15 February 2009

A place for Ciffers to keep things going

Martillo could probably do a better job of this, but I thought I'd create a place for Ciffers to keep alive threads that have been cruelly cut short by the Guardian mods.  Cluing each other in on what it was we've said that mods have deleted is acceptable, too.  

On a purely selfish level, I'm hoping this will alleviate some of my time zone frustrations.  I'm new to this blogging stuff, so the more technically savvy will have to exercise some patience with me as I learn how to take care of this thing.

158 comments:

  1. Montana, this is a great idea, thanks !

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey, no problem! And I promise not to censor comments. Help me let people know that it's here, okay?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great stuff! Now, Bidisha, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Montana

    I'm in. I'm posting as anon now but I am Afancdogge (Leni) . will sort out properly later.

    Leni

    ReplyDelete
  5. Oh yeah...an out the back of the wardrobe moment. So where's the Turkish Delight?

    Martillo...Bidisha...at last. I can't post on her threads anymore. Seriously,they go within 5 minutes; think I set off an alarm or something. Started with Bitterweed and the mad as a ... phase. I got 5 days premod.

    That girl's wasted on cif anyway. She should be writing a sitcom. Don't know if there's a technical term for jumping the shark every episode but she could pull it off.

    Montana

    Take it you're a bit of a Vonnegut fan? Which is your favourite? You can read plenty into someone's choice of Vonnegut. Be warned...

    ReplyDelete
  6. Okay, I'll bite - (further evidence, as if it were needed, of my habit of grabbing obvious hooks)

    Hello. Do you want to continue with this or would people prefer I set up a proper forum-style website? It's no trouble, really.

    Monkeyfish...

    *** Oh yeah...an out the back of the wardrobe moment. So where's the Turkish Delight? ***

    I can raise a weary smile for you, but I can't quite think of an emoticon that really does it justice.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @Monkeyfish - I must confess that Slaughterhouse5 and Breakfast of Champions are the only ones I've read. S5 being the fave - I don't remember how many times I've read it. BoC, just the once - @ 30 yrs ago. I think it's something about war-related novels. I've also read All Quiet on the Western Front more times than I can tell you.

    @Freenix - If you'd like to set up a forum-style website, that'd be fine. I haven't the technical nous to do it. I did this because it was the best solution I was capable of coming up with that would allow us to communicate without the mods deciding when we were done with a topic (AND what we were allowed to say about a topic. Honestly - they've been pretty heavy-handed lately.)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Great idea Montana, I tend to lurk around CIF chuckling to myself. Where you about of the Mike Reid CIF party, if not you should google it. That really showed what we were capable of.

    Thanks for the Opportunity to extend the pleasure.

    D

    Ps Can anyone explain the profile stuff I am on anonymous as not sure?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Spell check "for the M R party" not of.

    Hey Montana is that really you in the pic? because you look great. Have a good Monday everyone ;-)

    D

    ReplyDelete
  10. Great idea. I'm in. You should remind people to bookmark this page.

    ReplyDelete
  11. You too were in pre-mod, monkeyfish? Do you use a lot of bad language or is just your overwhelming misog*ny? Great comment on Brooker, BTW.

    Anonymous, whoever you are: 'select profile'; choose Name/URL; fill in only your user name. Submit...

    ReplyDelete
  12. "overwhelming misog*ny"

    That's a little unfair. My comments on Bidisha relate entirely to the fact that she's differently cognitively endowed to the rest of humankind. I've never suggested that's a consequence of her gender.
    Seriously, do my comments come across as misogynistic? News to me.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I'm often in premod btw.
    It tends to dull the cutting edge nature of some of my stuff. Aren't you? I thought everyone was. Asked Hank about it once but I got an immediate email warning me to desist.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Not once, monkeyfish. I'm surprised now I realise it's fairly common.

    Seriously, do my comments come across as misogynistic?

    Because I know your work, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that question was ironic.

    ReplyDelete
  15. No the question wasn't ironic. Many of my posts are and many aim to 'animate' certain other posters. If I'm responding to certain feminists, I often adopt a slight 'medallion man' stance for purely irritant purposes. It's entirely affected.

