jump to last post 1-14 of 14 discussions (118 posts)

Believe it or not: there are some that want more censorship here

  1. Ericdierker profile image81
    Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago

    There are actually some here that want more restrictions on what who can publish here!!  They really want to hold back new artists and writers.
    Well excuse me Hitler's book burning Germany but no thank you. I grew up with Uncle Tom's Cabin banned.
    I grew up with Martin Luther King's work being held from my library.
    Are these people lame and so uneducated that they do not know 70 years ago?

    My goodness by proposed standards billybuc would be banned because he did not pass a criteria established by Phylus and her crew.
    Please stand up to this nonsense or we will lose Froggy and Frog Prince and all us religious writers will be banned.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      HubPages is NOT for censorship but for STANDARDS.   HubPages has rules and standards which each writer must adhere to if he/she wishes to continue writing here.   It is GOOD that HubPages has STRICT standards in terms of what subject matter to write and how to express oneself as a writer in a professional and unbiased manner.   

      HubPages does not ban religious writers or conservative writers.  It is against hate speech and personal attacks.   No one, regardless of sociopolitical orientation, has a right to write defamatory or derogatory material on any subject or any group.  If one disagrees with a subject matter and wishes to express it, one can do so without being prejudicial, defamatory, or derogatory.  There is such a thing as a mature analytical discourse on the subject at hand!
      http://s4.hubimg.com/u/8639795_f248.jpg

      1. Ericdierker profile image81
        Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Nice person. Standards is exactly what our Martin Luther King Jr. and Mandela and Ghandijji stood against. First you make standards that you can live with and then you make standards others cannot adhere to and all of the sudden I am black and precluded and you are white and included. Or better yet I speak cockney and you speak the queen's from SA and I am just a diamond minor's son.

        You are obviously not historically bread well enough for this to worry you. I am. My grandparents worthy enough to be shot for their beliefs,,  regardless of how well theyt spoke them.

        Cut out first those we do not consider well spoken, and those that do, will soon hide.

    2. Cardisa profile image91
      Cardisaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Here you go again, going off on a tangent. You call yourself educated yet you lack the basic comprehension skills. There was no mention of creative writers not passing through HP. What the hubber mentioned was  basic training program to reduce bad grammar, people who joined just to antagonize others, spammers, sock pockets and trolls. In other words, this would omit people who have no real interest in writing.

      1. Ericdierker profile image81
        Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I expect as do we all knee jerk reactionaries with not much to add but an attack on us. It is welcome and part of the process. We need you and would not want to hold you back. But we know you and your position is blah blah blah.

        1. Cardisa profile image91
          Cardisaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I did not attack you, unlike what you did on the other thread but merely stated a fact based on observation. You clearly are misunderstanding the OP on the other thread and I stated such.

          Did you know that creative writing can succeed with proper SEO techniques. So a training program will NOT, in fact eliminate such writers but help to enhance their creative works online? Get that?

        2. 0
          Motown2Chitownposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Are you Chip?

          1. SmartAndFun profile image92
            SmartAndFunposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            lol

            Could very well be.

      2. gmwilliams profile image86
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Cardisa, glad YOU said it and not ME ( I was THINKING it though). This is about the 10th thread Mr. Dierker has posted related to HubPages.   I am just going to sit back and watch.   

        Cardisa, remember the saying that if a person has enough rope, he/she will HANG himself/herself without anyone else's help.  It is not good to knock the organization where one writes. Also remember the adage that it is NEVER good to knock where ONE works!  Let the proceedings begin...........
        http://s4.hubimg.com/u/8663599.png

        1. Ericdierker profile image81
          Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          That is not near even close to the quote. Please be more credible.

          1. Ericdierker profile image81
            Ericdierkerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Excuse me but that would certainly be Dr. Dierker to you. You see you cannot be civil and respectful. And I should be "sir" to you as our age differences would dictate. Or are you so self entitled that you owe no respect to anyone because you are you and entitled to it without earning

            1. calculus-geometry profile image85
              calculus-geometryposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I thought it was Dr. Poo Poo. What happened to your article about poops?  It's no longer on your page.  Did you...eliminate it?

              1. gmwilliams profile image86
                gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                http://s2.hubimg.com/u/8663733.png

                1. calculus-geometry profile image85
                  calculus-geometryposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  GMWilliams, please show some respect to our esteemed doctor in the house, the (until recently) self-styled "Doctor Poo Poo."  Dr. Poo Poo's infamous and mysteriously absent hub explored his ground-breaking discovery that prolonged constipation is -- wait for it --  bad for your health! WHO KNEW?!?!?!

