Yet another stabbing in London

[WATFORD zero]

A snide insinuation that's completely wrong.

The user is perma banned (again). Unfortunately he keeps re-registering under new names. It's like whack-a-mole. I suggest you apologise and withdraw that comment.

To be fair to [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION], he may not be aware how hard it can be to pin these multiple accounts down and identify them as previously banned users. This one has taken 3 months and as quickly as you ban one another one appears (or weeks, months and years earlier in some cases )

It wouldn't surprise me if [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION] has no concept of how much effort some of these stupid twats put into being stupid twats and the consequent efforts that have to be put in by the moderating team to identify them as the same stupid twats

*edit* And you can now say twats on NSC, as long as it's plural - A big improvement

 

[Randy McNob]

Oh hello..........are you back again?

Surprised you find the increase in knife crime among the working classes so boring, thought it would be right up your alley. Or do the effects of this epidemic not really have any bearing upon the lives or the clientele of the restaurants you choose to frequent?

maybe the same clientelle as Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson ? Your working class champion

 

[schmunk]

Despite using this second or third or whatever account of his (previously known as Beach Seagull) to post poorly hidden racist shit, he is obviously considered a valuable member of the forum meaning hopefully we'll keep biting to keep him posting. As seen previously, removal of people who are only here to post their racist narratives is apparently not how things are done around here for whatever reason. Maybe this and a few other blokes like him are someones old drinking buddies or something. Who knows.

I think you're wrong here (so should apologise or Guinness Boy will give you a Titty Twister) however we do seem to have a couple of pet racists who are treated as jesters to mock and deride. Personally, I don't know why they bother.

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

Bear Pit before page 2.

Nailed on.

Why? , do you feel that knife crime should be brushed away under the carpet ,is it something you feel uncomfortable talking about ?
Regards
DF

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

To be fair to [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION], he may not be aware how hard it can be to pin these multiple accounts down and identify them as previously banned users. This one has taken 3 months and as quickly as you ban one another one appears (or weeks, months and years earlier in some cases )

It wouldn't surprise me if [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION] has no concept of how much effort some of these stupid twats put into being stupid twats and the consequent efforts that have to be put in by the moderating team to identify them as the same stupid twats

*edit* And you can now say twats on NSC, as long as it's plural - A big improvement

Found your way out of the long grass I see
Regards
DF

 

[Guinness Boy]

I think you're wrong here (so should apologise or Guinness Boy will give you a Titty Twister) however we do seem to have a couple of pet racists who are treated as jesters to mock and deride. Personally, I don't know why they bother.

I'd need very long arms to be fair......

Bozza's post is all that's needed and I suggest that [MENTION=38333]Swansman[/MENTION] reads it. Meanwhile, directly below your post......................

 

[BBassic]

Why? , do you feel that knife crime should be brushed away under the carpet ,is it something you feel uncomfortable talking about ?
Regards
DF

Nope.

 

[Swansman]

A snide insinuation that's completely wrong.

The user is perma banned (again). Unfortunately he keeps re-registering under new names. It's like whack-a-mole. I suggest you apologise and withdraw that comment.

Its not just him though but take someone like "Fred Oliver" or whatever his name is. Last time you banned him you wrote the reason as "Yet another ban for racist trolling". I do like the general err.. laissez faire? attitude of the moderation here, some forums are way too strict or way too harsh.

But look at the "Fred Oliver" example again: in just his 30 last posts you'll find: "The most shocking part of this sad tale is that the officer is white and not black, especially considering the area too. All very strange and the more details that come out the more intriguing it is. Something has gone very wrong somewhere. Thoughts and prayers to the lady’s friends and family’s. R.I.P" (from the "Missing woman in London" thread), some borderline racist comments about George Floyd calling him a rapist scum, "black lives matter. apparently", this tired "Sake, we already get labelled as gayers and poofs, And now we have to prance around in rainbow laces? And against Saints as well. Why give them more ammunition, who ever thought up this ridiculous idea" and "Just ban ALL Muslims and be done with it. Sickos, the lot of them."

Thats just in the last 30 posts. I'm not saying you mods are "pro-racist" or whatever but when someone gets banned over and over and over again for the same offense, you cant be surprised that it raises an eyebrow or two that they are allowed to come back just to eventually in ten posts or so write something new in the same manner.

As explained below - it's difficult. If someone wants to re-register and takes care with how they do it, there is no way of knowing that an apparent new member of the community is someone who has previously been banned.

I manually vet all new registrations. This is quite time consuming but does help filter out various nefarious types, but I'll never be able to stop all the bad people at the front door.

