What's the point?

Personally, I feel that is a very political thread which does not sit well where it currently is.

Last time I looked a few weeks back there was heavy political discussions about Nichola Sturgeon and rapists becoming trans people and wanting to go in womens prisons.

Hardly what could be deemed "having the craic" or funny whatever way you want to look at it. Yesterday there are complaints that black people are over represented in ads and on the TV.

I also did see the gammon comment as well. Same thing. A thread referencing politics, sex and religion is never going to be lighthearted.

The new Mods need to be able to find their own way and apply balance as someone else said.

They do need to know what the scope of the forum is to be able to be allowed Mod successfully. If the charter is lighthearted, then they know what they are working with and what is out of scope of the Forum and belongs elsewhere.

There is nothing lighthearted about the topic of trans women in womens prisons. Judging from the responses in the thread itself, some people take the topic deadly serious. So maybe you should have commented at that point about them taking it too serious if thats how you felt about it.

It is a heavy political topic and there will be some extreme views.

Trying to pigeonhole the topic of trans women and rapists into a forum for discussing "nonsense" and "fun" as being anyway lighthearted is a big stretch.

There are warnings all over the place in that thread for people using it with hidden Agendas. I dont blame the mod for reviewing it, if its something that looks like its coming under their remit.

I'd happily lay a few quid that I would guess the same person.

So it was a solo call on your part? Or are was that question missed?

Dunno, looks like people want to have their cake and eat it.

Complaints because Mod is shutting down nonsense threads because that is what AH should be for. Then complaints because Mods are reviewing threads if they dont fit the AH paramaters. It is not a taste thing, it is establishing the ground rules and applying them. People need to know what they are working with.

Personally, I think its great to see new Mods coming on board.

Might see some people return to Boards if it is a friendlier and more welcoming place.

Another suggestion is sanctions for those who abuse the report post function.

It seems some think they need to reach a quota.

That was an example of one topic that is discussed there which is not lighthearted. There are hundreds of others about sex, politics and religion in the same thread.

I am not saying the whole thread should be closed down, I am saying that it probably does not meet the AH Charter as it stands and might be better somewhere else. That is for the Mods to look at.

But the opposite is happening which is the reason we are here. It'll end up driving people away.

Just woke up and am browsing this thread

Looking at this piece from the short thread that was closed as the OP was deemed incoherent in the eyes of the Mod

"So basically woke is taking something that in previous eras was considered just the way it is and then repackaging it as something else and telling people they have been exploited, in my example poor become poverty."

Seems pretty coherent to me as a line of argument.

Whether you agree or not is for another day.

If someone is incontinent, then it's easy to see.

Stating that the OP is incoherent, and then using it as weapon of exclusion, is beginning a journey on a different path, perhaps the same one once well travelled in 1939-45.

Pointless thread with an incoherent OP. 

closed

one definition of incoherent

lacking normal clarity or intelligibility in speech or thought

Right off the bat for what you’re claiming is a light-hearted thread that has the perpetually offended pearl clutchers reaching for the report post button, you’re claiming you can tell who they are. I’ve no interest in that bet but one thing I do know is that there are more readers of any thread than there are contributors. You couldn’t actually tell who’s reporting all the posts. If you’re referring to other posters as pearl clutchers while raising an eyebrow at the idea of John Cleese being called gammon, you’re a long ways away from light-hearted.

With regards to AH as a whole, I’d take quality over quantity every day of the week, so I can understand why mods will close down threads that they don’t feel are adding anything of any value to the forum they moderate. It’s part of what they’re supposed to be doing beyond just cleaning up crap in the background and only being visible to hand out warnings, etc.

It’s much better for a forum when mods are taking an active interest in the forum and contributing to discussions, and it shouldn’t be held over their heads that they’re a mod, while at the same time telling them they’re only a mod on an internet forum and not to let it go to their head. The idea that their moderating decisions shouldn’t be influenced by their personal biases and views is patently absurd. It’s why a forum like AH needs a good mix of active mods as posters, precisely because it’s been seen in the past that the forums overall tone in terms of its quality and content and whether or not it’s welcoming to new participants is driven by the impression people have of the forum.

I think the raised eyebrows were because of the obvious double standard and hypocrisy that sometimes shows its face on this forum. I didn't see anyone who was offended but might have missed a nuance.