        2. Cardisa profile image91
          Cardisaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Gmwilliams lol lol big_smile big_smile

      3. The Frog Prince profile image79
        The Frog Princeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Cardisa - I find it unusual to see comments about why people join this writer's forum since it is a forum for the public at large to express their opinions, be creative and interact with other writers and the public at large.  I avoid being the grammar police who are out there doing that like the small people they seem to be.  Content is the writer's content, not the readers.  If a reader doesn't  like the content then don't use the mouse in your hand.  If you don't like the writer, for whatever imagined reason since most don't really know the other person, then they need to stay away from their Hubs and stop voting something down for childish reasons.  There are childish trolls here and many of us know exactly who they are and have our own means of dealing with them.

        1. Cardisa profile image91
          Cardisaposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Why is everyone taking offense to what Phyllis suggested? I too am a creative writer. I write about religion as well. A training program, though I am not for it because I believe it's not HP's duty to do so, can only enhance the writers here whether they are journalist or creative writers.

          Creative writers do courses to help their careers. I don't think she's trying to get rid of anybody but rather helping to make them better. That's was my original impression. I was the one who mentioned the trolls and so forth because they are my biggest problem.

        2. phdast7 profile image83
          phdast7posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          The Frog Prince has made some very good points here.

          There is no need for sarcastic or catty or smirky comments toward another Hubber or their Hubs.   If you don't like their content or their angle or them as a person (some of the comments have been very mean and personal and I don't mean Erich's comments), then don't read the hub, don't follow the forum discussion.    No one is forcing you to deal with "distressing" material or a "distasteful" person.     

          As a sensible and respected Hubber, Kathlen Cochran, recently wrote in a comment to someone who was angry and antagonistic to others,  "Use the Buttons, thumbs up or thumbs down, and then move on."   Such good advice -- life is way too short.   We are not all going to agree.    We shouldn't force it.

    3. The Frog Prince profile image79
      The Frog Princeposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      The problem is there are some very thin skinned writers/users here who object to content that others may use.  Liberals seem to think that publishing and expressing their opinions are fine just not anyone else 's unless it meets their point of view and standards.  I suggest that they adjust their stinkin' thinkin' as my old friend Zig Zigler advises and grow up. 

      The Frog Prince

      1. tsadjatko profile image77
        tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Problem isn't just with the users, there are rogue HP moderators, I can't think of any other explanation for some of my comments to Questions appearing after brief moderation, others appearing days or even weeks later after the activity is done on the question and some never appearing even when done on the same Q&A, the same day. I had a 2 1/2 year old, featured hub page unpublished the moment I posted it in a forum for no good reason (other than I suspect a moderator must have disagreed with the content on atheism), they didn't reply to my inquiries about why for a week and when I asked to speak to a supervisor it was republished in an hour.

        1. JRScarbrough profile image86
          JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          tsadjatko,

          I can explain that one for you. Alright? You commented on my question several times and you are the only one that I get notified that I need to moderate your comments. I believe you are behind a proxy and HubPages requires that I allow or disallow your comment. Now, the way that I am notified is on the front page I get a number beside comments. I imagine a lot of people who ask questions don’t even notice it and leave it undone.

          At first, I thought it was telling me I should disallow your comment. I wasn’t sure what it was all about. So, I didn’t allow it for the purpose of it even coming to me like that. You really said nothing wrong or objectionable, but I’ve never read anywhere that tells me I have to moderate my own questions. Another user suggested it is because you are behind a proxy.

          I started just clicking “not spam” for your answers. It isn’t a HubPages moderator, it is whoever asked the questions to begin with and the way in which you connect to HubPages. Sorry.

          1. tsadjatko profile image77
            tsadjatkoposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Thanks JR. Well I guess that could explain some of it but I am not behind a proxy.  Still it is a moderator who is signaling to you to do something about my answer even though it is inane. I have asked questioners why my comment wasn't showing and they tell me they didn't delete it. When I myself ask a Q & A,  answers always appear immediately but I do have the option to delete them. If I answer or comment on comments on  my own question it is never moderated. Just doesn't make sense unless someone up there is singling me out at times and at other times maybe he/she is not there. Who knows? Lots of Hub Page policies make no sense.

