Threadjacking!

[Hawkmumbler]

I dont like censorship.

^This.

[Bubba Zebill]

With all the talk of Gregg's the Bakers on this forum - isn't it about time somebody produced a GREGGS Judge badge as a avatar? It had to be said.

[Professor Bear]

If I'd started a thread in jest where we all posted pictures from the media of a particular ethnic minority where they are depicted stealing things and it was still going a decade later only without the initial ironic context and everyone took it as proof that I was a racist toolbox, I'd not be pleased either.  We make sexist comments all the time here on the forum and get away with it, it's hardly censorship to decide they don't need or deserve their own thread.

Having said that, it went for ten years and got hundreds of posts, yet the new one is shut down within the hour after I suggested it be used to host pictures of fit men.  CLEARLY WE KNOW WHAT THAT'S ALL ABOUT.

[Trout]

Yeah, calm down. It's only the internet.

Half the reason we kept posting on it was to embarrass poor old Rich. The joke's kind of worn off now so I don't see why we can't let it go.

[Tiplodocus]

Yeah, it was MY thread really and I am happy to let it lie.

It should be stickied though. You know, so it's always there as an example of how not to behave.

[M.I.K.]

What the problem is part 1.
What the problem is part 2.

[Definitely Not Mister Pops]

This is a web comic:

[Frank]

Tornado in Oklahoma, complete tragedy, sympathies to everyone concerned. Look at the name of the good looking young black guy in this report, though:

HE HAS A BROTHER CALLED CHEWIE

[Hawkmumbler]

This is a web comic:

I call bullshit.

[Richmond Clements]

I dont like censorship.

You are a fan of hyperbole though.

[Goaty]

[Minkyboy]

What the problem is part 1.
What the problem is part 2.

Arsom M.I.K.

[darnmarr]

 El Pops and M.I.K. : both those web-comics explain the mods possible reasons* for locking the original 'ware' thread, but what has me all bum-hurt is that these were not the reasons given in the subsequent 'ware' thread, and the subsequent 'ware' thread was locked; not immediately because of it's name, not subsequently because of the unwanted imagery on it, but only when I questioned the stated explanation, for removing that imagery.

Look, perhaps it is hyperbole to describe that sort (or any sort) of 'mod'eration as censorship, and perhaps the second thread was locked for other reasons than my unanswered question popping up at the end (still felt the bum-hurt mind you).

For the record, I'm not a fan of 'cheesecake' in my comics either, but I just don't think blanket-bans and imagery suppression are the best way of helping people see what's wrong with it. I've never run an internet forum, so I guess that those who do it here are choosing what is, for them, the best way of stamping out this attitude and aesthetic they don't agree with.

I wish 'em luck with it.

[Proudhuff]

Jaffa cakes vs Bourbons? why not both together?

[IndigoPrime]

To those who've been complaining:

The original 'ware' thread was an embarrassment on a forum that, remember, is NOT on a fan site but THE PUBLISHER'S own website. It was started as an off-hand joke, but just ended up being a thread that effectively said "you are not welcome" to a large number of people. It was closed because it was deemed entirely inappropriate for the forum.

The second thread was locked because people with a bug up their arse immediately—and despite repeated warnings—decided to troll. There have subsequently been several other threads and a number of posts that are nothing more than intentionally trying to piss off the team behind this site. Such things are childish, unnecessary and a waste of everyone's time.

If anyone here is desperate to see scantily clad women, there are countless places elsewhere for that online. We don't need nor want a thread like that here. Also, describing this as censorship is hyperbole. This is a publisher's forum primarily designed for discussion about a publisher's comics. That this forum has as much off-topic stuff as it does shows how hugely flexible Rebellion has been over the years. I've moderated forums since the late 1990s for many publications/publishers and this is by far the most open of them. That people get pissed off because there are some rules rather than none is just astonishing and really quite depressing.

Should people decide they can no longer post here, because it's not an entirely open free-for-all, that's their choice. There have in recent months been repeated warnings peppered throughout this forum regarding topics and conduct, and it's hardly surprising that the moderation team's now taking a firmer stance, given that people continually poke and poke and poke when decisions have been made.