    If you're referring to my on-line flirting, some of that's fairly genuine but clearly light hearted.I can only recall doing that with Marina Hyde once or twice (to no avail) and the delectable Fowler twins who seemed to take it in good part. Dunno-is that misogynistic?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Oh yeah martillo...my 'work'..cheers

    ReplyDelete
  17. Martillothe sensitive16 February, 2009 11:21

    Now I'm getting worried about you monkeyfish. I never use the M word without irony - I've only encountered a few posters who genuinely seem to hate women and I try to let them know how I feel about them.

    No, I don't think you hate women. OK?

    ReplyDelete
  18. Well, the link works for me

    ReplyDelete
  19. All this stuff could have gone on Vicky's.

    C the S

    ReplyDelete
  20. martillo

    No..fair enough, I was just wondering..something somebody said the other day. Kinda had me thinking.

    ReplyDelete
  21. That's true, ursus, but I think this might be a good way to avoid the occasionally over-zealous modding.

    What did they say, monkeyfish?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Well it was kind of odd really. It was a woman I've known for ages and sort of flirt with in what I'd always thought was a harmless, light hearted manner. I bumped into her in the pub. She was a little bit pissed and came on far stronger than usual. Told me she'd just split with her fella and invited me back to her flat which I declined.

    Then all hell breaks loose and she accused me of demeaning her all this time etc etc and claimed my flattery, compliments etc are a way of controlling and "coercing" women. She's quite attractive and if circumstances were different ie. she wasn't drunk, on the rebound and I was married to a suspicious psycho I'd probably have gone with her. I sort of explained this which made things worse; resulting in the accusation that I don't like women (and am actually scared of them).

    Have bumped into her since and she apologised (drunk, emotional blah blah)but I asked her if she stood by the misogyny accusation which she thought about and retracted but not immediately nor remotely convincingly. Got me thinking.

    Thing is I far prefer women's company to mens; men are a pain in the ass most of the time and generally boring bastards. Specially round here.

    ReplyDelete
  23. ...and I wasn't married to a suspicious psycho...

    even

    ReplyDelete
  24. Look forward to one of the big 3 Bs.

    cts

    ReplyDelete
  25. Monkeyfish,
    It's 'a woman scorned' mate.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This has got to be quick 'cos I'm at work and class is almost over, but I'm glad to see people are finding & using the place.

    Anonymous - malheureusement, non. That's not me. That's about a 30 year old picture of Valerie Perrine from the movie version of "Slaughterhouse 5". I'm much prettier.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Found it! Hi it's Kizbot,,, Still smarting from her first ever pre-mod... But can't complain too much as it only lasted 5 posts.. Still... I'm a bit miffed it was only me and Jay that got done... and it was all Martillo's fault anyways as I wouldn't have gone on the rotten thread if he'd not alerted me to it!

    ReplyDelete
  28. I'd like to post my frustration at the fact that Cath Elliot's latest thread is based on tabloid misintrepations of valid research and despite my several posts refuting this nonsense, people continue to post as if what Cath has written and claimed is somehow written in stone. Nothing new about the usual misogynists and radical feminists posting crap, but it would be nice if people actually reacted sensibly to the specific article and questioned the premises.

    Some examples:
    ultimathule - "It's presicely this kind of research that has given British research a dubious reputation in this country."

    jayreilly - "Or just a few scientists who published some dodgy material a decade ago?"

    Neither of these posters took the time to look at the facts - kneejerk reactions from both.

    I suppose it's too much to ask that commenters think a bit before they post, but it would be nice. Still we're a broad church, and we're not fascists - keep those entertaining/annoying comments coming!

    On a lighter note - Re bidisha's latest. I've never seen a thread go down so fast - 9hr 6min. Nice one mods! My aborted Shakespearean comment was "Leave Bidisha alone, you bastards. If you prick Bidisha, does she not bleed? if you tickle her, does she not laugh? No, fair enough, probably not."

    Montana, this is a great idea and thank you for revealing that it was Valerie Perrine in the pic. I was sure that it was someone from the original Star Trek TV series, but couldn't place her.

    ReplyDelete
  29. the last post was mine. Some problems here.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Pre-mod is for wimps.

    ReplyDelete
  31. You got pre-modded for the 4am thread, kizbot? Sorry, I suppose, though admit it: you'd have hated to miss such a feast. I think it may be my Favourite ever.

    Thinking about what you post, scherfig? I don't think that'll ever catch on.

    Now, I have an idea for this site (if that's ok with you, montana)...