            1. JRScarbrough profile image86
              JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I don’t know how it came about. I just know that it asks me to moderate your comments. It could be someone upstairs flagging you I suppose. I just know you were the only one commenting that it was directly stopping from auto appearing. It confused me and kind of made me nervous. I at first thought I had better not allow it, and then I started searching for why it was picking on your comments. I still do not know.

              Another user said that you were probably behind a proxy. If you are on a cell phone sometimes, it can be a proxy. I actually searched and read up on it but there really isn’t an easy answer to why your comments were flagged. So, I just started clicking "not spam”. It truly makes no sense at all.

    4. ChristinS profile image92
      ChristinSposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I think comparing HP to all that is a bit over the top Eric.  Standards, as others have mentioned, exist so that this website can be beneficial to everyone who writes here.  You say "no standards" - but how would that be beneficial exactly?  Would you buy products if no standards were in place to ensure they were safe for example?

      If you go to visit a website and it is littered with grammar and spelling errors do you take that website seriously as an authority?  HP is trying to reestablish itself as a credible source of information - that means standards must be in place to ensure a certain quality of writing.  This not only doesn't harm you, it helps all who write here draw better traffic and gain exposure to our myriad of ideas and experiences.

      There are numerous thoughts, ideas and beliefs expressed here as you know.  To say that what is going on here is akin to Nazi Germany is rather distasteful because it minimizes those events into something trivial. 

      I can see disagreeing with or questioning some policies here, but being a victim and crying discrimination doesn't get you taken seriously, especially in a world where actual discrimination and victimization does still exist.

      1. JRScarbrough profile image86
        JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        I must say that ChristinS hit the nail on the head very eloquently. To liken a suggestion about quality standards to Hitler, Stalin or Pol Pot is quite extreme. I mean, if I were a victim of those regimes, I would be very insulted.

        Every language has standards when spoken and written. In order for anyone to take writing seriously, those standards must be adhered to uniformly. It isn’t an insult on anyone who is unable to write without mistakes to point out those mistakes. They call the people who get paid to do that editors.

        Anything that would help newcomers write better or know how to choose titles and pass on their thoughts and ideas more effectively is a good thing. Anyone who would take offense at someone attempting to help them write well is just being silly.

        I had a PhD in my English Composition class in my freshmen year of college and he tore everything apart. I guess a person kind of gets a thicker skin when even if they make no grammar mistakes, they still see red pen marks ordering them to rearrange a sentence.

        I find the suggestion made to be worthwhile to think about. I didn’t see it as a censorship issue. I saw a suggestion on helping new writers.

        1. 0
          sheilamyersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          I wasn't going to jump in on this one, but after reading some of the responses I will. JR makes a very valid point - there are set standards for the written language. Yes, there are variations between standards for poetry and prose, but those standards are set. Unfortunately, the modern use of texting and using "chat speak" is lowering the quality of writing skills among both young and old.

          From what I've read, HP sees itself as similar to an on-line magazine. Choose any other on-line publication for news, entertainment, gardening, or any other topic and go read the articles they publish. You'll see the use of proper English and, if a controversial topic is discussed, the opinions stated without calling people names and advocating all types of violence.  For those of you who don't think the standards of writing should apply to you, try getting one of your articles published at one of those sites. I'll tell you right now it'll never happen.

          I consider myself a serious writer as probably everyone else here does. But unlike some people, I'm willing to follow the established standards. If HP tells me my work is below those standards, I'd rather work at improving myself and my work until I get where everything needs to be in order to be featured. If I ever decide the standards are too high for me to obtain, I wouldn't be complaining about it. I can always choose to go to another writing site where the standards are much lower.

          So my question for those of you who keep complaining is this ... If you don't agree with all of the policies and standards, why are you still here?

      2. gmwilliams profile image86
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Totally CONCUR!

    5. EncephaloiDead profile image60
      EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I'm really puzzled as what to make of your latest rant. Are you concerned about new writers and artist, being banned, being censored, comparing Nazi Germany to Hubpages, or is this all about writing religious stuff, perhaps, along the lines of evangelism and proselytizing?

    6. rebekahELLE profile image91
      rebekahELLEposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        How are you to be taken seriously with these Saturday night forum threads?  Your first sentence is not clearly written and then you go into Nazi Germany and book burning?  You may want to proofread your posts before hitting submit and clearly refer to what it is you are talking about.

