main issues. Eeking out articles from foreign press to start a thread which has an anti-Islam sentiment is neither subtle nor what I'd define as following news issues.

 

This isn't censorship - this is about enabling all people to save money - regardless of beliefs - and if some are put off these forums because of discussions which have nothing to do with MoneySaving they will be deleted.

 

I'm trying to make this as plain and undiplomatic as I can as prior notes haven't really worked.

 

If it can't be solved here - and the posts continue and people react to them - then the only option is that I'll be forced to close down this particular board.”

 

Martin Lewis.

[Thailand]

To be clear, as Martin Lewis is, are you saying that religious discussion is also not welcomed here. Just so I know.

 

I don't agree with his views on it either, but it is his site etc... and this ain't mine either, lol.

 

Ta.

[Michael Browne]

To be clear, as Martin Lewis is, are you saying that religious discussion is also not welcomed here.

 

 

.

God knows!! He'll be along in a minute to answer your question

[MARTIN3030]

Hi Thai,

 

I have gone in archives,and discovered that this is not something that has not been raised in the past.

In fact as far back as 2006,there was similarly the same issues raised and the same guidance issued.

In late 2006 the CAG membership stood at 70k.

Its accepted that there are members who are or were unaware of the rules,or were not here in the past when its been pointed out that CAG has a zero tolerance to racial comments.

The rules have been updated as and when the need is seen-but this rule has always existed.

I apologise for my wording in the pm posted in which xenophobia was raised,it was highlighting the area in the rules-you will see it.

Bankfodder himself has also made CAGs position clear in the past-and it is consistent with ML.

[Thailand]

I don't care about ML.

 

I'll read that as a win for the religious to never have any facts about crimes committed ever written on here.

 

A sad day - suggest you read Spicey's posts again. I don't mean any disrespect to you Martin, but this is laughable.

[babybear39]

lol...

[tiglet]

I do have to say that I found the homophobic comments to be far more likely to be in contravention of site rules that the comments on the Stephen Fry thread (I only glanced at the other one, so I can't comment on that).

 

If the comments were targeting a group of people, then that is obviously wrong. However, I cannot see how a discussion of the merits, or otherwise, of a debate which is widely available on the internet can be construed as anti-religious. I also do not believe that issues such as sexual abuse should be a taboo subject, whether the perpetrator is secular or religious, as by refusing to discuss the matter adds even more to the shame of it's victims.

 

For the record, I contributed to the Stephen Fry thread actively disagreeing with comments made by a poster who is one f the "religious" - and I happen to be one of the "religious" - I am a committed Christian. Oh, and I have a degree in Philosophy and Theology.

 

The antidote to misuse of freedom of speech is more freedom of speech.

[postggj]

well said

 

a lot of history is not taught in schools anymore because it is not politicaly correct

 

good or bad, these things need to to brought into the open

 

perfect example is 1930=40 germany

 

tell a lie enough of the time then it becomes the truth

 

george orwell 1984

 

THOSE WHO IGNORE/DISREGARD HISTORY == ARE DESTINED TO REPEAT IT

[Bookworm]

Lets begin with the first 2 threads which started all this,not only were there posts made which were considered to be racist,but the actual tone of the posts were also deemed unacceptable.Warnings were given and posts unapproved.

Martin, would you please be kind enough to give examples of what racist comments were posted? I was a regular participant on these threads, and if I had seen any racist comment, you know that I of all people would have been the first one to report these. My views on racism and xenophobia are well known on this forum and I find it rather distressing and frankly insulting that you (speaking as you seem to imply for the whole team) seem to intimate that some of us would have allowed such views go unchallenged and unreported. I can only assume that I and others must have missed them, so examples would be greatly appreciated.

 

 

The second thread included much of the same as the first,but saw a wave of insults exchanged between a number of users.Once again at least 3 warnings were given.

I may have missed some of the insults, but as I recall, quite a few of the threads did not contain any insults, and could have stayed in the discussion, surely? In fact, the very first post with the video of Mr Fry contained no insults whatsoever, so forgive me for asking again the reasoning there?

 

The site rules are clear in that racial comments will not be tolerated.