    In order to give some kind of focus, why not have a series of 'my week on cif'? I've suggested this on 'what do want to talk about?' but they ignored it, just as they did with all my genius ideas. Just a kind of review of which threads you've been following, highlights and so on. Anyone fancy trying it?

    ReplyDelete
  32. Bitterweed,
    speaking as a wimp I was pre moderated for using the word fat in several comments I made on a piece by Burchill. I also said 'fuck 'im' on a piece about Ringo Starr and when moderated I put 'Far kim.
    Then I get this thing come up saying;
    'Your comment will be scrutinised by a right wing Christian schoolgirl on work experience'
    I'm well hard me.
    Colin the stoat. I could explain but I wont.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Wayhey.

    Bookmarked.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Martillo

    Hey - I just got the ball rolling. As far as I'm concerned this puppy belongs to all of us. Actually, I think when I was setting it up, it said something about allowing up to 100 people to be able to contribute as authors. Meaning, up to 100 of us (and I doubt if we'll go over that many, don't you?) could create our own posts, which would appear as my original one did up top. Lemme play around and see how to do that and then I'll get back to you all about what I'll need to do to get people on here as authors, okay? In the meantime, do what ever makes you happy.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Okay. It looks like what anyone who'd like to be added on here as an author will need to do is get themselves a Google account and let me know what their gmail address is. Then, I'll send you an invitation to be an author here, you reply to the invitation and then use the Google account to post. That will make your posts look like the one up top and the fun will ensue.

    Oh - and I just changed the settings for the time stamp for comments to GMT. I did have it set on US CST, but figured that was probably a bit confusing for some of you.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Poop. Just realised my gmail add probably doesn't show up up top for anyone but me. It's: theWildhack@gmail.com

    ReplyDelete
  37. Good idea but it's playing silly buggers with me - mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  38. Cool idea, this. Thanks for setting it up.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Greetings all! This is like some shady tax haven where the authorities cant touch us, brilliant! I have oft dreamed about something like this where we can escape the mods and talk about what we want when we want. Whoever set this up (Montana?) is a saint, a scholar and an officer.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Right, speaking of dodgey modding can anyone help clear this one up for me?

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/06/gender.law?commentpage=11

    When I made that last post, it then flashed up 'comments are now closed'. Then four hours later, another poster called 'TheBug' managed to get a post through?
    Could this of been just a technical thing or I'm being paranoid?
    I probably wouldn't be as suspecting, if it wasn't for the fact that the CiF seems to be answerable to the F Word and whoever else happens to be on nodding terms with the staff.

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  41. It does seem the F word and feministing have alarge amount of influence, maybe because some Guardian staff also work for these sites (to my knowledge) and they also often feature on the 'best of the web links' - it wouldnt surprise me if they paid for that little privilege, and it also wouldnt surprise me if they threatened to advertise elsewhere if CIF was seen to facilitate 'misogynistic' comments.

    ReplyDelete
  42. selfl*ver

    Just thought I'd share the shortest post I ever had deleted.

    ReplyDelete
  43. ha, that beats my personal best of 3 words, "Predictable, useless tripe."

    ReplyDelete
  44. Martillo

    Seven letters: TUSCANY

    Works every time. Incidentally, I'm sure you're 5 times more likely to be premodded on Toynbee or Bidisha than anything else.
    You can call Nick Cohen anything you like and it stands. I think if it's bad enough the mods even recommend your post.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Have you tried T*scany?

    That was a strange story by the way. I wouldn't take it to heart if your other female friends aren't pulling you up. Now you mention it, I've had more female friends than male, too. (It's ok, I'm not going to make any claims about my moral standing on that basis).

    ReplyDelete
  46. I'm interested in testing out the etymological limits of the Cif mod policy.
    I am now going to describe Polly Toynbee as a 'rabid buffy shunter'.

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  47. Talking of deletions, I noted that Bidisha's latest delusional rant was closed, never to reappear, after exactly 9 hours and 6 minutes. Is this a record?

    ReplyDelete
  48. It's up there, scherfig. Still, I count myself lucky I was there...

    ReplyDelete
  49. Scherfig,

    I dont think 9 hours is the record, if memory serves, wasnt Bindels piece on BG only up for about 3 or 4 hours before it was closed for the amount of "off topic comments"?

    It was gone very quickly indeed. I think she holds the record.