      1. gmwilliams profile image86
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        http://s2.hubimg.com/u/8663733.png

    7. 60
      tbHistorianposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      censorship initiated through rules that permit the censor to personally suppress speech without accountability equates to tyrannical rule.  The bias depicted by such censor is fully based on personal agenda rather than social tolerance. While defenders of the current HP rules believe it is HP's right to censor, they fail to understand that this permits expansion into discriminatory actions that deny the transfer of knowledge pertinent to the individual poster.  The use of such discriminatory practices is what has led to the fear for those who disagree with the policies.  In the USA, they have learned that you cannot remove discrimination simply by saying it is so.  In the USA, they have discovered that no matter how you express a law, there is always some feature of it that results in discrimination.  This is the politicians avenue to permanent chaos so that they can continue to deceive the people into believing that fairness can be legislated.  The censors of HP are equally avenue bound.  They block the avenue to freedom with jargon and then concoct their own definition of publishing rule when offended.  This was the same tactic used by the Nazi's in Germany in an attempt to coerce the youth into the Nazi party.  History repeats itself even when portrayed as an attempt to keep people from having hurt feelings.  The individuals who believe they must protect the feelings of others are actually creating a weakness within the protected individual who needs to learn to become stronger than the offender.  Such is the circle of life.

      1. JRScarbrough profile image86
        JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        That isn’t what this is about. Nobody has even said anyone did not allow their hub to be published. Many hubs are published but apparently, some don’t get featured. HubPages has a system for what they determine as quality or not-so-good. If they consider a hub to be higher quality, they will feature it across other hubs. Mr. Dierker has had hubs end up not being featured and he believes that the reason they do this is because of the content of the hub rather than the quality of the hub.

        Without getting into anything about Mr. Dierker’s hubs, it isn’t a question of censorship, it is a matter of HP’s judgement of what constitutes quality. All of Mr. Dierker’s hubs are published and can be viewed. I don’t know which hubs he considers to have been censored but apparently, some or all are not featured and this is his issue with HP.

        So, I don’t know how to explain it any better than that. I’ve never been censored and if a hub does not end up featured, I fix it until it is. This has only happened to me 2 times when I did not comprehend what HP wanted from me early on. After that, I write it, I publish it and it ends up featured. If something isn’t featured then you can fix the reasons and it WILL end up passing the process and end up getting featured.

        1. ChristinS profile image92
          ChristinSposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Don't worry - some people like to feel they are the persecuted victims in life. Chronic victims are not worth the effort it takes to keep trying to explain common sense to them.

          HubPages akin to Nazi Germany is one of the most ridiculous things I've seen on these forums.  I am quite certain that regime was not started by insisting on semi-good grammar practices and writing quality standards.  sigh.

          1. wilderness profile image97
            wildernessposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            LOL, neither was HubPages.

            And it showed; when google began requiring reasonably correct grammar, traffic site wide fell considerably until they managed to clean it up some with the QAP.

            1. JRScarbrough profile image86
              JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              That’s totally accurate Wilderness.  I’ve seen a lot of people who seem to think that Google came after HubPages as if Google actually considered HubPages for its change in policy. This just isn’t so. Google went after particular things, which includes grammar, punctuation and plagiarism and HubPages lost out as a result.

              No matter how much HubPages distances each author from the other, subdomains are handled by Google in a way that the main domain passes some attributes to every single one of us. So, in essence, each author on HubPages will contribute to how Google views each individual author’s subdomain to varying degrees.

              HubPages is aware of this and that is why it has a policy to nofollow links and to not feature some hubs site wide. I mean, why should your subdomain suffer because so and so can’t structure a proper sentence?

              I think it important that each author here be held to high standards and HubPages is doing everything in its power to ensure each of our subdomains do not suffer for poor quality. It came late but it is remedying most of the problem that Google’s changes created for mass content sites like this.

              1. 0
                sheilamyersposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                Thanks JR. I didn't know that about the main domain and subdomains. I mean, I do understand individual hubs appear under a URL which is a subdomain of HP, but didn't know that Google sees some of the attributes of the main domain as part of our subdomain. What you say makes a lot of sense when explained the way you did.

                1. JRScarbrough profile image86
                  JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  You’re very welcome Shelia. The attributes of the main domain will pass in ‘varying’ degrees to each subdomain and this is according to Matt Cutts of Google and Rand Fishkin over at SEOMoz. They would know.

                  The benefits of creating subdomains for each author are that not all of the domains attributes will pass to the subdomain. So, in essence, you will never outrank hubpages.com with jrscarbrough.hubpages.com, and the latter is distinctly different than the former but the worth of the main domain in Google (and anything bad about it) might lend to how Google views the subdomain.

