6 Music Feedback  permalink

The moderation of this board - Hosts helped requested

This discussion has been closed.

Messages: 1 - 50 of 295
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    Hello all, and in particular hello to our Host

    At the moment, this board is being disrupted by a new member, "Dick Solomon", whose purpose in joining these boards is gloat about the fact that someone is pretending to be Mozo, and texting the George Lamb show for Shabbas etc.

    The joke being that Mozo doesn't like the George Lamb Show. Ohh, my aching etc.

    Personally, I think Dick Solomon's posts should be removed as being designed to provoke

    Instead, the mods have had a frenzy of deletion, removing every post that mentions Dick Solomon, because his first name is also a euphamism for the male reproductive organ.

    They have also deleted just about every post on a thread regarding moderation of this board (including three of mine), then removed the thread. Then we get a warning from the "Central Communities Team" not to post about moderation on OTHER threads, because that's off topic.

    It's a feedback board - why are you so upset about feedback?

    I am very politely asking:

    1. Can we have an appearance from our Host. Resolving disputes is in your job description, as is answering questions? Can the Host please immediately address the following.

    1.b (Or, if we don't have a Host, can you 'fess up?)

    2. Can Dick Solomon be policed properly, and the provoking posts removed?

    3. Can we please have detailed guidance on how we address Dick Solomon without breaching the board rules? If you cannot arrive at a suitable form of words, please instruct Dick Solomon to chose a new name.

    4. Can you explain why this board, and in particular any George Lamb related threads, are policed with the intolerance of the Taliban, whereas the Marc Riley board is spattered with swearing and innuendo, and NEVER has a single post removed? I think it's because you don't like us, because we don't like George Lamb, and you're picking on us to try to get us to shutup about it.

    5. I'd like my three posts restored, please. All I did was use Dick Solomon's first name. It's his name. *That's what he's called.*

    And finallY: Moderators: CHILL OUT. I've never seen anything like it!

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    Seconded...

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Ddik Trebor (U202315) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    Your wasting your time Fist, I posted something very similar to this and it was removed, post 4000 in the Lamb thread, actually.

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 3.

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    I can't see why it would be removed - everything is politely put, it contains no swearing or provoking language, and it asks a serious of questions pertinent to the business of this board.

    I'm hoping that the person whose job it is to interact with us on these boards - our Host - will be able to respond and resolve/answer some of my questions.

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by Ddik Trebor (U202315) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    Well it's certainly more polite than my post, but I asked pretty much the same things as you about Mr Solomon. Though I did add a bit about somebody being banned yesterday for mentioning , while other people can get away with what I would call trolling.

    All power to you for trying though...*





    *I hope that didn't sound too patronising.

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    The banning of infotainment was wrong. I hope he has made a complaint to the BBC, and I trust they will allow him back. He was a positive, enjoyable poster to these boards.

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    I second and third all the above. Up to now I haven't bothered to re-post my deleted posts on the facebook site www.new.facebook.com... because I really thought it was a waste of time. But I'm going to do it now and I would encourage anyone else that had posts ripped off the thread earlier today to do the same. If nothing else, to act as a repository for these posts should any outside agencies ultimately become in involved in this whole issue.

    I'd also like to ask why earlier today the Central Communities Team appeared on the board and provided an email address after a direct request from me to be able to answer to the people that censored me. I clearly stated my wish to open up a reasoned debate about the whole moderation issue and specifically asked for a direct address that would be responded to. I gave them the option to send it to me via my personal address if they didn’t want to make this public.

    The address they provided was central-communities-team@bbc.co.uk. I immediately emailed them with a copy of one of my removed posts and asked for an explanation of what I had done that had contravened the 'house rules'. Almost immediately I got back an automated 'out of office' response. After I posted again to the thread complaining about this, I then got the same message again except this time the 'out of office bit was removed'. Both emails were automated responses pointing me to a series of FAQs that were not relevant to my request. Both emails also stated that "The Central Communities Team cannot reply to your question". In other words I was sent on a wild goose chase. I believe this displays a level of cynicism and arrogance in a publicly funded organisation that is frankly breathtaking.

