Very Quiet On Here .

[MJ01]

1 hour ago, leviathan13 said:

You won't be laughing when your lot follow Sotlqbd with the 'hate crime' laws and you're the first one under the bus for saying something 'offensive' because you weren't able to see how 🦇💩 insane it all is.

 

Keep ignoring and laughing it off at your peril...

Could you tell me where this place is?

[leviathan13]

2 minutes ago, MJ01 said:

Could you tell me where this place is?

Meant to be Scotland - didn't realise the mistake (case of fat-finger syndrome as using my mobile...)

 

I know my terminology is probably offensive to someone... so i await the post being deleted and/or me being banned from the forum.

[leviathan13]

53 minutes ago, peak4 said:

Except that it's not likely to happen like that; the "new" legislation seems to be getting wildly misrepresented.

Patrick Harvie defends 'wildly misrepresented' Hate Crime Act   National Scot, but plenty of other sources & authors

PATRICK Harvie has defended the Hate Crime Act, saying the legislation is being “wildly misrepresented” and dragged into a “culture war space”.
Speaking on the BBC’s Sunday Show, the Scottish Greens co-leader said “people on the right in particular use phrases like free speech as though it only means the freedom to be abusive and vile and unpleasant and prejudiced”.

He said the idea that police would target comedians and theatre actors “couldn’t be further from the truth”. 
Harvie, meanwhile, said "no individual people" are exempted from the legislation but Police Scotland had "said very clearly that the media reports that that comedians or others would be targeted are complete nonsense." 
He added: "The law is essentially most of it bringing up to the common standard, hate crime legislation that was much of it already in place, but in disparate places in different bits of legislation, it's consolidating that altogether, so it will be simpler. 
"And it's also ensuring that the stirring up hatred offences which have been part of the criminal law for decades now, in relation to stirring up racial hatred, for example, that that applies to every other group."
 

That feature doesn't really say how it has been misrepresented... it just says it has.

 

It all serms a tad vague and it's a bit worrying that it only mentions those on the right using vile and abusive language... so it's OK for the left to call for battery acid to be thrown over right-wing politicians and to 'punch a Nazi', but saying there are two sexes and you can't swap between them will land you in trouble if someone 'finds it offensive'?

[butlers]

Why lie about it being a " mistake".

 

[peak4]

16 minutes ago, Anna B said:

The new forum rules are putting a lot of regular posters off. IMO They seem rather excessive and a bit draconian. People don't like being told what to do to such an extent.

I think they need using wisely and could probably be more relaxed. 

I was wondering whether to reply here, or in the feedback thread, but it does seem directly relevant to this topic.

Are the "new" rules really that different to those of most other forums & websites?
Yes, they are longer, with more specific clauses then previously on here, but the law(s) in England/Wales & Scotland has also changed since the some earlier editions; site owners & lead moderators do have legal responsibilities too.
Most T&Cs seem to deal with these legalities & responsibilities, just trying to ensure contributors treat each other with respect, and generally being a welcoming place for all visitors.
For interest, there's a copy of the rules from 2016 preserved here on The Internet Archive.
Broadly the same from what I can see, maybe with some additions due to those who sought to circumvent the original T&Cs.

 

I'm sure clarification, or even requests for re-wording, would be considered on the feedback topic.

 

[peak4]

15 minutes ago, leviathan13 said:

That feature doesn't really say how it has been misrepresented... it just says it has.

 

It all serms a tad vague and it's a bit worrying that it only mentions those on the right using vile and abusive language... so it's OK for the left to call for battery acid to be thrown over right-wing politicians and to 'punch a Nazi', but saying there are two sexes and you can't swap between them will land you in trouble if someone 'finds it offensive'?

Did you actually read the whole article, including the embedded links, such as this one

EXPLAINED
What is - and isn't - in Scotland's new Hate Crime Act?

[leviathan13]

8 minutes ago, peak4 said:

Did you actually read the whole article, including the embedded links, such as this one

EXPLAINED
What is - and isn't - in Scotland's new Hate Crime Act?

Still not convinced that it's not going to be one sided... but we'll see.

[GabrielC]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

The new forum rules are putting a lot of regular posters off. IMO They seem rather excessive and a bit draconian. People don't like being told what to do to such an extent.

I think they need using wisely and could probably be more relaxed. 

Maybe ,but I think internet forums are just not has popular now as in the past.

[SheffieldForum]

1 hour ago, Anna B said:

The new forum rules are putting a lot of regular posters off. IMO They seem rather excessive and a bit draconian. People don't like being told what to do to such an extent.

I think they need using wisely and could probably be more relaxed. 

 

1 hour ago, peak4 said:

I was wondering whether to reply here, or in the feedback thread, but it does seem directly relevant to this topic.