                  They are distinctly different entities, but they are known by Google to be relatives. So, this sharing of attributes back and forth can affect everyone. BUT HP did exactly the right thing and is weeding out anything that might weave into a site wide affliction and begin affecting everyone.

                  So, in truth, there is a conspiracy but the conspiracy is to improve Google’s view of everyone on HP. The conspiracy also is being kind to anyone who cannot lend to that improvement by not completely disallowing them to be a part of the community. I think HP has done quite well in making a home for anyone that wants to learn online publishing but it has to be careful because Google is very choosey now. If it was my server and my investment, I can’t say that I’d be so kind.

    8. Traci Ruffner profile image84
      Traci Ruffnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I do believe standards are important, but should also all for style.  Say you are from Mississippi and you are recalling moments of your childhood.  You grew up in a very small town.  Writing in that southern dialect may add color to your work.  That being said, I believe feedback would be an excellent idea for writers who may have problems with grammatical concepts.  I have a hard time with pronouns and commas.  I would welcome the feedback.

      1. Traci Ruffner profile image84
        Traci Ruffnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        That should read "allow for style".

    9. Shanna11 profile image90
      Shanna11posted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Don't like something?

      QUICK COMPARE IT TO HITLER.

      1. 60
        tbHistorianposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Tyranny is an easily capacitated declaration for any use of discrimination regardless of supposed level of style or diction rules.  One individuals term often does not depict the assumed reference of the censor.

        1. psycheskinner profile image80
          psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          So you don't consider comparing forum moderation to the Nazi leader to be hyperbolic in the extreme and therefore unreasonable?  Because I sure do.  I don't think you can reasonably say "just a tiny bit Hilterish" at this time in history.

          1. 60
            tbHistorianposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Forum moderation is easily viewed as a simple discriminatory level when a censor chooses subjectively to deny activity solely based on personal bias.  This readily equates to the same discriminatory level established by the early Nazi movement as it began its pursuit towards global dominance.  Any censorship can be viewed as a Nazi equivalent when the purveyor utilizes adroit propaganda to implement policies of censorship.

            1. psycheskinner profile image80
              psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              I disagree that all censorship can be sensibly compared to Hitler by anyone other than an affluent teen being deprived of her cellphone at granny's funeral; any more than all dancing can be compared to Pavlova even when it is you drunken uncle in the garage.

              Also, you are simply uncritically accepting the proposition that the moderation is arbitrary and subject.  In my experience and observation it is not.  Which is kind of what this thread is-slash-was about.

              And what it the point of the rarified writing style?  We can slap each other with PhDs and pearl-filled purses, or we can try and communicate. Simpler language would be just as accurate given the prosaic nature if what we are discussing. It ain't quantum physics.

              1. JRScarbrough profile image86
                JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                wink Go Psyche, Go Psyche! *does the birthday dance* tongue

              2. 60
                tbHistorianposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                censorship of personal communications is exactly the same when it suppresses opposing viewpoints and information.  regardless of content or reason, the truth is censorship under the Nazis parallels the same techniques used by HP censors for the forum.  Censorship only represents the interests of the censoring unit, not the participants who can personally censor by discarding or in the case of a hub not continuing to participate.  It is common sense (a basic ability to perceive, understand, and judge things that are shared); therefore, it is sometimes difficult to achieve when overthinking is employed.

                1. JRScarbrough profile image86
                  JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  So then, because someone is banned from the forum for abusive language, then the owners of the forum can be rationally classified into the same category as Hitler, by your method of reasoning, and this is perfectly acceptable?

                  Let me remind you, the censorship that occurred under Hitler’s regime was not in any way as a result of anything that those who were discriminated against did. They were innocents. You are likening breaking the rules and being punished for breaking those rules to Hitler’s decisions to silence enemies and steal the nation’s wealth and slay anyone he saw as an opposition toward Germany’s right to inherit the earth and for caucasians to dominate and rule over the lesser races for a thousand years.

                  I would ask, how is it even remotely the same?

                2. psycheskinner profile image80
                  psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  It suppresses name calling and obscenities on a privately owned website and explicitly allows every kind of opinion, including fascism, homophobia and holocaust denial.  I must conclude you are unfamiliar with the rules your are criticizing and have just swallowed OPs assertions whole rather than doing anything at all to verify them. 

