Censorship

About Site Feedback
1

I’ve been pondering about posting this for a while now, but I think the time is right. I’m referring here, of course, to the global censorship of debate surrounding COVID during 2020-2022, which is still ongoing to a certain extent but has now turned into a controlled demolition.

Forumosa participated in this. I’ve gone back through my PMs with mods to refresh my memory on how this panned out. It seems to have really kicked in during 2021 when the vaccines were being rolled out. Just as on YouTube, Twitter, etc., departures from the mainstream narrative were flagged, deleted, or modified. I started the Humbug thread in 2021 as a response partly to the general unpleasantness in the main threads, but also regular criticisms from moderators about “misinformation”. I was not the only person to experience this. A couple of people just gave up and left the site, while a couple of more persistent individuals just dealt with the bans and harassment, and carried on regardless.

As is now abundantly clear, the “misinformation” we were posting turned out to be considerably more accurate than the official pronouncements from the faces on TV; in fact it’s turning out to be far, far worse in some respects that we ever imagined.

I have a modest request: an undertaking from the moderators that censorship of debate will not happen here again, particularly when matters of science are being discussed. Forumosa isn’t a huge platform like Facebook or YouTube, but the fact that it is non-mainstream means that it was potentially a lifeline for people drowning in a sea of propaganda and fearmongering emanating from the big platforms. Several members lost the plot during “COVID”. Several were harmed (fortunately not permanently) by COVID vaccines. Allowing robust debate may have allowed the tide to turn far earlier than it actually happened. It may at least have allowed people to maintain some tenuous hold on sanity in the face of weapons-grade psychological manipulation.

Most of what I’ve written above was communicated privately to moderators during 2021-2022. I was rebuffed, ignored, or told not to say anything further on the matter. Now that tempers have cooled a little, perhaps it can be discussed. I’d also be interested to know how other members recall the prevailing climate here in 2021-22.

16 Likes
2

Seems to me that Forumosa followed along with all the other social media sites to censor free speech and healthy discussion to push their agenda. If admins are going to censor a specific viewpoint, they should make it clear on their about page that they don’t allow this kind of viewpoint on their site.

4 Likes
3

I think anyone reading through the threads would be hard pressed to understand what you’re talking about. As will always be an option for moderators, we temped material that could be shown to be false or fallacious, but that was relatively rare. We had people talking about all sides of the issue throughout, and I heard many complaints that we were being too liberal in allowing certain viewpoints that some people considered to be harmful. I don’t expect things will be much different in the future.

That’s far from the truth from the things I’ve heard about some well-known social media sites. There’s no agenda. We’re not going to censor a specific viewpoint.

3 Likes
5

One thing probably worth remembering is that this is a moderated site. We don’t make that a secret. It’s not a free-for-all.

1 Like
6

Eh … I was more on the other side, and often wished that the moderating were a little more heavy-handed: not so much with deleting stuff but with temping it or moving to different threads. (But damn that would have been a lot of work.) It became difficult to actually find useful info, with every thread derailing into whatever other, er, theories were being spouted. Or for that matter more good-natured whining “Well this sucks” threads turning into the same debates, again and again.

Of course, where people draw the line between “Keeping a forum useful and appealing” and “Censorship” is going to differ. I wound up muting almost all of the COVID threads because I found them neither useful nor appealing.

Anyway, one vote for “It’s a hard job, I’ve got minor issues, but mostly agree with the approach.”

7 Likes
7

Be more clear about it then. If you are going to moderate anti Covid vaccine opinions, then say in your rules page that you don’t tolerate anti Covid vaccine opinions. Whilst you are at it you can add the myriad of other things you oppose.

If you are going to oppress, at least let people know so they can avoid using the site.

1 Like
8

A quick look at many threads here will show that whatever we’re doing, we’re not “moderating anti Covid vaccine opinions” or “don’t tolerate anti Covid vaccine opinions”. Do you read those threads? I know I see you here often.

I have no idea what you’re talking about, but this indeed may be the wrong site for you.

1 Like
9

That’s why I rarely post anymore

1 Like
11

Maybe there could be a thread addressing mis-information in the post covid hysteria era? Or does one exist?

1 Like
12

I’d guess almost all of the COVID threads?

1 Like
16

I have in times considered to delete my account here because Forumosa seems to be becoming less a forum about Taiwan, but more an echo-chamber about all kinds of crude theories and right-wing ideas.

I remember reading posts here that compare health ministers of various countries to Hitler and Covid vaccines to the holocaust.

I don’t really want to be part of a community where those kind of „opinions“ seem to be accepted or even shared by a considerable percentage of the members…

7 Likes
18

So tired of this too. If you want a site where particular sets of ideas are ruled out of bounds, you are also in the wrong site.

5 Likes
19

You had a whole Humbug thread where I don’t think anyone censored your posts or debates. Some of the other threads weren’t appropriate for everything, and a lot of people didnt want to see it there. I remember arguing with you about masks, and you posted a paper that expkicitky said it did not support your position. Things like this can escalate and be moderated.

