Locked Threads

[45R]

After a long morning at work I decide to take a look in the critique corner. It turns out that another thread was locked because people thought that images were a tad on the offensive sides. (needles and such)

Anyways my point being that we all take photos as for art, expression and so forth and just because someone finds something offense we decide to lock down the thread.

My question is.......do we consider that censorship or maintaining the peace.

I notice that now and then something that is not quite PC is locked because of members attitudes towards the picture in general being posted.


Be nice. No flames. I am just asking.

[neil_r]

This won’t get locked but it may get moved :lol: :lol:

This really is a tricky one, on the whole I think the Mods have the balance right here. A few threads have been locked because they became a sounding boards for polarised political debate that ended up being both futile and a waste of bandwidth.

There have been very few threads locked due to the “photographic” content (I think). In principal I am not in favour of any censorship, and if a suitable warning is given in the subject line and the image is not in any way illegal, things should be left alone.

My 2p

N

[CyberDyneSystems]

Let me just assure anyone reading this that NO CENSORSHIP has taken place.

The images remain for all to see.

The motivation for locking the thread was, as you suspect.. to maintain the peace.

It is a shame when we are forced to take such action. I hate to see it happen ... especially in a case like this.

But it happens.

As for "censorship"

...In all the time I have been here I have seen only two "Image threads" removed from this forum.

In both instances it was not the photos themselves that resulted in the threads removal.. but rather the responding content or copyrite issues that prompted the action.

Thus far thankfully as far as I know there has not been need for anyone to try and govern the content of the photos on this forum.

With luck and member's cooperation such a thing may never occur.

However, as allready mentioned in the thread you bring up,. the rules are there for all to read.

When we post on this forum we not only agree to be LIMITED by the rules as posted,. but we also agree to expect no limitations BEYOND those specified in the rules.

CDS

[defordphoto]

I also would like to state that we (Mods) take this very seriously. The thread in question was not locked willy-nilly. It was only locked after some discussion between us all.

Also, as a reminder there is no such thing as "free speech" on these forums. This is a privately owned forum and the owner can lock or kill any threads he so desires with no recourse from the poster. He can ban any member, just because he wants to.

But, of course, that is not the case here. Pekka is very, very lenient on this forum. We're very lucky to have this place to share photos and opinions, even the ones that we don't agree with.

We appreciate your concern as this is our photography home for sure. We just to sweep up once in awhile to keep things tidy.

[Belmondo]

Since I'm the one that locked the thread, I feel some obligation to confirm what CDS has already said. We had already discussed this thread as to its photgraphic content when it first appeared many days ago. The decision then was not to censor it except to add an appropriate disclosure to the title. That having been done, it was then up to the viewer as to whether or not they wanted to see the photos.

Fast forward to the most recent exchange between a couple forum members: After consulting with the other moderators, I determined that the general tone of the exchange was such that no useful purpose would be served by allowing it to continue. The images and the disclosure are still there, and links to the thread still work. We just decided to cut off discussion that was rapidly turning hostile.

[chris.bailey]

Given the number of threads generated on this forum, the degree of moderation is in my opinion pretty low. At the end of the day this is a forum to talk about photography, in whatever form it takes, such that we all learn a little. When forum members use it as a place to trade personal insults with no reference to photography at all then I think it is in order to lock the thread. Thankfully this is a rare event.

As an interesting observation, posts with warnings tend to get huge numbers of viewings compared with those without.

[tommykjensen]

As an interesting observation, posts with warnings tend to get huge numbers of viewings compared with those without.

Yeah that is really funny.

When the 20D lockup debate was on its highest on dpreview I posted a photo with the subject "Warning! Actual photo inside", this photo got some of the best comments I have received there like "One of the best I have seen here in two years" and the view count was huge. And the really funny thing is that I had posted the same photo just 2 days earlier with a normal title and it barely got noticed.


And I agree that it is noticable that the number of locked threads are very low compared to other forums.

[tofuboy]

I'll put a vote in for maintaining the peace. As was already mentioned, the thread is still there, with the pictures... I wouldn't call that censorship. I'd like to commend the mods for doing a good job at what they do.

It's a shame people sometimes take things they disagree with to heart and get all worked up over it. Life goes on, and I can still view those oddly intriguing photos whenever I want :)

[45R]

Mods-
Thanks for keeping the peace around here. :) Its good to be hanging around in a non-hostile environment. Just wanted to clarify what I saw.



45R

[stopbath]

Keeping the peace? Seems more like suppression of the freedom of speech to me.

Now don't get bent out of shape. I looked at the thread in question, didn't like the images, and quietly moved off to another thread. I didn't post anything about being disturbed, I just left. If others found the images offensive and said something, well, that's part of being in a social gathering isn't it.

As to act of locking the thread, well, I feel it is suppression of the users ability to comment (pro and con).

Of late, I have seen debate on the value of nude shots being on the site as well (mostly the problem of viewing them unknowingly in public places due to no 'warning' before hand).

I think the main problem with these sensitive images is that they are mixed in with the 'family' type images. If they were put in a section where the user could 'expect' the type of images, then things would likely be fine as you would not be in that area unless you wanted graphic images. Go into the area if you will, but don't knock the photographer for taking an image not suitable for children. Not all art is friendly... It's still art, but keep your "I can't handle this" remarks at the door if you enter.