    ReplyDelete
  50. I think some people get to mod their own threads.
    Do we forsee a time when instead of a comment on Cif there is a link to this site?
    And how long will we get away with it?

    ReplyDelete
  51. Perhaps I can clear up a couple of things that seem to puzzle a lot of people.

    1. Comments are sometimes closed and then re-opened. This can happen when there are a lot of very active and troublesome threads and the moderators can't keep up with them.

    2. The Pluck system used by Cif does not allow the moderators to edit comments. This means that if a small part of an otherwise reasonable comment causes offence the whole comment has to be deleted.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Good call, Jay. La Bindel was consigned to the blog rubbish bin after 4 hours and 12 mins.

    Bindel actually posted herself at 3.11, and at 3.16 the Cif Editor posted "This thread will now be closing due to the volume of off topic comments." Half an hour later the thread was history.

    So it looks as if the ambitious young Bidisha still has a bit of work to do before she ousts Julie. Having said that, I would refer you to Bindel's piece of 19 Jan 2009 which kicks off with the controversial question "Ever wondered what happens to your left-over bread or wine after you leave a restaurant?" This one stayed open for three days and prompted 20 people to comment.

    How the mighty are fallen, eh?

    ReplyDelete
  53. "Brian Whitaker said...
    Perhaps I can clear up a couple of things that seem to puzzle a lot of people.

    1. Comments are sometimes closed and then re-opened. This can happen when there are a lot of very active and troublesome threads and the moderators can't keep up with them."

    I can understand that but in the instance I mentioned, the thread was due to be ended anyway and it wasn't even particularly troublesome ( in regards to inappropriate language/comments ).
    It just looks, for all the world, like this particular poster got a four hour extended time limit, whereas the rest of us, didn't.

    It looks a bit suspect to me.

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  54. The Scherfig speaks more truth,

    "So it looks as if the ambitious young Bidisha still has a bit of work to do before she ousts Julie. Having said that, I would refer you to Bindel's piece of 19 Jan 2009 which kicks off with the controversial question "Ever wondered what happens to your left-over bread or wine after you leave a restaurant?" This one stayed open for three days and prompted 20 people to comment."

    Bidisha does have a way to go. She has written some stupendously stupid articles, but occasionally Bindel just unleashes something on quite another level, "Why i Hate Men", "Barry George", and "Political Lesbianism", spring to mind for being unimaginably awful and offensive. It stills sends a chill down my spine that she has the ear of the government.


    On the modding front, might it be an idea to allow mods to delete offending sections, rather than whole posts? Some perfectly good and interesting posts are no doubt being removed for one tiny infringement of the rules, and the rules, lets face it, are pretty subjectively enforced.

    ReplyDelete
  55. "Have you tried T*scany?"

    No but on the same thread I posted a crossword clue:

    'Slices about random selection' which lasted a while until someone solved it. It was then deleted. Then I posted the introductory section from the wikipedia article on Tuscany, without the title. That went fairly quickly; I don't know if they worked out what it was or just decided it was off topic.

    It's only after writing this that I realise I'm a bit obsessive. Oh shit.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Anonymous:

    The article appeared at 13.27 on October 6 and, according to the file, the thread closed automatically 72 hours later at 13.27 on October 9.

    Three people succeeded in posting comments after that time. It is clear that nobody manually reopened to comments thread, because that would show up in the file. I can only suggest there was some kind of technical glitch but it's difficult to investigate further so long after the event.

    If it happens again, raise it as soon as you see it and we'll try to get to the bottom of it.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Cheers for that Brian, that's cleared it up for me.

    JR - "but occasionally Bindel just unleashes something on quite another level, "Why i Hate Men", "Barry George", and "Political Lesbianism", spring to mind for being unimaginably awful and offensive. It stills sends a chill down my spine that she has the ear of the government."

    This amazed me the other day..
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/05/meredith-kercher-murder-trial-amanda-knox

    She's basically written an article on the strength of her own half-arsed gut instinct.

    This guy calls it to task quite well..