Are the "new" rules really that different to those of most other forums & websites?
Yes, they are longer, with more specific clauses then previously on here, but the law(s) in England/Wales & Scotland has also changed since the some earlier editions; site owners & lead moderators do have legal responsibilities too.
Most T&Cs seem to deal with these legalities & responsibilities, just trying to ensure contributors treat each other with respect, and generally being a welcoming place for all visitors.
For interest, there's a copy of the rules from 2016 preserved here on The Internet Archive.
Broadly the same from what I can see, maybe with some additions due to those who sought to circumvent the original T&Cs.

 

I'm sure clarification, or even requests for re-wording, would be considered on the feedback topic.

 

The 'new' rules are pretty much what the rules have always been (as you can see in the previous version linked above), but the feedback was that in the terms it was written quite formally and people were saying they were confused, so the guidelines were created to make it easier to digest and less formally written. There has to be the formal version as a legal requirement thing (yes, as stated there are laws that require such things - and for it to be enforced).

 

In fact, the 'new' guidelines are pretty much pro forma, copied and shared as standard best practice across many different forums. I'm struggling to see why people would have problems with it as it all just boils down to just being nice and treating others with respect. There are a few specific tweaks, but only to clarify some site-specific things. However, as observed in the feedback forum I'm open to constructive feedback and will clarify where necessary, feel free to message me or contact the help desk.

 

As for the thread subject, it is quieter than normal for a few reasons, some of which may include:

 

1. I have been posting less the last couple of weeks to see what happens after some people openly stated they didn't like me posting (and, frankly, some specific people were targeting everything I posted seemingly to have a go at me directly). Honestly, I'd like more people to contribute topics - particularly in the main Sheffield Forum - and stoke discussions. The less I have to do, the better, in my opinion, but since I came on board and started posting the forum got busier. Then, since I stopped posting as much, it got quieter, and there is some correlation there. The power is in your hands! Post more! Start the discussions! 😀

 

2. We are in Purdah, and a vast amount of Sheffield-centric 'news' (or moans! 🤣) comes from or about the Council - I'm sure there'll be a flurry of stuff announced or happening soon after the local elections. Likewise, other news is thin-on-the-ground due to time of year and other factors, some journalist friends at local outlets have told me they are really struggling to fill column inches at the moment.

 

3. A couple of people have been 'let go' after multiple warnings over the course of weeks for continuously breaking the rules. Honestly, I am extremely tolerant (I genuinely use suspensions and bans only as a last resort, I don't even issue formal warnings unless I think it is absolutely necessary) and tried to discuss their issues with them several times publicly and privately and warn them to stop, but those people were just spoiling the site, seemingly only posting to push my boundaries and/or have a go about the site rather than genuinely get involved in the discussions. I'm all for constructive feedback but constant aggressive criticism, accusations and threats just won't cut it.

 

4. Perhaps because of 3, a few people have seemingly gone on a mini-boycott/protest between themselves - that's up to them. I'm aware of a small group of people who don't seem to like me personally (apparently I have been called some very interesting names 🤣) or seemingly any form of 'change', me being involved or me challenging certain views as part of the discussion - and that's fine, but sorry I'm here and I am me - and I am investing a lot into keeping the site going. Of course, I don't have a problem with these people (or anyone!) personally and they are welcome to post (within the rules 😉), but it is up to them.

 

Anyway, that's all I'm going to discuss publicly on that so we'll leave it there and draw a line under it. If anyone does have issue or want to talk about any of this feel free to message me or use the help desk (it would be nice for people to do that rather than snipe in the background or egg each other on 🙄).

 

On a positive note though, it has been much nicer and more relaxed on the forum with less of the angry posts, falling out and less posts reported, so that's genuinely great! 👍

 

There's some cool changes to come and a bit of a relaunch planned, so I'm not worried about a temporary drop in activity (which, looking at the stats isn't actually that much of a drop; the site is still busier on all counts than just a few months ago, and March was the busiest the forum has been in well over five years!).

[The_DADDY]

My two penneth. I got behind you SheffieldForum, I was excited about what you would bring to the Forum. I like some of the changes,  not all but that's life. I was very happy to continue posting, start threads etc. I even agree with most of the rules (and those I don't agree with I'm still happy to follow) but what I can't get behind is when there are rules regarding racism, ageism and sexism (all of which I fully agree with) yet you on more than one occasion highlight "Middle aged White Men" in a very negative way, like its something to be ashamed of or our points are less valid, well I find that hypocritical and insulting and it definitely left a bad taste.

Like I say, just my two penneth and if posting this results in my account being banned then I'll accept that, move on and wish the forum all the best for the future. 

This will be my only contribution like this on the open forum. I do have more to say but this is the thing that has really irked me. Anything else I'd like to say will be either in the feedback section or via the Help Desk 👍