    If I'm reading any of this wrong I will be glad to receive an email from The Central Communities Team first thing tomorrow explaining the situation more fully. Failing that, I think there are issues of free speech and the BBC charter here that need to be addressed and which I think are now long overdue a more public exposure.

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by I am not an organiser etc (U11351618) on Wednesday, 6th August 2008

    There'll be more to say on this tomorrow.

    The latest post on this is an entirely appropriate response to the current situation...

    www.facebook.com//ed...

    In case people don't know, here's the premise (although it does have to be noted, the word 'erudite' is a common theme):

    Since George Lamb 'won' his Sony 'award' an increasing, and worrying, amount of posts critical of the event and Mr Lamb have been censored as breaking the messaging rules.

    The many contributors have become concerned and confused by this turn of events. By and large the comments are erudite, pithy and moderate. As far as anybody can tell they are not offensive in any way - particularly when compared to some of the material delivered by Mr Lamb and his 'posse' for 15 hours each week.

    So why the change in policy?

    As licence-payers, we respectfully request an explanation of this change in policy as repeated individual requests are met with a wall of silence.

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    And once more a totally innocuous posting goes missing. Henceforce all moderators will now be referred to as censors and we'll have to resort to coded acronyms like NORWICH (Alan Bennett reference).

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 9.

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Whose was post 8 then?

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Hello Mods..Firstly, thanks for removing the above post for now. Secondly, could you or Iamnot anumber please explain how the link that was posted took me back into my own Facebook account? Would it be available to anyone to go into? I was able to log out then go into the account via the link and access all my account details. This is a breach of my personal security, as I'm sure you'd appreaciate. Perhaps it was an error...if so please explain how. If it was deliberate then I presume you will take appropriate action. It was not 'clever' or 'funny'. I would imagine that had it happened to anyone else they would feel the same, not that I expect anyone to agree as the Whips are out in force.

    Many thanks,
    QueenData

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 11.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    And once more QD stirs it up for her own personal entertainment. The link took you to your own personal login on FaceBook, not to QD's specifically.

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    And I'm supposed to know that how, exactly....and the purpose being what exactly??? I would imagine I was not the only person to wonder what on earth was going on....

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Cookies dear, cookies....

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 13.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    oh, hang on, of course, I'm not allowed to engage in discussion with the mods on here am I...or query anything, or have an opinion...If that is the case the mods will react accordingly and put the post back up, as it was SO relevant and important. Utter rudeness.

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Not when your specific intention is to stir up trouble for the sake of it - you know what I mean.

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 16.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    I think everyone here has got the measure of you, QD. Discussion ended.

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    hahahahahahahahaha.....that told me!!!!!!!

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    by the way.....do you have enough rope????????...oh, it would appear you do....!

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by Richard (U4566524) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    QD- if you click on a link to a site you have an account with, it will usually log you in automatically. Your computer stores small files called cookies that keep your login details to save you having to log in every time. Nobody else's computer has the correct cookies to access your accounts.

    I didn't see what was on the removed post but you can rest assured that anybody trying to access your account details on any site would be presented with a login page. Your security has not been compromised.

    Apologies if I'm stating the bleeding obvious, I just wanted to put your mind at rest on that score.

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 20.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 21.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Thanks Bobtoo...I need the obvious stated when it comes to computers...It was because it took me straight to my edit profile page that got me concerned. It did seem a bit odd. I didn't understand the context of going there and I still don't, but I'm sure I will be enlightened by 'Iam..' as to the nature of the link. I am a bit jumpy because of what happened the other week regarding personal stuff etc so naturally wanted it resolved. Mods, if there was nothing 'naughty' going on then please consider me happy with the 'cookie' explanation. My apologies to 'Iam..' for asking for a deletion of the post, but could I suggest that he makes it clearer next time for the virtually illiterate. Merci all....QD

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 22.

    Posted by steve_swift (U2177659) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    That was funny

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Oh Geoff..*yawn*...go and be a bit more creative with your conspiracy theories....it's really lazy to presume that all the people that disagree with you are actually one individual...sooooo boring.