Quite rightly so. But as previously stated (and in fact quoted by myself when first queried), those threads di NOt contain any racial comments.

 

Free speech should consider the good order and consideration for ALL users,whether a complaint is made by one member or 20 is irrelevant.

Shouldn't the same courtesy apply equally to all then?

 

The rules are there for good reason and should allow everyone to expect respect from others.

Completely agree. Shouldn't that also apply FROM the ST TOWARDS these others who saw their threads summarily removed with no explanation?

 

It is not site team policy to discuss openly individual moderation actions,and neither should there be an expectation.

I don't there would have been... But when a thread disappears without explanation, private or otherwise, how else are we to query this??

 

Members are notified in private informing of any decisions that affect them.

I saw that one of my messages was posted,which proves that it was done.

ermmm, sorry to contradict you publicly, but my thread entitled "Why?" disappeared in fact without any notification from anyone, and only much later once I had queried it on the board did I finally get a templated response which didn't go near responding any of my worries.

 

Contrary to some of the comments posted,the site team DOES collectively engage together,and follow guidelines,which are designed to be fair,and democratic.

Every team member is aware of their responsibilities and every one works hard to achieve that goal.

Yet, the very 1st thread was in fact posted by a ST member. I and others have been repped on those threads by some site team members who seem to want to dissociate themselves from actions of others.

 

We are not here to work against you-we are here to work FOR you.

There will be times when we don’t always get things right-but we are human and learn from mistakes.

Its accepted that theres always room for improvement-and we strive for that.

and yet, you insist on saying that us users were in the wrong in this instance, try to justify actions which were unjustified and over the top. Maybe people who weren't there will believe it, but come on Martin. Let's be honest for one minute, shall we? You (and by "you" I mean the whole team) KNOW that those threads were nothing to do with racism, not even xenophobia. These threads, if I must remind you, were about the pope's visit to Britain. Nor once was it about his nationality (I'm still not sure whether he is German or Austrian for that matter). It WAS about him being the head of the catholic church (which knows no colour, last I checked) and it WAS about him covering up the child rape by priest scandal (with no notion whatsoever that some races or colours did it more than others).

 

Oh yes, and then to compound it all, one of your ST breached the moderating rules by replying on a thread, then closing it so no-one could respond. You know what? It would be nice to see an apology for that and an admission that he made a mistake, I think we would all have a lot more respect for him and the rest of the team that way.

 

In fact, it would be good to see any of those who have f****d up (and you know as well as I do that this was a classic case of mishandling the situation, we've had enough of those to spot them a mile off, don't we...?) come forward, stop hiding behind "the site team", and say: "I'm sorry. I made a mistake, I will try to learn from this one".

 

I hope this clears up some points.

I do not feel the need to say more,but would like to post an extract from the policy held at MSE in consideration of things.

If any member feels that they have been unfairly treated by CAG, in posting some of the things which began these discussions,then I suggest that you go and post more of the same on MSE,and see if it will be welcome there.

 

 

Martin (Martin3030)

 

Some facts

 

i.” This is a Money Saving site.

ii. Discussion board is an add on board, primarily to discuss related MoneySaving issues, and some news, current affairs and chat issues.

iii. There is a strict anti-racism policy and that includes prejudice against people for their race and religious beliefs

 

Please stop posting discussions about Islamic issues many of which are unnecessarily prejudiced. This site is about Money Saving and has respect for all religions. Let me make this plain too - I am happy to see discussion of Sharia money products, happy to see free products that help Muslims - in the same way as I am happy to see Christian, Jewish, Buddist, Sikh and other specific posts - we are - if you forgive the phrase - a broad church.

 

There are some posters who seem to be on here to simply post and raise debate and potential prejudice against Muslims. I don't want them on this forum. There are many free speech forums which will allow people to voice their views. This isn't one of them.

 

So if you start another 'look at this; more Islamic trouble' type post (or any other religion for that matter) then don't be surprised if its deleted without explanation and those posters who only come onto these boards to post on such a single issue agenda aren't wanted here - find a more appropriate forum - you will be PPR'd here.

