• Creator
  • #3937463


    by john.a.wills ·

    A few days ago I posted a General-Discussion item about changes in psychological practice in my lifetime. It is not to be found, so I suppose it has been censored. Can I know why? It contained no advertisements, profanity or personal attacks, so I suppose it was in some way offensive; to whom and how?

You are posting a reply to: censorship

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our Community FAQs for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.

All Answers

  • Author
    • #3938526
      Avatar photo

      If I were to guess.

      by rproffitt ·

      In reply to censorship

      I see it but do see something that could be offensive to some.

      -> You may want to find a forum that covers such topics?

    • #3938525

      rproffitt’s response

      by john.a.wills ·

      In reply to censorship

      ..includes a suggestion that I find another forum, but this is the water cooler, where I and many others have discussed many very varied topics (things have been fairly quiet for a while – perhaps the censors have been nipping interesting subjects in the bud). Perhaps some psychologists might be offended, but we are informaticians here; or possibly some republicans might be offended at the reference to Coronation Year, but I am sure that TechRepublic, despite its title, is not an abode of bigoted anti-monarchists.

      • #3938524
        Avatar photo

        Sorry that you feel differently….

        by birdmantd ·

        In reply to rproffitt’s response

        This site has forum moderators and freedom of speech is not guaranteed by the the 1st amendment here. Users/Members of this forum are free to post whatever they choose. However, moderators have the ultimate authority on what is or is not allowed for whatever reason at any time.

        This is stated in the Terms and conditions/forum rules. There is no monthly membership fee to belong or post to this site. Please review the forum rules: if you have any questions.

    • #3938504

      birdmantd misunderstands me

      by john.a.wills ·

      In reply to censorship

      I am not denying TR’s right to exclude my post. Some months ago I declined the offer of a Moderator position with TR due to my overloaded daily agenda. Facebook is probably going to be challenged in the courts for censorship, but TR is a comparatively small and “private” forum, so its Moderators can presumably act more arbitrarily than some people think Facebook ones legally can. But I am curious as to the “something” that rproffitt saw. Has the Moderator who excluded the post spoken yet? If he or she doesn’t want to offend by quoting in public what I said about the contrasting experience of myself and my nephew, perhaps I can be sent an email. All that I said (which wasn’t much) is true.

      • #3938502
        Avatar photo

        Sorry if I misunderstood….

        by birdmantd ·

        In reply to birdmantd misunderstands me

        ….your post. From your latest comment, you clearly understand my point. I did not delete the other thread that you referred to. It is possible that the automated thread monitor could have deleted your prior post but I can only speculate. I wish you no ill will.

    • #3940577

      Following Guideline

      by old molases ·

      In reply to censorship

      They might not be according to the standards set for the platform. This is why they are censored.

    • #3940570

      Yes, Old Molases, but…

      by john.a.wills ·

      In reply to censorship

      which guideline was I not following? That is what I would like to know. Rproffitt, who as Moderator has seen my submission, suggests that some thing in it might have been offensive to some, but to whom? To a group of which I myself used to be a member but due to some kind of reprogramming long ago no longer am? To those of another group no longer catered to? I wish the Moderator who made my submission disappear would give some idea.

      • #3940566
        Avatar photo

        Re: censorship

        by kees_b ·

        In reply to Yes, Old Molases, but…

        That moderator was me, I’m afraid. Your post here was a few days later. But the forum software doesn’t allow for easy retrieval of old posts, so I didn’t take the trouble to try and find it again to have a closer look.

        I do remember I was in doubt, but found the subject too off-topic for our site, and maybe a little bit controversial, so I decided to delete it.
        If you can make a new post with more or less the same content, I’ll leave it to my fellow moderators to have an opinion.

      • #3940565
        Avatar photo

        Well John, I think you really know which point

        by Wizard57M-TR ·

        In reply to Yes, Old Molases, but…

        was considered too controversial…it wasn’t dyslexia! When the majority of medical and psychiatric organizations have the opinion that “therapies” that were attempted decades ago actually cause more harm, then a post espousing the use of those therapies might just not be appropriate.
        Wiz (another moderator, long term)

    • #3940089


      by rnmetelica ·

      In reply to censorship

      I’ll take a note.

    • #3945033

      censorship elsewhere

      by john.a.wills ·

      In reply to censorship

      Recently I have had two emails from an organization with which I have no connection (at least, none known to me) regarding censorship on Youtube. Apparently this organization’s posts were suddenly removed without notice or explanation, but they managed to get them on another such site (I presume they had wisely kept copies on their own disks).

      I went to the new site and found it to consist of descriptions by people of how they had been cured of sexual inversion or sexual dysphoria, mostly by treatment of co-morbidities without which the morbidity of main interest could no longer exist. It seems remiss of Youtube to deprive sufferers (sexual dysphoria must be absolutely dreadful) of knowledge about even indirect cures for their conditions, treatments which should not offend adherents of the GLBxyz ideology because they do not directly address the conditions that ideology wants considered “normal”.

Viewing 6 reply threads