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 25.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Caps back on I see...

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    ...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    I thought QD had made her final, FINAL dignified exit from these boards? More farewell concerts than Liza Minelli.

    And yet here she is, telling people what they can and can't post AGAIN. And getting herself in a right Paddy.

    And yes, it was funny, wasn't it, children?

    I hope the mods will put that post back up now!

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 28.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    I wasn't saying what people could post..I made a query. There is a difference. I am more than happy for it to go back up. No problemo. We can all go back on our words, can't we Fist?

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 29.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    But I have noticed a few people telling the mods who/what should be allowed on these boards. Maybe you've confused me with them. Perhaps.

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    ..and yes, it was funny...I am really going to have to do an Adult Ed course in being less of a spanner when it comes to computers....I really didn't know that!!! Oh well...smiley - doh

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    That wasn't "personal stuff" that happened to you the other week - that was all conducted by you in public, to the delight of onlookers.

    Now you've given us a delightful demonstration of the limits of your tecnical knowledge, do you have anything else to add about the topic: to whit, the moderation of this board (which I still recall you saying on several occasions you would never post on again)?

    Otherwise I'm afraid you may be off topic, and our ever vigilant Central Communities Team will have to remove your posts.

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    And on that note: Host - where are you?

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 32.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Was that the same day you said you would call a truce with me then decided last night, on a public place, to call me a northern town? When I had done nothing to annoy you? Goalposts moving again. Still, that's your perogative as it's your right to do as you wish. And yes, I am rubbish at computinginess, as you have pointed out here and in the other place already this morning. Regarding Eds, I was chuckling when I wrote that cos he really is funny...this place would be poorer without him. He is a 'Proper Character', don't you think? So, hope I have given everyone a good chuckle too...hasn't the mood lightened? No..oh well.

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by doctorbeat (U12048169) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    The reaction that most of us have to George Lamb there. Starting to get you too.

    Anyway, top computer skillz there QD, as your man would say. Very impressive.

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by I am not an organiser etc (U11351618) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Oh the joy of a ‘temporarily hidden’ post. You don’t get an email, so if you haven’t saved it you can’t re-post. And I thought that post was so innocuous, I didn’t bother saving it. Then to discover it was removed at the request of a fellow board member! QD, as the Pet Shop Boys asked, What Have I Done to Deserve This?

    Of course, up until now, only the mods know the supreme irony of that post being censored. The link was to... I can hardly type the words... the link was to... I can’t believe I’m about to say this... the link was to:

    The ‘Stop Censorship at BBC 6Music!’ FB site! Joy.

    [Question though – why not one of those link broken/unsuitable things, rather than complete removal? Am I about to be in trouble?]

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Yes...maybe I should apply to be a Mod...then you would be able to bribe me with those cookie things..is that how it works?? Oooh..What's that button there....*%$£££%&*%^"&(*()$£!!!^....CRIKEY!

    Report message37

  • Message 38

    , in reply to message 37.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Hahahahaha..you should send that to that Alanis woman...she thinks it's summat to do with spoons!! (really sorry if I over-reacted...I literally panicked...oh my goodness!!! What is this, etc,etc...I thought I would wake up with a picture of Fist's bottom as my profile pic *joke* or something...) Apology accepted??? QD

    Report message38

  • Message 39

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by Mozo (U10059077) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    QD – my resolution today is to be nice to everyone so, might I suggest that perhaps you have a cup of tea and count to 10 in future before running off on yet another tirade of woe about how everyone is out to get you?

    I appreciate that you are not computer literate, but I would have thought that there was an element of common sense involved here. Also your screen name suggests that you have some connection with IT, so I think it would have been reasonable for whomever made the post to expect that you knew one end of a mouse from the other.

    I also gathered after your recent troubles that you had decided not to stick your digit back in the hornets nest that you believe we all are. That didn't last long then did it? I note that as usual though you stir it all up and then run to the nearest figure of authority brandishing a stung finger.

    After my recent experience I am keen not to be squashing anyone's right to free expression, and perhaps we should all examine our motives here. But if you just want to pick a fight all over again, I'd suggest you get the economy sized box of Kleenex out now to save time.