Call the section "Back Room" "Green Door" "Limited Appeal" or even "If You Dare"... and going in, you would expect images of questionable taste which may or may not be up your alley. Naturally all posts would have the reason for it to be there in the title: "... (weapon)" "... (nudity)", "...(gore), "... (auto accident)" ... to help the users decide which images they want to bother with and which to avoid.

That's just my 25 cents (two bits.)

[Belmondo]

Stopbath:

For convenience of those reading this that might not be familiar with what you're talking about, this is the thread under discussion:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=43216&postdays=0&postorder=asc&hi ghlight=friends+suspension&start=30

Please go back and look at it again. There was never any suppression by the moderators as to discussion of the images, or even the practice of piercing. The moderators all saw it, talked about it, and agreed the topic was appropriate. The discussion was allowed to run unfettered from September 19 until October 13. Ultimately, the thread was locked only because the discussion changed to personal attack by at least one individual towards another. That attack produced a predictable response, and every indication was that the dialog was only going to go downhill from there.

Freedom of speech is a concept that, while altruistic, has practical limitations in a forum like ours. If we didn’t exercise reasonable controls over content, it would quickly degenerate into something far less pleasant and useful to its members.

I invite you to point out any situation where you feel we haven’t been consistent with that policy or have administered it in an unreasonable or unfair manner. I doubt you will find many instances when our action wasn’t justified.

I look forward to your response.

Thanks,

Tom

[FlipsidE]

belmondo is right. There is a big difference between sharing photographs and users flaming and bashing each other. The first is acceptable. The second is not. The moderators did not, in any way, restrict the freedom to show this photo. They did, however, stop what ended up being personal attacks between two users. In all my years on message boards, I haven't seen any that are widely used that allow two users to bash/flame/verbally attack each other.

I think the mods made the right choice here. The choice wasn't based on whether or not the photos were offensive. The choice was made based on users in a thread leading it in very much the wrong direction. I've been a moderator in the past on a large message board, and these choices are not easy ones to make. The fault of the thread going off topic or turning into a flame fest is not the fault of the original poster, but, at the same time, you can't leave a thread like that going. It's a tough call at times, and there's no way to satisfy everyone. But, in the end, you just have to make the call based on the rules.

I think the mods did a great job!

FlipsidE

[stopbath]

Stopbath:
...Ultimately, the thread was locked only because the discussion changed to personal attack by at least one individual towards another. That attack produced a predictable response, and every indication was that the dialog was only going to go downhill from there.
Personal attacks have no place in a public forum, and should be just deleted by the moderators if need be instead of shutting down the whole thread.

Freedom of speech is a concept that, while altruistic, has practical limitations in a forum like ours. If we didn’t exercise reasonable controls over content, it would quickly degenerate into something far less pleasant and useful to its members.

Agreed - this is a 'family' board. But now, no one can come on this board, see the image and comment... Instead of just deleting the offending posts contents the whole thread is locked out from any further use.

I invite you to point out any situation where you feel we haven’t been consistent with that policy or have administered it in an unreasonable or unfair manner. I doubt you will find many instances when our action wasn’t justified. The thread in question is one place where I think it's unfair... although I don't value the images in particular, they are photos and they should warrant discussion amongst people who care to comment (further).

I am not knocking all the hard effort that the moderators expend on keeping this board lively, accurate, and in good spirits, but I really don't think threads need to be locked due to a few transgressions into poor behaviour.

A rampaging debate, be it on politics or the social impact of a photograph is valid, and I think, a good thing. If it falls into mud slinging, clean it up, but don't close the door...

Now I'm up to 50 cents...

[Belmondo]

Stopbath:
One unanticipated downside to locking threads is the occasionally resulting thread regarding locking threads. :lol:

Actually, this is a healthy discussion, and you raise points that are valid.

Bear in mind, however, that these are decisions that we moderators must make on the fly, often at less-than-convenient times, and under the pressure of trying to have a life while still being true to our commitment to the forum. Remember: photography is our real love--- not moderating. If we're less than perfect in the performance of our duties, I hope we are to be forgiven.

I still believe almost a month's exposure to the forum was sufficient opportunity for people to comment on the photos.

Thanks,

Tom

[stopbath]

Stopbath:
One unanticipated downside to locking threads is the occasionally resulting thread regarding locking threads. :lol:

Actually, this is a healthy discussion, and you raise points that are valid.

Thank you, I like healthy...
Bear in mind, however, that these are decisions that we moderators must make on the fly, often at less-than-convenient times, and under the pressure of trying to have a life while still being true to our commitment to the forum. Remember: photography is our real love--- not moderating. If we're less than perfect in the performance of our duties, I hope we are to be forgiven.

Agreed.

I still believe almost a month's exposure to the forum was sufficient opportunity for people to comment on the photos.

Thanks,

Tom
Well, for users who read it before it got locked anyway... :wink:

[Molydood]

hurrah!
I could never be a moderator as I usually say one thing and mean another :P
Anyway, with regards to locking threads, it seems like a cool way to do it in my opinion, in that the thread remains for viewing, but the ability to post further is disallowed. I don't see it as a big deal, as nobody is THAT desperate to post a response are they?

As the mods say already, the threads don't get removed, they get locked, and if they get to that point, all the meaningful comments have stopped happening long ago, and further posts are becomming more and more off topic, and of less and less value to forum members. Therefore, locking a thread is usually a good thing IMO

for what it's worth, I feel people can post whatever they like if they put a warning in the title too.