Once vetted all new members go through a probationary period and, after a certain level of activity, they are automatically promoted to a full member. Clearly some bad actors know this and stay below the radar until such time as they feel they have made it back unnoticed - and they probably have.

Beyond that, a long-time rule on NSC has been to let people be stupid, because there will be plenty of people who will let them know. I certainly don't want NSC to be some sort of safe haven for racists and, perhaps sometimes I have been too liberal in allowing some people to post in a way that many find objectionable. That's not because I agree or sympathise with the views expressed, nor because I want NSC to get more page views regardless of the content, but simply because I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Maybe I need to be a bit less forgiving, and it's something I'll give thought to.

If people use the report post button alongside any bad posts, it gives us the best chance to take appropriate action.

I understand it is time consuming and I also have to say that generally speaking I think the moderation here is very good and fair but perhaps in this particular area there could be improvements. In the case of this Larry Boyd character, Frutos banned him like a month ago with the reason "Three day break for trolling in a manner every bit as tedious as under his previous usernames"... so why make it time limited?

Ultimately its your decision and I know the benefit of a doubt vs. go hard on them is a very difficult equilibrism but if I had a vote I'd but it in the latter hat when it comes to some particular, increasingly sensitive parts (like racism) of the ban-able spectra.

There is a fair chance that it might somehow turn required in the future. In the beginnings of the internet you could pretty much say anything about anyone pretty much anywhere and plenty of forum owners have been caught off-guard as that rapidly changed - libel, bullying and stalking suddenly became a new level of problematic, and I wouldnt be surprised if the same thing happens to anything that even smells like racism in the not too distant future. For good (racism sucks) and bad (its not easy to track down everything as well as judging borderline cases).

 

[maltaseagull]

More lives ruined after yet another London stabbing:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/cri...ent-cross-shopping-centre-murder-b933769.html

Surely one possible solution is for the Government / Police to look at the data and start to profile the typical victim and typical perpetrator of such crimes in terms of age / gender / ethnicity and start to target this group with a rigorous stop and search policy between the hours when these crimes typically take place, probably early to late evening......................so for example if the statistics show the typical perpetrator of knife crimes tends to be white males in the 40-50 age range, issue a statement to say if you fall into that demographic expect to be stopped and searched early to late evening in order to try and prevent knife crime. I appreciate it wouldn't be practical to search everyone of this demographic but surely it would act as a deterrent if you know there is a good chance you will be stopped and searched.

That would surely be deemed racist by many MPs

 

[Weststander]

Popcorn, anyone?

 

[sydney]

just let them kill each other .....let 'em get on with it , at least then no one gets called a racist ffs.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Its not just him though but take someone like "Fred Oliver" or whatever his name is. Last time you banned him you wrote the reason as "Yet another ban for racist trolling". I do like the general err.. laissez faire? attitude of the moderation here, some forums are way too strict or way too harsh.

But look at the "Fred Oliver" example again: in just his 30 last posts you'll find: "The most shocking part of this sad tale is that the officer is white and not black, especially considering the area too. All very strange and the more details that come out the more intriguing it is. Something has gone very wrong somewhere. Thoughts and prayers to the lady’s friends and family’s. R.I.P" (from the "Missing woman in London" thread), some borderline racist comments about George Floyd calling him a rapist scum, "black lives matter. apparently", this tired "Sake, we already get labelled as gayers and poofs, And now we have to prance around in rainbow laces? And against Saints as well. Why give them more ammunition, who ever thought up this ridiculous idea" and "Just ban ALL Muslims and be done with it. Sickos, the lot of them."

Thats just in the last 30 posts. I'm not saying you mods are "pro-racist" or whatever but when someone gets banned over and over and over again for the same offense, you cant be surprised that it raises an eyebrow or two that they are allowed to come back just to eventually in ten posts or so write something new in the same manner.

.

Posters are permanently banned as a very last resort. As [MENTION=6886]Bozza[/MENTION] said we cannot police every post. I've seen casually racist posts from that user that were worth a short time off and I've issued some of those short bans. Ultimately there is an infraction system where if someone carries on getting infractions the added up points ban them permanently anyway. There are all sorts of reasons for bans too - as a rule of thumb just don't be a dick, particularly if your dickishness has been called out.

 

[Driver8]

just let them kill each other .....let 'em get on with it , at least then no one gets called a racist ffs.

Because the victims are often completely innocent of anything perhaps? Or doesn’t that matter if they are black?

 

[A1X]

I don't think objecting to targeting groups based on ethnicity as the OP suggest is being part of the PC Brigade, I think it's more "Not a racist Brigade".

In my experience of people who moan about the "PC brigade", they amount to basically the same thing.

 

[Harmyar]

Because the victims are often completely innocent of anything perhaps? Or doesn’t that matter if they are black?