    Report message39

  • Message 40

    , in reply to message 36.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 41

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by U6679583 (U6679583) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Some cack-handed attempts at practical jokes, and sock puppetry on here put paid to that.

    No - the mood hasn't lightened. George lamb's show is still rubbish, 6music is still being cnynically wrecked and not replaced elsewhere, and the moderators are making discussions on this board impossible by deleting every other post on the most spurious of pretexts, much aided by you.

    Meanwhile a person is harrassing a regular poster by sending spoof texts in his name to Radio shows, then coming onto this board to gloat about it. I'm pretty sure I know who that person is.

    I understand why you're here - you want some attention, and it's lonely over there on your GLR page, posting repies to yourself amongst the tumbleweeds, but take a step back and observe yourself: the very first thing you did to mark your triumphant return here, before you'd even written anything, was to have someone else's perfectly innocent post removed. Then you proceded to insult everyone on this thread. Do you wonder why you get the sort of response you do?

    Report message41

  • Message 42

    , in reply to message 39.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Point taken...but I still don't understand why it happened. Every other link on here goes straight to the place it's supposed to. So why didn't that one? I tried it several times. I even shut the screens down then re-tried. And how would I have known where to go from my profile...oh I am so confused.. Speak slowly in words of 1 syllable if poss....Thanks Guys.

    Report message42

  • Message 43

    , in reply to message 40.

    Posted by I am not an organiser etc (U11351618) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    If you're asking me to accept that 'apology' above, the the answer is - What's the Point? It's what I call a New Labour apology. It's one of those, "I'm sorry if I offended you, but it was your fault, anyway" efforts. Have some humilty, for God's sake.

    Report message43

  • Message 44

    , in reply to message 41.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Fist, I did not insult everyone on this thread. I had a mini ding-dong with Geoff cos he was rude. I was rude back. So it goes. I think the person sending the texts is indeed getting the reaction he wants. I wouldn't be happy if it was happening to me. But there have been some dirty tactics used here and there I guess. I asked the mods to remove the post and will happily forward the email I sent to 'Iamnot..' if he wants to see it. It was a query. Nothing more. If you think about last night's little diatribe, you may remember you 'bit your thumb' at me first.

    Report message44

  • Message 45

    , in reply to message 42.

    This posting has been hidden during moderation because it broke the House Rules in some way.

  • Message 46

    , in reply to message 44.

    Posted by LoudGeoffW (U11943874) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Anyone here remember the Arabella Weir character in the Fast Show who swapped from hard nosed journalist to simpering doe eyed innocence at the sight of a male?

    Report message46

  • Message 47

    , in reply to message 43.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Right. Ok. I am sorry that I asked for your post to be removed because I wasn't able to access the area it was supposed to go to and thought someone had posted my details up. It was an honest misunderstanding. I apologised because it was all a bit farcical and probably to do with me being rubbish with computers. However, I still don't understand why it happened and maybe(?) the link was wrong in the first place. Maybe it was 'one of those things'. So I will reserve the right to throw myself on your mercy until I get a more understandable explanation.

    Report message47

  • Message 48

    , in reply to message 47.

    Posted by I am not an organiser etc (U11351618) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    See. I'm sorry but... You are Peter Mandelson and I claim my £10.

    Report message48

  • Message 49

    , in reply to message 48.

    Posted by lastfamousplaygirl (U4382644) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    Are you sorry 'Iam..'? Are you sorry that your post could have caused confusion? You might say 'sorry if it worried/confused but I reserve my right to have done it'...yes indeed...'sorry for removing it but I reserve my right to have done it'...etcetcetc...roundandroundandround.

    Report message49

  • Message 50

    , in reply to message 49.

    Posted by I am not an organiser etc (U11351618) on Thursday, 7th August 2008

    I see the internet tips board has been closed.

    Report message50

Back to top

About this Board

Talk about Gideon's show and Freak Zone on the 6 Music Message boards.

or register to take part in a discussion.


The message board is currently closed for posting.

Mon-Fri 0900-0000 Weekends 1000-0000

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.