Censorship, or ToS?

Thread Starter

jaygatsby

Joined Nov 23, 2011
182
I made a comment in the expensive drug thread a couple of days ago about president Obama. It was quickly taken away. I thought it was because of Terms of Service, but I just looked and a quick find for 'polit' returns nothing.

Was it censorship? Are mods the type to remove things they disagree with, while leaving other things?
 

bertus

Joined Apr 5, 2008
22,270
Hello,

Did you read point 5 of the ToS?

5. Role of the Moderators. The Moderators are here to help the membership. If a moderator believes that a question will draw more attention or help in another forum, they may move the thread to draw more responses. If a topic or post has accidentally been duplicated, they will remove the extraneous post. A new topic that repeats a previous topic might be merged for the convenience of the membership. Moderators may also offer occasional encouragement to keep debates civil, should the need arise. When debates become heated the Moderators reserve the right to closed or moderate threads and posts that may be deemed unsuitable in the wider interests of the community.

The Administration and Moderating Team reserves the right to edit your posts, threads, and user information in any way they deem necessary. The Moderators will only do such a thing if there is a reason and such reasons will not be questioned. Reposting content that was removed by The Moderators will result in swift action and a ban.

Although the All About Circuits Administration and Moderation Team will attempt to keep all objectionable posts and threads off this forum, it is impossible for Us to review all messages. Therefore if You come across post or threads that violate Our Terms of Service, or contain any offensive, illegal, or otherwise contentious content on The All About Circuits Forums, please alert a member of the Administration and Moderating Team and we will deal with the offending content. Please report report offending posts using the
button.
We also do not allow any religious or political sensitive statements.

Mentioning Obama could be political sensitive.
I do not know who moderated your post.

Bertus
 

Thread Starter

jaygatsby

Joined Nov 23, 2011
182
My post was: "I thought Obama had your backs." Seems pretty innocuous, and only slightly racy.

My theory is that someone took it off because of personal political preference, and would have left and oppositely politically polarized statement in tact. Oddly, this person probably believes they are anti-censorship and pro-freedom of speech.

Or maybe it was a ToS thing. Maybe I'll never know.

Thanks Bertus
 

tshuck

Joined Oct 18, 2012
3,534
Your comment was a political one, putting the blame on the president for the shortcomings of others (Congress). It can only be seen as a divisive comment as Obama has nothing to do with the workings of Congress and allocating blame when there is none is simple mud-slinging.
 

Thread Starter

jaygatsby

Joined Nov 23, 2011
182
Your comment was a political one, putting the blame on the president for the shortcomings of others (Congress). It can only be seen as a divisive comment as Obama has nothing to do with the workings of Congress and allocating blame when there is none is simple mud-slinging.
You are mud-slinging congress. What's the difference? That's the thing about politics. Party A adherents are 'sure' they are right, and that Party B is to blame. And vice-versa.

Also, that's not what this thread is about. Stick to the topic, lest ToS come into play.
 

tshuck

Joined Oct 18, 2012
3,534
You are mud-slinging congress. What's the difference? That's the thing about politics. Party A adherents are 'sure' they are right, and that Party B is to blame. And vice-versa.

Also, that's not what this thread is about. Stick to the topic, lest ToS come into play.
You are asking why it was moderated. I am explaining why.
You are mud-slinging congress.
Who selects which healthcare bill is voted on? Who is responsible for a bill being killed/appended/modified? It's not mud-slinging. It's government.
 

Thread Starter

jaygatsby

Joined Nov 23, 2011
182
Wow, you are quite sensitive to this kind of stuff. I don't even vote. My point was, it seems there are loads of people who voted for the current president because they thought healthcare would be brought (the money grubbing fetus-protecting republicans had been the ones to always block it). He got a lot of votes from it I assume, but a reasonable person should realize that it's not that easy.

