- This topic has 9 replies, 1 voice, and was last updated 2 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Dear Sir or Madam,
I have made occasional posts to this forum and just noticed that I couldn’t see them anymore. Is this a technical problem or have I said something to offend? I can’t recall using abusive language and have always tried to remain polite so is it the contents that are considered unacceptable?
If the latter then please let me know so I won’t need to waste my time writing here. A pity as I am an admirer of Craig Murray and have read his books. I think he has been very badly treated.
Yours Sincerely
Bruce Hooker.
Hi Bruce.
Were the missing comments posted using the identity ‘Bruce H’?
There is no record of any of your comments having been deleted or blocked. Nothing from you is awaiting moderator approval, and you have no comments in the Trash list. I have also checked the admin logs, and there is no action recorded on anything posted from your IP connection. As there are no clues in the server logs, it seems your comments didn’t reach us. It could be worth checking whether there is a systematic problem with your connection or the browser settings on your device.
I’ve looked over all your comments since 2018, and didn’t see anything objectionable. You’re very welcome to continue commenting, but it might be a good idea to keep a copy of anything you post in case it vanishes again. You could try reposting it via a different browser.
I’m sorry we can’t be of more assistance.
Regards,
Mod.Yes they were all posted using Bruce H… maybe it’s me that’s going bonkers. They showed up on the threads but since I couldn’t see them. If they haven’t been deleted or anything then that’s the main thing. Thanks for your reply.
Best wishes to you all and especially to Craig Murray,
Bruce Hooker.
My humble excuses, I’ve found the posts I thought I’d lost, they all were all on a much earlier article so it’s not my posts that have gone but my brain.
Hello,
posted today (11th December 2021) & it went up on Craig’s latest blog about COP26, but just noticed it ain’t there anymore.
Not sure what volume of ‘deletions’ you process, but it’s a shame that, as part of the moderating process, you couldn’t just fire off an email saying why,,,, just a quick one line saying how the guidelines were ‘transgressed’, for future reference :-))))
Be interested to know why my contribution was binned, if it was (posted under same name as this, Josh R).
Hi Josh R,
I approved your comment initially but, after reviewing the links and listening to the broadcast, I removed it because it leads down a conspiracy theory rabbit hole.
Iain Davis is a self-confessed conspiracy theorist. On the pages you linked to, he promotes his recent book “Pseudopandemic” – which starts with the predictable theme that the coronavirus health crisis is a total scam, weaves together most of the usual conspiracy theory tropes, infers manipulation of governments by a monolithic global technocratic dictatorship, and calls for mass civil disobedience.
Nothwithstanding the persuasive allure of his gentle mannerisms, his analyses clearly conform to the conspiracy theory pattern of “Ah, but it secretly all stems from this … ” – which unfortunately breaches the guidance from Craig to keep such content out of the comments section lest it disrupt more grounded commentary. Davis concedes that his ideas sound crazy to most people; in which case they require more elaboration than can be accommodated in a comment thread.
As ever, you’re welcome to repost the content in the discussion forum, creating a new topic if there isn’t already a title with a similar theme. That will allow people to peruse and critique the ideas you put forward without distracting from the flow of topical discussions under Craig’s articles.
Regards,
Mod.Josh R,
Thank you for following the moderation advice to repost the deleted comment in the discussion forum rather than the BTL comments section. Under the title “Analysis & opinion on COP26 & the fluffy “green” agenda“, in your opening post, you state:
This is a repost of a comment deleted from the front page, sadly deemed verboten as it “leads down a conspiracy theory rabbit hole”, according to ‘official sources’.
so, Beware!
…although those of you with your critical faculties intact should be in very little danger :-)))))I find the rationale for this decision quite alarming, but clearly & honestly explained by the moderator.
…
At the end of the day, ‘your house, your rules’, so no hard feelings, just a sense of sadness at the loss of a forum for the analysis & critique of the agendas & motivations behind that which is deemed ‘acceptable’ establishment narrative….To clarify the rationale behind the relocation advice: the aim is to prevent distraction. We know from years of moderation experience that the introduction of far-fetched claims or conspiracy theory narratives into the BTL comments section has tended to elicit strongly worded critiques of the ideas and authors and/or condemnation of characteristics of the conspiracy theory, provoking an unproductive exchange that quickly dominates the ongoing debates and distracts attention from the points Craig made in his article. Casual readers end up getting dragged into a polarised discussion about conspiracy theories, while the tone quickly degenerates into a slanging match. The aim of relocating to the discussion forum is to allow the evaluative conversation to take place without deflecting the focus of the comment thread away from Craig’s article.
Craig decreed that unbelievable conspiracy theories will be deleted from the comments section without explanation. This credibility criterion is essentially subjective; but it’s up to the moderators to make that judgement. Comments with outlandish conspiracy theories and other dubious content can be blackballed by any moderator. (It normally only happens on rare occasions with instances of toxic racism, antisemitism, or the repetition of previously debunked claims.) In the case of dissent amongst the team, the matter can be raised for team discussion and resolution by majority consensus.
However, there is more leeway in the discussion forum, where commenters can determine the topic. Sometimes it’s enlightening to debate ideas that don’t seem feasible at first sight, provided they’re supported by a rational argument (whether sound or fallacious). Iain Davis’s explanations are well reasoned and articulated, so they are a worthy subject for rational debate.
Accordingly, you were asked to relocate your content to the forum to avoid distraction. The credibility criterion wasn’t applied in this case, as your comment wasn’t deleted without explanation. So kindly stop giving the impression – whether explicitly or by insinuation – that the ideas and authors to which you refer are being proscribed or censored by the blog moderators, otherwise those submissions will be suspended until you remove the false allegations.
a sense of sadness at the loss of a forum for the analysis & critique of the agendas & motivations behind that which is deemed ‘acceptable’ establishment narrative….
This facility is the forum for that kind of discussion. The clue is in the name.
Regards,
Mod.Hi moderator
I have just noticed that my comment on the medical risks associated with the untested coronavirus vaccines has been summarily deleted.
I can see from the preceding discussion why you have made this decision. However, you need to reassess your judgements. There is increasing evidence, referred to in my post, that something is seriously amiss with the official narrative on the manufacture and testing of these vaccines. This evidence is fact…and needs to be discussed and investigated as any other fact would be.
I would suggest that you allow freer debate on this issue in future. You are getting behind the times.Hi Kate,
Thank you for using the discussion forum to raise this issue; some commenters post their enquiries as another comment under the thread concerned (which would make it off topic, as it concerns moderation rather the subject of Craig’s article).
Only one comment from you was suspended, about 20 minutes ago, and it was annotated with the following advice:
—
[ Mod: Sorry, Kate, the covid pandemic and vaccination are off topic and too controversial in their own right to be posted under articles that don’t specifically deal with them as a central theme. Any comments or information about them should be posted in the discussion forum. ]
—
Most commenters can still see a suspended comment, with the annotation, if they remain on the same connection they used when posting it. But in certain cases it isn’t visible, which may have something to do with your browser settings.
There are certain highly controversial topics that quickly derail threads about other political issues; these are generally subjects of circulating conspiracy theories, e.g. 9/11, climate change, pizzagate, etc.. In the experience of this blog, and many others, if these discussions are allowed to take place in topical threads they quickly overwhelm the subject that the blog author was trying to draw attention to.
You are welcome, however, to repost the comment here in the discussion forums. It should be easy enough to start a new thread, and I’m sure you’ll find that other people will be keen to discuss the issues with you. This has the benefit of keeping the conversation focused, with its own specific URL for future reference.
Thank you for your consideration.
Thanks, will do.