But you had a space to day what you wanted, this is not censorship.

Was that what happened with me? I remember several long back and forth messages with you and I suggested you write this very post. So here, I call bullshit. Maybe not every moderator responded with what you think was an acceptable response, maybe some did what you said, but I know this statement here is false in my case.

Psychological manipulation.

As far as I know there is no “mod agenda” except to keep the place from falling apart.

Yeah, all this talk of censorship is quite overblown. Which are the viewpoints that were censored, and can’t be found anywhere on the site (e.g. the Humbug thread)? The rules state what kind of content is not allowed, like extreme bigotry. A little light bigotry is often overlooked, we have a new poster with some long and unusual posts (moderators have asked for shorter contributions), and there are some viewpoints that are overwhelmingly held by members, but also lots of healthy debate.

Content isn’t moderated, so much as attitude and post placement. At least, in my experience but in fairness I joined the Flob in 2021 (?)

There’s the rub. Not every thread, let alone every covid thread, needs to become a debate about covid

There are plenty of these not censored, there is no policy of censoring this or any other opinion

If someone wants to get vaccinated and they come here for help and the same few people continually derail those discussions it isn’t unreasonable to moderate that. But as far as I know there was no anti-vax thread opened and them censored

Yeah, i just don’t see it. There are rules about what is allowed, those rules are posted and everyone using the site agrees to abide by them

I don’t think most be have those views, just a vocal minority

Again, I’m fairly new, so not sure what it used to be like. Yes, the site does lean a bit right, but the left isnt censored. Yes, there are some fringe viewpoints here, but that goes to show that we’re an open platform

An open platform with rules, but no nefarious agenda. Yeah, it’s a challenge to moderate fraught topics that people are very worked up about in such a way that makes everyone happy

But censorship? Not really, no

6 Likes
20

That would be the Humbug thread. But the veracity of otherwise of “misinformation” was not the point of my complaint. Mainly, what I wish to see is that open debate is permitted without judgements from moderators on factual accuracy.

Mostly, this is true. However we did have the brief appearance of a banner promoting government-sponsored inaccuracies, and some posts still became the subject of PM exchanges with moderators.

21

It is, but not every post on every thread needs to be open to the debate that you want to have. But on the site, with the exceptions in the rules, all debate is allowed.

3 Likes
22

Neither of these things are censorship

23

A thread called “Open”, you would expect, would be open to all debate. In practice it was not. Anything that was counter-narrative (i.e., factually accurate) was instantly removed to the humbug thread or to temp where nobody would read it. The Open thread (and others) thus became an echo-chamber of hysteria, unbalanced by any counterpoint.

My complaint here is concerning judgements from moderators over what was factual and what was not. I’ve had PM exchanges where the moderator concerned has not merely misunderstood what I’d said, but had decided that I was wrong simply on the basis that he was a moderator and I was not. I’ve been told that I can’t mention names, but my beef here is not with you personally. You weren’t a moderator when all this really kicked off.

All I’m asking for here is that, if something is clearly bullshit, it should be possible for posters to point out that it’s bullshit, particularly when accompanied by evidence supporting the point.

4 Likes
24

I see “open” here as non-specific, a catch all. Doesn’t mean that some things aren’t better placed in other threads. Mods move all sorts if things from this to that thread. This isn’t censorship.

That also isn’t censorship. The fact is, there is no opinion which was censored. Attitudes are moderated, things are moved around, but there was no COVID content that was verbotten

But you have to prove it. Again, I remember clearly when I asked you to support a point and you provided a paper that explicitly stated it did not support your point. With all respect, you have to acknowledge that sometimes you have been the one holding the shovel and you haven’t always conducted yourself perfectly when called out.

25

What I remember is that any longish stretch of posts in Open that could fit in a more specific thread was moved. How this came across to me in threads and PM conversations and now is that you insisted on your right to force everyone to read your opinions wherever and whenever you wanted it. If all discourse became bogged down, that was not a concern. If I would not actively assist you in advancing your agenda, I was insulted or asked to apologize or other pleasantries.

26

How do you know? It wasn’t you doing it. Something that is deleted cannot be seen.

I think it is abundantly obvious that almost everything that we posted in 2020/21 regarding the COVID narrative, and the vaccine narrative, turned out to be entirely accurate - in fact COVID turned out to be less dangerous, and the vaccine even more random and useless, than I or anybody else was claiming with reference to publicly-available data at the time.

Meanwhile, people who were claiming that COVID was horrifically fatal and that COVID vaccines were life-savers never had to prove anything. All they had to do was quote the newspapers.

My “agenda”, as you call it, is that the values of liberal democracies and the principles of science should be upheld and not suppressed. Now, if you don’t believe that those principles have any value, or indeed should be discarded, perhaps that’s a valid topic for debate. The fact is that people were actively harmed by the manipulation of information on social media. If you don’t like the word “censorship”, feel free to find another word for it.

2 Likes