                  This kind of credulity is perhaps a pernicious influence in society even than censorship.  The censors determined what could be hung in art galleries or written in letters, the credulous actually believed they were the master race just because someone charismatic told them so--and so voted in a genocidal regime and initiated a world war. 

                  Consider yourself Godwinned.

                  1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                    MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    The big words... they hurt. I can't understand. I wish I knew big words. wink

                  2. 60
                    tbHistorianposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    the lack of common sense regarding the parallel discriminatory spectrum is as blatant as that of the incredulous Germans that blindly followed the Nazi censors.  this totally mollifies the nature of conformity considering the suppression of thought based on repressive censors.

                3. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                  MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  What exact topics are they censoring, again?

                  And I do so apologize to all HP writers. I embrace them every time I see one on the street. I can always tell them by the numbers on their arm.

                4. EncephaloiDead profile image60
                  EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  The Ministry of Propaganda implemented the censorship in Nazi Germany, but they censored everything, all media—literature, music, newspapers, and public events. They attempted to do so with mail and private messages, but it had mixed results and failed.

                  If HP is using the same techniques, they would be censoring everything here, not just one small portion.

                  The aim of censorship under the Nazi regime was to reinforce Nazi power and to suppress opposing viewpoints and information.

                  Can you confirm that HP is trying to suppress opposing viewpoints and information in order to reinforce their power here?

            2. JRScarbrough profile image86
              JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              It may be easily viewed as such by anyone unfamiliar with the reality of the Nazi movement but anyone who knows the before and the after of the Nazi regime will attest to the fact that the two are completely different in both approach and result.

              The OP isn’t even speaking about forum moderation. He is referring to another forum thread where another hubber stated we should institute better filtering techniques that might weed out bad grammar and spammers before it begins. He got mad and said this suggestion was like burning books and trying to get rid of artists and then went on to liken it to Pol Pot, Hitler and Stalin regimes. The references are completely ridiculous when dealing with an online forum where people ask such questions as, “Why do women have abortions?” and get responses from every extreme side there is. Nobody silences anyone except on the occasion that a comment becomes abusive of another person.

              I’m not trying to be mean here but there is no sense in attempting to explain how it is rational to liken forum moderation to Nazi Germany when I find that offensive. It is an extreme reference for something that can’t possibly result in anyone here getting gassed to death through a shower head.

              1. 60
                tbHistorianposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                as usual, the discussion is exacerbated through the expansion of thought beyond that of the discussion.  when discussing Nazi censorship, one must not convolute the conversation with activity beyond that of censoring.  limiting the thought to censoring, one can then properly surmise that censoring is censoring.  it is this common tendency to introduce unparalleled description that conveys a false position of disagreement.  when moving off topic in this manner, the discussion then cannot truthfully convey the proper representation of the event in question.

                1. JRScarbrough profile image86
                  JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  You got that right. Exacerbated. Off topic.,

                  Censoring and moderation are two distinctly separate activities and the two do not belong in the same discussion.

                  The distinction:

                  Moderating one’s own personal property and disallowing certain language and action in order to prevent utter chaos is completely within a positive morality zone because it is enacted in order to create a mutually beneficial environment for each individual within the population.

                  Censorship in order to silence opposition so that other opinions cannot be spread even if those opinions are a part of moral persuasions and popular thought cannot be deemed as within a positive morality zone as this activity is enacted in order to obtain power over a weaker population.

                  As you can see. The two are distinctly different by method, purpose and in the result.

                  1. 60
                    tbHistorianposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    the off-topic concentration is the introduction of moderation as if it were the topic.  however, moderation was not mentioned in the original forum comments.  censorship was the basis for the forum discussion and should not be projected as moderation as an attempt to discredit the thoughts of others as they continue to discuss censorship activity. 
                    “What is freedom of expression? Without the freedom to offend, it ceases to exist.” ― Salman Rushdie

        2. JRScarbrough profile image86
          JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          That is rather convoluted for the consumption of the general masses, don’t you think?

          What he said was basically, Tyranny is often times declared when any kind of discrimination is perceived., When someone says something like Hitler, it doesn’t necessarily have to reflect how one perceives Hitler. It’s a copout excuse that many who get chewed up and spit out by the Jewish Defense League end up falling back on. It simply means “but I didn’t really mean they were Hitler” and then is followed by “I’m sorry for my very insensitive comments”.

  2. LongTimeMother profile image96
    LongTimeMotherposted 2 years ago

    So is this thread just to express your fear that religious writers will be banned?