Reminds me of the http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio Obama phone lady.
 

tshuck

Joined Oct 18, 2012
3,534
Wow, you are quite sensitive to this kind of stuff.
I am sensitive to disinformation. I'd be surprised if your "political" comment isn't modded very soon.
I don't even vote.
This is relevant how?
My point was, it seems there are loads of people who voted for the current president because they thought healthcare[...]
The president has no say in what healthcare is approved, he can only sign or veto, then Congress can pass it anyway with enough votes, completely going over the president's head...What you implied in your other post corroborates the misconception of many people in America...
 

Thread Starter

jaygatsby

Joined Nov 23, 2011
182
I am sensitive to disinformation. I'd be surprised if your "political" comment isn't modded very soon.

This is relevant how?

The president has no say in what healthcare is approved, he can only sign or veto, then Congress can pass it anyway with enough votes, completely going over the president's head...
You believe what I said is disinformation. I believe what you said is disinformation. What's the difference?

And, about the legislative process, do you feel the same way about war? Because Bush got a lot of flak on that, and congress relatively little.

If we're going to act like this, we should take it to PM, where it doesn't bother the other poor peaceful souls.
 

tshuck

Joined Oct 18, 2012
3,534
You believe what I said is disinformation. I believe what you said is disinformation. What's the difference?
One is backed by the Constitution, the other is simply feelings...
And, about the legislative process, do you feel the same way about war? Because Bush got a lot of flak on that, and congress relatively little.

If we're going to act like this, we should take it to PM, where it doesn't bother the other poor peaceful souls.
If I must engage this, Bush put the troops overseas(legally). He has to get Congressional approval for funding. At that point, Congress could either approve the funding, or leave the troops over there without support.

I am not on this site to discuss politics.
 

maxpower097

Joined Feb 20, 2009
816
One is backed by the Constitution, the other is simply feelings...

If I must engage this, Bush put the troops overseas(legally). He has to get Congressional approval for funding. At that point, Congress could either approve the funding, or leave the troops over there without support.

I am not on this site to discuss politics.
This is incorrect. Congress approved a law to attack terrorist in Afganistan, not the government. He never got the OK from congress to invade Afganistan the country, before we arrived. So he just declared the Afgan gov terrorists. We did vote and approve iraq in oct of 02 though.
 

tshuck

Joined Oct 18, 2012
3,534
This is incorrect. Congress approved a law to attack terrorist in Afganistan, not the government. He never got the OK from congress to invade Afganistan the country, before we arrived. So he just declared the Afgan gov terrorists. We did vote and approve iraq in oct of 02 though.
I was referring to the fact that as Commander-in-Chief, the president can order the US military anywhere he pleases without legal repercussions(from the US, anyway).

The president needs Congress to declare a war, not to move troops.
 

t06afre

Joined May 11, 2009
5,934
I made a comment in the expensive drug thread a couple of days ago about president Obama. It was quickly taken away. I thought it was because of Terms of Service, but I just looked and a quick find for 'polit' returns nothing.

Was it censorship? Are mods the type to remove things they disagree with, while leaving other things?
It was a non important comment in the off topic section that go deleted. That has happened to me also in the off topic section. It is a fact that humor does not always travel well in the cyberspace. In this case my advice is. Just shrug and get over it.
 

Georacer

Joined Nov 25, 2009
5,182
I moderated the initial comment and by the run of this thread you can see why.

No political talk. Zero. Nada. Zilch. Μηδέν.
This one will stay visible as a temporary reminder.

Cut it out.
 

tshuck

Joined Oct 18, 2012
3,534
What about 9/11 conspiracies? Do they count?
Scientific discussions about the feasibility of the events of 9/11 and their more spurious counterparts are discussed... I was just looking for one recently, but can't find it. The horse, however, seems to have died a while back...
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,415
Which brings it back to the discretion of the moderators. Many times we do not catch this stuff before it heats up, but when it does we act. Conspiracy theories usually tend to be anti-science and political, which is strongly discouraged on two fronts.

This site is All About Circuits. There are other good places for other activities. We are a community, but there is a core focus.
 
Top