    "Upon reading this article which I came across earlier today, I can honestly say my first reaction was absolute outrage. If you have read the article and are now at a loss as to why I feel this way I hope you’ll allow me to explain:

    In this short article Julie Bindel is seemingly angry at the Italian judicial system for daring to prosecute Amanda Knox for a “sex crime” as, during her 30 years of “monitoring, researching and campaigning against sex crime” she has “never encountered anything remotely like the case against Amanda Knox.” Despite the fact that Bindel correctly asserts that the majority of sex crimes (and in particular sex related homicides) are predominantly committed by men, she goes on to make the outlandish claim that we “tend not to look too closely for motives of male sex killers, unconsciously accepting them as being badly wired, but with women, we demand one.” This profoundly outrageous feminist statement angers me beyond belief. In the space of a few words Bindel has attempted to nullify and completely obliterate the work of several eminent forensic experts and years of research.

    Understanding why people kill has been the main focus of forensic psychology and psychiatry for many years. The excellent work of Dr Robert Hare has provided us with an insight as has Dr Michael Welner’s ongoing work on the Depravity Scale. These are fantastic examples of researchers with a real passion for understanding the motives behind crime irrespective of gender.

    I’m tired of reading jumped up feminist articles spouting badly researched drivel with bum statistics and massive inaccuracies. It’s only possible to see how the mainstream media can saturate the public domain with inaccurate information when you spot the so called ‘expert’ journalists talking complete and utter nonsense. In her all encompassing knowledge and wisdom Bindel goes on to make further outlandish statements; stating that the evidence against a defendant on trial for murder in a country where the judicial system is strongly in favour of defendants is “circumstantial” and that if “Knox is convicted, it will be a first”.

    In a previous post I outlined how stereotyping prevents us from seeing the woman as a potentially violent individual but would also like to add that feminism prevents us from seeing the female as a potentially violent individual by vehemently denying all evidence and research about female perpetrators and nearly always asserting, despite extensive evidence to the contrary that women couldn’t possibly be violent and that it simply had to be the work of nasty, nasty men.

    Feminists like Bindel who are analysing the ongoing trial are attempting to pick and choose which woman they would like to defend by placing the female rights and privileges of Amanda Knox above the main objective: justice for Meredith Kercher and her long suffering family. I would also like to point out that nowhere in the entire article does it mention the victim’s first name, merely referring to “Kercher” as if the victim of a violent attack leading to an agonisingly slow death is merely an afterthought.

    I would like to ask Julie Bindel to assert her supreme confidence that women are incapable of this level of violence to 21 year old Brooke Cameron who was scarred for life when an older woman named Sonja Oliver deliberately ran her over in a BMW, dragging her underneath the car for several yards and leaving her arm hanging on by a tendon. The reason? Ms Oliver was jealous of the younger woman and her good looks. Ms Oliver was acquitted of unlawful wounding with intent and sentenced to a mere 15 months in prison. Ms Cameron will be permanently scared and no longer has the full use of her arm. I wonder what sort of article Julie Bindel would have written had it been a man who ran over Brooke Cameron.

    One of the major blockades to the truth in this case is that the media and the public who trust it without question, simply refuse to accept that Amanda Knox could have killed her housemate Meredith Kercher, simply because Amanda is a woman. I’ve read quite a few articles from the feminist angle and was beginning to wonder how long it would be before they really started to sink their teeth in.

    For a while I’ve wanted to ask Candace Dempsey why comments which are ‘disrespectful to women’ are prohibited on her blog when she continues to show virtually zero sympathy for the woman at the centre of this case who really matters: Meredith. I’d ask but it would probably be deleted almost instantly.

    This mass cognitive dissonance is the only thing holding Knox’s defence together and writers like Bindel and Dempsey merely sound like bossy little 8 year olds in the playground demanding to have their opinions heard whilst simultaneously ignoring virtually every scrap of evidence the prosecution has used to build a (strong) case. Typical feminists.

    What would have happened if Amanda went to the cottage alone that night? What would have happened if Amanda didn’t have a man to blame?

    If you’d like to be a real feminist make sure women (and this includes Amanda Knox) are treated fairly and equally in court. There can be no equality without responsibility. Amanda and her team of supporters have pulled virtually every female trick in the book during the investigation and trial.

    As my friend quite rightly noted: Justice shouldn’t recognise the sex of the defendant.

    So to answer your question “Can Amanda Knox really be a crazed sex killer?” Yes Ms Bindel, yes she can!"