    I have not seen any evidence to suggest that is going to happen.  I suspect you are the only one currently feeling threatened.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      OUCH!  OUCH!

  3. PaulGoodman67 profile image90
    PaulGoodman67posted 2 years ago

    HubPages insisting on keeping up standards helps both new writers and established hubbers, so I support the rules overall.

    Comparing the HP rules with Hitler's persecution of the Jews shows extremely poor judgement in my opinion.

    1. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      +1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000!

  4. gmwilliams profile image86
    gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago

    Let THE PROCEEDINGS begin..............
    http://s4.hubimg.com/u/8556711.png

  5. psycheskinner profile image80
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    I am here all the time and yet I still have no idea what you guys are discussing.  What specific policy of HP is the issue?

    1. JRScarbrough profile image86
      JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      No policy Psyche. It was another forum thread that Eric didn’t like. A basic suggestion by another hubber that HP institute some policy changes before allowing new hubbers to make hubs.

    2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
      MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      That one that says you actually have to be able to write a grammatically correct sentence in English to write on HP. Tyrants they are.

      1. JRScarbrough profile image86
        JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        Yes: that OnE!

      2. JRScarbrough profile image86
        JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        im a gOnner ifin that stuff Happins

        1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
          MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          What's sad is that sentence is still more understandable than some I have seen by other posters in this thread.

          1. JRScarbrough profile image86
            JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            The whole flip-out confused me. I found what Phyllis suggested to be completely reasonable and easy to comprehend. She did not say anything to insult anyone and she did not even call anyone out. I don’t know how it got related to censorship.

            1. MelissaBarrett profile image60
              MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

              Eric equates censorship with failing of hubs due to being substandard. He believes that HP is just using the term substandard as a reason to keep certain types of hubs off of HP. He has had several unfeatured for not reaching quality standards. He believes that it is a personal attack for some unknown reason rather than his hubs not meeting the criteria to be featured. Tightening the restrictions for grammar and mechanics would likely result in more of his hubs not being featured, as that is an area he is most frequently told is an issue for him.

              1. JRScarbrough profile image86
                JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                I’m just appalled. I’ll test it for him.

                I’ll write a hub based on anything anyone gives me a subject for and be completely one sided to their political or religious viewpoint and it’ll get featured. Guaranteed.

                I don’t know if he will accept this challenge but I am willing to partake to prove that HP is not censoring anyone based on their belief systems.

                1. gmwilliams profile image86
                  gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  HubPages NEVER censor any author based upon his/her political or religious beliefs.  Authors, regardless of their respective beliefs, are allowed to publish articles on HubPages as long as it is not considered to be hate speech or personal attacks.

                  1. JRScarbrough profile image86
                    JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    Obviously they do not censor anything. Just looking at the Q&A section and across the range of hubs, anyone can see that every viewpoint and belief is represented from very badly done to very well written.

                    There is no censorship. If grammar is censorship, I am in favor. I’ve never in my life heard an argument opposed to trying to write better or an argument against that we should all try to be better at writing.

                    SMH

                2. MelissaBarrett profile image60
                  MelissaBarrettposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                  I'm going to try to say this without it being insulting, but I'm not sure what subject to suggest you write it on that would be along the same lines as Eric's. Most of the time, I'm not exactly sure even after reading carefully, what he is talking about.

                  1. JRScarbrough profile image86
                    JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

                    *laughs*

                    I must say that you wrote that very well but I can’t say that Eric will not be insulted. I will say that I have yet to attempt to delve into anything written by him. Perhaps I will soon.

  6. Lowdown0 profile image84
    Lowdown0posted 2 years ago

    What they really want is only progressive liberal New Age people to have an opinion. But nobody who talks of the truth of this world and fundamental Christianity.

    I've been censored here with a comment, and there was no good reason for it, except petty people getting mad and tattling on me, cause they can't defend themselves otherwise, except to have me censored.

    1. ChristinS profile image92
      ChristinSposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      You're mistaken.  There are plenty of forum posts, Q&A and everything in between with religious discussions and/or rants on them and the forums tend to get very heated in both directions.  Having one comment taken down doesn't mean there is a giant conspiracy in play to silence the religious conservatives.  I'm a left leaning atheist/agnostic who has faced a removed question/comment or two myself - I didn't come up with conspiracy theories.  Yes, some people are highly sensitive - it doesn't mean the whole site is out to silence you and those who think like you.