 

Im not saying all current affairs discussions are blocked - but this isn't anews site - lets stick to main issues. Eeking out articles from foreign press to start a thread which has an anti-Islam sentiment is neither subtle nor what I'd define as following news issues.

 

This isn't censorship - this is about enabling all people to save money - regardless of beliefs - and if some are put off these forums because of discussions which have nothing to do with MoneySaving they will be deleted.

 

I'm trying to make this as plain and undiplomatic as I can as prior notes haven't really worked.

 

If it can't be solved here - and the posts continue and people react to them - then the only option is that I'll be forced to close down this particular board.”

 

Martin Lewis.

 

So MSEMartin doesn't condone ant-Islamic feeling? How is that relevant to us here on CAG? I don't recall any anti-islamic posts on the deleted threads (although there are plenty on other threads I could mention, if you want to have a look at them let me know).

 

What I DO read in your above comment though is what I am pretty sure I can't be alone in reading, and that's the: "if you don't like it, bog off, cos what we say goes" message.

 

BTW, I haven't read the sticky you mention yet, so can't comment on it right now, but if it does restrict the whole religious discussion thing, then expect the ST to be very busy with reported posts for the foreseeable future, because when you start trawling the BG alone, it is full of that stuff. You might want to warn the others.

 

I'll shut up for now until I have seen the sticky in question.

[Bookworm]

Ok, read it, basically, rules as they were with this added bit:

 

"Racism” should be seen to include adverse or hostile postings comments and discussions,which include but are not limited to,religion of all denominations and beliefs,gender,sexual preferences and ethnic origins.

 

Forgive me for nitpicking a tiny wee bit, but in what world does "racism" equate "religion", "gender" and "sexual preferences"???

 

Surely you're not saying that some races or ethnicities have more gays than others? Or that you can't be of a certain religious denomination if you are of a certain colour? Because if that's what's being said, with all due respect, THAT's where racism lurks.

 

The problem here is that by trying to "clarify" the rules (essentially so you can retrospectively justify the OTT actions undertaken by some of the ST), you have just made it a lot more complicated, and created even more ill-feeling towards what, ironically, becomes an act of bad faith. (I hope I'm still allowed to put "bad" and "faith" in the same sentence).

[tiglet]

Precisely - I think the word to be used is "discrimination", not "racism".

 

Oh, hang on - that is what I posted about - a quite articulate account of diversity in species and the contribution LGBT people have historically made to the human race, in response to a post stating that nature favoured "hetros", if memory serves.

 

BTW, I didn't even get a CAGBOT message to inform me why this post was unapproved, never-mind the common courtesy of an individual response.

 

To be honest, this is why I rarely post on CAG any more. I browse most days and usually only post or PM when it is something within my speciality which I think I can offer advice on.

 

Too many good people are fed up of being treated like children and vote the only way they can - with their feet.

[babybear39]

Child abuse of any nature SHOULD NOT EVER be condoned or covered up. The papal visit highlighted this abhorent behaviour which has tarnished the catholic church's reputation forever.

 

If that statement gets me banned so be it. I endured systematic child abuse from earliest memory 'til late teens (not sexual abuse).

 

I will not stand by and let religious nuts make exscuses for criminal behaviour.

 

My personal belief is that god will judge and nothing man can say will make any of this evil stench disipate...

[mightymouse_69]

It would be interesting to know the volume of complaints received concerning the threads - also interesting would be whether these complaints came from a wide range of caggers, or just a few (maybe even one) members.

 

Never the less, a large volume of complaints should not necessarily mean the thread is destroyed. I could state that I believe that Hitler was a very bad man. Everyone may disagree and complain - but it does not invalidate my argument which is backed up by history.

 

The same goes for the wrongs of the catholic church - which, by the way, is not a race...

[MARTIN3030]

I am not going to get into further debate on this.

There were a number of calls asking for a response from the team,and I feel thats been done.

Obviously it seems that people are not happy with the response and do not agree,but I am not prepared to be spending time defending or justifying anything,when there are other important things to deal with that are core to the site.As much as I respect everyones personal opinions and views, the team are tasked and have been chosen to see the rules upheld,as part of their team roles.and that has to be how it is.

[mightymouse_69]

Just seen the sticky.

