Comments on: On Line Opinion and Me http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/ Working for a secular Australia Mon, 31 Oct 2011 02:57:47 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=4.7 By: Linda Joy http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-158 Sun, 13 Mar 2011 06:56:19 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-158 My apologies Gregory.

My email to you clearly sets out WHY I thought censorship had occurred, and why I was thus so disappointed. There is no point in repeating it here.

]]>
By: Gregory Storer http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-157 Sun, 13 Mar 2011 06:10:45 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-157 All comments on my blog are moderated. I don’t sit here all day waiting for comments to roll in. Just a short delay, not any form of censorship.

g.

]]>
By: Linda Joy http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-156 Sat, 12 Mar 2011 14:16:01 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-156 You would be about the last person I would have thought who would delete an inoffensive post.

See how easy it is to censor when you have your own site/blog?

]]>
By: Linda Joy http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-155 Sat, 12 Mar 2011 05:56:55 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-155 (Returned from O/S. Late to these events!)

“Stupid, hateful comments are permitted so that the rest of the online community can pull them to shreds.”

Don’t do that. Please.

Don’t use others, as ‘you’ (gay community) have been used. That rationale is dependent on being allowed to disagree. (And Young has used much the same argument in his ABC interview BTW).

There has to be a graveyard somewhere that is littered with the ‘bodies’ of those moderates who have been banned (as myself) or withdrawn in disgust from OLO.

If anything it is the other way around. I am convinced that some articles are allowed because Young knows they will take a hammering from what is undoubtedly a central core of OLO stalwarts (the same names appear again and again) who run unchecked on OLO. Moderates that remain there have to accept that these same stalwarts will turn on them. Moderates WITHOUT DOUBT know that THEY must be careful in what they write; how they respond…

(Interestingly, though Young does not admit it, he has taken some steps to curb one? a couple if? his more radical core. It has been like smacking a spoiled brat! They cannot believe it, and are mightily annoyed! Far too little; and too late).

]]>
By: JObs http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-95 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 06:53:48 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-95 With the intention of influencing the advertising agreement and hence the source of funding for the site. I see that as aggressively punitive.

ie: You denied my request for a comment to be deleted, so I’ll attempt to hurt the whole site financially.

]]>
By: Gregory Storer http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-94 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 06:40:10 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-94

I assume based on your position in life, and mine, I would normally not be granted a chance at conversing with you aside from via a patronising bureaucratic form letter.

What position in life have you assumed about me? I’m a private citizen that once stood for election. Granted a chance? Please.

Based on your aggressive and disproportionate attack on OLO when you disagreed with the moderator’s decision, I am glad I can remain anonymous. Lucky me indeed.

Your language is over the top. There was no attack, I was not aggressive nor was my response disproportionate. I wrote a letter of complaint to some advertisers, that seems like a fairly standard thing to do.

]]>
By: JObs http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-93 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 06:13:53 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-93 Where do I start…

‘Among them, the fact they they are incorrect,’
Who decides what is ‘correct’ on an opinion site?

‘ inflammatory,’
All the better. Is it a prerequisite not to invoke passion on opinion sites?

‘likely to incite violence’
I don’t think random comments from random anonymous posters on the internet ‘incite’ violence, unless explicitly a ‘call to arms’ by someone influential.

‘ I don’t think making these statements gives some a right to be heard.’
I never argued that, I think rights are irrelevant to my argument, I’m talking pragmatically about ‘opinion changing’. What chance of changing opinions that are censored and hidden?

I have no idea ‘where’ you are and I don’t see that as relevant, I don’t see why that would threaten you if I did. I assume based on your position in life, and mine, I would normally not be granted a chance at conversing with you aside from via a patronising bureaucratic form letter.

Which brings us to your dilemma about anonymity. I think on the whole, someone such as yourself would applaud this scenario we have before us. Just think of the bloggers in Iran and China.

Based on your aggressive and disproportionate attack on OLO when you disagreed with the moderator’s decision, I am glad I can remain anonymous. Lucky me indeed.

]]>
By: Gregory Storer http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-92 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 05:43:52 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-92 There’s many reasons why comments that actually add nothing to the debate should be deleted. Among them, the fact they they are incorrect, inflammatory, likely to incite violence or vilify people. I don’t think making these statements gives some a right to be heard.

I also note how easy it is on the Internet to make comments, and that you can be anonymous. One of the comments in question is by a Mr Anderson, he’s only made two comments on Online Opinion, I don’t even know if he’s a real person, and I also note that nobody took him to task. Even if you did take him to task, it looks like he won’t respond because he’s gone. Even more reason to delete his comment.

Your own comment is an opinion, and I thank you for it. I disagree with you, and I’m not sure whether or not you are calling me a spoilt child or a bigot who posts a comment. However, you are fully aware of my name and where I am, yet you have the luxury to take a pot shot at me without revealing anything other than a questionable email address and an IP address. Lucky you.

I’m not even sure you’ll see my response, but I appreciate your time in visiting the blog and reading some if not all of it.

]]>
By: JObs http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-91 Thu, 17 Feb 2011 00:12:39 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-91 I really see it as an over-reaction and I’m generally very sympathetic to the Gay cause. The statement

“Stupid, hateful comments are permitted so that the rest of the online community can pull them to shreds. That’s not changing anyone’s opinions”

seems ludicrous to me. It’s infinitely better to change people’s opinions by seeing how such statements are inappropriate and rightly ridiculed than to delete the statements and have them hidden.

Bigots should be damned by their hatred remaining a constant source of ridicule and a black mark never to be removed from public viewing. Sanitising their stupidity saves them the embarrassment and denies others who think the same way to see how easily such statements can be refuted.

Censorship is the opposite of education.

I think this is really about a spoilt child who cant accept the word no.

]]>
By: Sillybilly http://gregory.storer.com.au/2011/02/on-line-opinion-and-me/#comment-83 Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:17:38 +0000 http://gregory.storer.com.au/?p=286#comment-83 Thanks for this article Gregory. I am a regular reader of Online Opinion, and I totally agree with what you have done.
You are quite right about the terrible language used against homosexuality on OLO.
I for one, will take a more proactive approach on the forum to try to ban that sort of language.

]]>