      1. gmwilliams profile image86
        gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        i had my comments removed from the religious Q&A section also, ChristinS.  I am what Lowdown0 describes.  Yes, I am a Liberal, New Ager and QUITE PROUD of it  I might add.  I am not insulted when my answers/comments are removed, particularly from the religious Q&A section.   Comments/answers are removed from the Q&A section on behest of the poster asking the question. It is HIS/HER prerogative to remove the comments at will.

        1. Lowdown0 profile image84
          Lowdown0posted 2 years ago in reply to this

          They weren't just removed, I was banned from commenting for 48 hours.

          1. ChristinS profile image92
            ChristinSposted 2 years ago in reply to this

            Many others have faced bans too - still no conspiracy sorry.  A ban is usually because you get out of line and say something that crosses that fine line into a personal attack (or what a mod construes as a personal attack) I've had 24 hour bans previously.

        2. JRScarbrough profile image86
          JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

          Right. GM, the person who asked the question is in charge of the moderation of the question. It is not HP doing that as I informed someone else earlier.

          I was unfamiliar with this fact and thought that this particular commenter was being flagged by HP. So I kept deleting their comments to stay safe. It turned out that for some reason, HP was questioning whether their comments were spam (such as links or ads) or not. I don’t know what it is about some people’s connections, but some people come off as being more likely to comment with spam. Most hubber comments auto pass whatever test that is and appear.

          If you were banned Lowdown, that would be a HP moderator viewing your comment as abusive or something of that sort. Perhaps you just weren’t aware of which rule you broke.

          I’ve asked some pretty intense questions and had answers that go from extreme left to extreme right and as long as people don’t start delving into immaturity and insults toward their counterparts, nothing is ever removed or slapped down by the powers that be. It just doesn’t happen.

          Expressing a point of view is not against anything here. Getting heated and beginning to hurl insults and threats or slander will get slapped down.

    2. EncephaloiDead profile image60
      EncephaloiDeadposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      That's strange, there are a few fundamentalists posting their views all over the place and they aren't being censored. In fact, they are only too happy to post verses here that demonize nonbelievers, verses that threaten them with eternal hellfire.

  7. paradigmsearch profile image89
    paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago

    This thread confuses me. There's no censorship here.

    The S-word is used 9 times here. http://pickupguide.hubpages.com/hub/How … -Questions Nice ads...

  8. paradigmsearch profile image89
    paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago

    Here's another one. http://boutlife.hubpages.com/hub/the-12-types-of-shit No ads on this one though...

  9. paradigmsearch profile image89
    paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago

    And here's a lovely one, ads and all. http://guardian1.hubpages.com/hub/Enter … f-a-Cutter No way I'm clicking that freaking video...

  10. psycheskinner profile image80
    psycheskinnerposted 2 years ago

    From what I see people can have any opinion they want, they just can't say rude things about other people.

  11. paradigmsearch profile image89
    paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago

    I mean really, there are no restrictions here. HubPages is even pro F-bomb and pro-intercourse. http://letter-z.hubpages.com/hub/fallinlove I found Rule #4 rather intriguing... Never heard it referred to before as a vajayjay. Advertisers seem fine with it, too...

    1. JRScarbrough profile image86
      JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      `You crack me up. I agree, there is no censorship. There are some rules about what gets featured and that’s as far as it goes.

      1. paradigmsearch profile image89
        paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago in reply to this

        big_smile

    2. gmwilliams profile image86
      gmwilliamsposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      Read the hub, it is APPARENT that THERE is NO CENSORSHIP at HubPages REALLY NOW!
      http://s2.hubimg.com/u/8653525_f248.jpg

      1. barbat79 profile image72
        barbat79posted 2 years ago in reply to this

        ROWL

  12. paradigmsearch profile image89
    paradigmsearchposted 2 years ago

    @HP If you want me to find more, I work cheap. smile

  13. Len Cannon profile image88
    Len Cannonposted 2 years ago

    believe it or not I'm walkin' on air.

    1. JRScarbrough profile image86
      JRScarbroughposted 2 years ago in reply to this

      I never thought I could feel so free eee eee.

  14. barbat79 profile image72
    barbat79posted 2 years ago

    What "tomfoolery"!  To quote a holier than thou attitude, yet is afraid of holy water...

    What is the matter with this?  Live and let live..don't read it if you don't like it...and me, I usually am an incredibly nice person, but I am sorry, this discussion has brought this out.

 
working