Yeah,if we're not careful London will run out of promising footballers/talented rappers/regular churchgoers who had 'nothing to do with gangs' ..........apart from spending most of their time hanging around with one.

 

[Chicken Run]

Its not just him though but take someone like "Fred Oliver" or whatever his name is. Last time you banned him you wrote the reason as "Yet another ban for racist trolling". I do like the general err.. laissez faire? attitude of the moderation here, some forums are way too strict or way too harsh.

But look at the "Fred Oliver" example again: in just his 30 last posts you'll find: "The most shocking part of this sad tale is that the officer is white and not black, especially considering the area too. All very strange and the more details that come out the more intriguing it is. Something has gone very wrong somewhere. Thoughts and prayers to the lady’s friends and family’s. R.I.P" (from the "Missing woman in London" thread), some borderline racist comments about George Floyd calling him a rapist scum, "black lives matter. apparently", this tired "Sake, we already get labelled as gayers and poofs, And now we have to prance around in rainbow laces? And against Saints as well. Why give them more ammunition, who ever thought up this ridiculous idea" and "Just ban ALL Muslims and be done with it. Sickos, the lot of them."

Thats just in the last 30 posts. I'm not saying you mods are "pro-racist" or whatever but when someone gets banned over and over and over again for the same offense, you cant be surprised that it raises an eyebrow or two that they are allowed to come back just to eventually in ten posts or so write something new in the same manner.




I understand it is time consuming and I also have to say that generally speaking I think the moderation here is very good and fair but perhaps in this particular area there could be improvements. In the case of this Larry Boyd character, Frutos banned him like a month ago with the reason "Three day break for trolling in a manner every bit as tedious as under his previous usernames"... so why make it time limited?

Ultimately its your decision and I know the benefit of a doubt vs. go hard on them is a very difficult equilibrism but if I had a vote I'd but it in the latter hat when it comes to some particular, increasingly sensitive parts (like racism) of the ban-able spectra.

There is a fair chance that it might somehow turn required in the future. In the beginnings of the internet you could pretty much say anything about anyone pretty much anywhere and plenty of forum owners have been caught off-guard as that rapidly changed - libel, bullying and stalking suddenly became a new level of problematic, and I wouldnt be surprised if the same thing happens to anything that even smells like racism in the not too distant future. For good (racism sucks) and bad (its not easy to track down everything as well as judging borderline cases).

Just so that you know the moderation list isn’t representative of all the people who have been banned, example rogersix was banned recently and wasn’t on the banned sub forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Lyndhurst 14]

More lives ruined after yet another London stabbing:

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/cri...ent-cross-shopping-centre-murder-b933769.html

Surely one possible solution is for the Government / Police to look at the data and start to profile the typical victim and typical perpetrator of such crimes in terms of age / gender / ethnicity and start to target this group with a rigorous stop and search policy between the hours when these crimes typically take place, probably early to late evening......................so for example if the statistics show the typical perpetrator of knife crimes tends to be white males in the 40-50 age range, issue a statement to say if you fall into that demographic expect to be stopped and searched early to late evening in order to try and prevent knife crime. I appreciate it wouldn't be practical to search everyone of this demographic but surely it would act as a deterrent if you know there is a good chance you will be stopped and searched.

They tried something similar in New York a while ago, it didn't end well. Mike Bloomberg, the mayor at the time, looked at the available data and it was showing that more knife and gun crimes were being committed by young black males. He started a stop and search policy based on that data, which actually made sense to a lot of people. But it wasn't handled very well and it was decried as racist profiling and when he stood as a Presidential candidate it was brought up and finished any chances he may have had. Police and politicians in London will look at that experience and similar ones and would probably think twice even though it would probably save lives. Such is the world we live in

 

[AmexRuislip]

They tried something similar in New York a while ago, it didn't end well. Mike Bloomberg, the mayor at the time, looked at the available data and it was showing that more knife and gun crimes were being committed by young black males. He started a stop and search policy based on that data, which actually made sense to a lot of people. But it wasn't handled very well and it was decried as racist profiling and when he stood as a Presidential candidate it was brought up and finished any chances he may have had. Police and politicians in London will look at that experience and similar ones and would probably think twice even though it would probably save lives. Such is the world we live in

The Met Police randomly do section 60 orders around our borough, especially Uxbridge & Hayes.

 

[carlzeiss]

Yeah,if we're not careful London will run out of promising footballers/talented rappers/regular churchgoers who had 'nothing to do with gangs' ..........apart from spending most of their time hanging around with one.

Let's hope not , that would be very sad indeed

 

[AmexRuislip]

[tweet]1412132015579742208[/tweet]