 

It seems that threads may be deleted if they are blatantly offensive or for "ANY OTHER REASON." This really gives admin a lot of power - threads can be deleted the moment someone disagrees with the content, no matter how many other people believe the thread to be civil.

 

A lot of time could be saved in drafting the rules by simply stating that:

 

"Threads will be deleted if they are bad

 

Bad includes: Offensive, Boring, Too long, Not popular enough, Not slagging of people that CAG does not like, Concerning religion, Concerning anything that may upset someone slightly etc"

[mightymouse_69]

I am not going to get into further debate on this.

There were a number of calls asking for a response from the team,and I feel thats been done.

Obviously it seems that people are not happy with the response and do not agree,but I am not prepared to be spending time defending or justifying anything,when there are other important things to deal with that are core to the site.As much as I respect everyones personal opinions and views, the team are tasked and have been chosen to see the rules upheld,as part of their team roles.and that has to be how it is.

 

I for one thank you for taking time out to respond to the questions that have been raised.

 

I do not believe that the rules of this site are too restrictive - its just that they are so open to interpretation, a thread could be locked no matter whether it is based solely on fact. I am confident however that we can continue to have discussions in the bear garden.

 

Time will tell.

[babybear39]

Oi! It's my bloody garden BOGOF

[Bookworm]

I am not going to get into further debate on this.

There were a number of calls asking for a response from the team,and I feel thats been done.

Obviously it seems that people are not happy with the response and do not agree,but I am not prepared to be spending time defending or justifying anything,when there are other important things to deal with that are core to the site.As much as I respect everyones personal opinions and views, the team are tasked and have been chosen to see the rules upheld,as part of their team roles.and that has to be how it is.

Of course not. I predicted that in my earlier post. Sorry about that Martin, from you of all people I wouldn't have expected that attitude.

 

I take it that lodging a complaint is going to be pointless then? Since despite requesting an example of racism on any of those threads, none is forthcoming, it's obvious that it has been decided that we were the ones at fault for apparently not complying with rules which didn't exist at the time and have been added since. Not just Orwellian then, Kafkaesque as well.

 

To quote the admirable Mr Fry once more: For shame.

[SOD'EM]

....

[Spiceskull]

Oh lordy, what a petty and unneccesary direction CAG has taken ... it used to be that when people were in error they would have their error explained to them, by the helpful people at CAG. Now it has gone the way of the banks.

 

Unintelligible term or phrase in that letter from the bank? Then you had better seek independent legal advice for clarification, because we aren't going to explain our made up words to you ... we're not paid to do that.

[dragonkeeper]

 

 

 

I for one thank you for taking time out to respond to the questions that have been raised.

 

I do not believe that the rules of this site are too restrictive - its just that they are so open to interpretation, a thread could be locked no matter whether it is based solely on fact. I am confident however that we can continue to have discussions in the bear garden.

 

Time will tell.

 

 

 

 

I agree with MM post

 

I know first hand from a post I made in mazbck's helmet thread Bookie quite rightly has no problem with taking a poster to task.

 

 

 

Martin thanks for your responce

 

 

 

 

 

dk

[hilaryfrances]

I have several reasons to object to what a certain member was saying on those posts. I am not willing to discuss them on here though as they are private. I just want to say that I feel just as passionatley about my views as he did. I possibly have more reasons to take the opposite viewpoint from his, I rose above his personal insults directed at me and ignored them but just because someone is religous does not make their views " right"

 

Perhaps CAG is not the place to discuss these views. Religion is one of the last taboos. When I was at school divorce was something to be ashamed off now it is common place. If you were an unmarried mother then alsorts of dreadful things could happen to you. The least of which was your baby being taken from you. Until recently some single mums where still in Mental instituations as they were put there as they were considered to be moral degenerates. If you were a gay man you could go to prison, many gay men lived in fear and so on.

 

This all seems laughable now I wonder if we will ever be allowed to speak openly on aethisism. Sorry if this spelling is incorrect but you will know what I mean!

[Bookworm]

You're preaching to the converted, if one may coin a phrase HF.

[hilaryfrances]

bless you my child

[babybear39]

Ah! I know what your new job is HF

 

You're going to be a catholic priest