    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  58. Bindel vs Bidisha. Yes, Jay, it's a tough one. Both are capable of breathtaking stupidity, but for me Bindel edges it comfortably. Bindel's outrageous claims and opinions are invariably backed by a ferocity and conviction that are unshakeable in the face of all reason and fact, whereas Bidisha's nonsense can never quite get beyond a sort of pretentious sixth-form naughtiness. It must be galling for Bidisha that she provokes such amusement, and this is never going to be a problem for the vitriolic Bindel. So - shape up Bidisha! Let's have a lot more unapologetic grown-up hatred and a bit less teenage angst, or you'll be joining Bindel in the dark recesses of the restaurant pages.

    ReplyDelete
  59. Good article, Mendoza, where you get it from? Bindel is building quite a reputation for herself.

    ReplyDelete
  60. 's'

    Agreed, Biddy has some way to go, she manages to be comic (unintentionally) where Bindel is pure repugnant. Biddy really is an angsty student escaped from the common room.

    ReplyDelete
  61. http://missrepresented.wordpress.com/2009/02/17/the-narcissist-manifesto/

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  62. Mendoza

    Fascinating email from Knox, makes Bindels pathetic, transparent obssession with this girl all the more shameful.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Mendoza - thanks for that article.

    I was briefly tempted to write something very similar for Cif - but a/ it was a day or two after Ann Wollenberg wrote a piece slating JB for the political lesbianism article and I reckoned it was unlikely they'd turn it into bash Bindel week, and b/ I never got around to it.

    I was appalled by the comment about how "we tend not to look too closely for motives of male sex killers, unconsciously accepting them as being badly wired, but with women, we demand one.” It is just unbelievably ignorant.

    The other point I'd make is that to say Amanda Knox, if guilty, would be "unique" is just flat out wrong. There are literally dozens of known female collaborators in sex murders, some with profiles very, very similar to Knox. Some of them very much took the lead role in their crimes. Karla Homolka springs to mind.

    Grrrr, Bindel.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Thanks for this blog, Montana.

    Mendoza and AllyF have nicely summed yup La Bindel's stupidity and arrogance.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Thanks for this blog, Montana.

    AllyF and Mendoza have nailed Bindel's strupidity and arrogance perfectly. Let's hope Georgina reads it.

    ReplyDelete
  66. By the way, how do I log in as a Guardian CIF-er?

    ReplyDelete
  67. AllyF:
    I was appalled by the comment about how "we tend not to look too closely for motives of male sex killers, unconsciously accepting them as being badly wired, but with women, we demand one.” It is just unbelievably ignorant.

    Yeah, when I read that, I was a bit confused. To some extent, I think what she says is actually true, i.e., culturally I think we do tend to think that men are more "hard-wired" to commit sex crimes, but what I couldn't figure out was whether or not she thought that this attitude was acceptable. (Yeah, I know - she probably does.) I, for the record, don't. Women, especially 20-something American ones, can be truly scary creatures.

    I'm slightly amused at the way comments here are going so far. When I wrote my blurb up top, I originally had in it, "I won't moderate comments at all, because I'm assuming we can all play nice together. After all, we may disagree on some things, but I think we can stand united in our belief that Bindel and Bidisha are off their chumps."

    And Gigolo - I think you can get one of those OpenID thingies if you'd rather use your Cif name here. Not totally sure myself.

    ReplyDelete
  68. @Monkeyfish:

    Erm, am I being thick or perhaps it's something from before my arrival, but what on Earth is the matter with Tuscany?

    ReplyDelete
  69. Montana, bless your cotton socks, there is nothing wrong with Tuscany, im sure its lovely, but when it is used on CIF it generally refers to arch socialist Polly Toynbee's villa in Tuscany. It winds some people up a tad.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Oh, see, there you go - I don't read Polly much and was unaware of the villa. Socialists with villas. Interesting concept.

    Now I'm going to feel the need to read/comment on a Toynbee piece just to see if I can work in something about Tuscany. Which I hear is lovely this time of year.

    ReplyDelete
  71. Montana

    This needs a focus...something to discuss. Maybe get martillo to give us "What I did today" or his thoughts on West Ham fans ever needing a passport again?

    We need momentum...

    ReplyDelete
  72. Monkeyfish wants momentum... Well, I dunno. What did Martillo do today?

    I suspect a pre-Montana subtext to both of your topic suggestions, but I know what I did today - I spent the day screaming at 14 yr olds. I don't know whether it was me or them, but man they were getting on my tits. (Not literally, mind - that would be inappropriate) Not trying to pull a Bindel here, but would one of you care to explain to me what it is about a 14 yr old boy that makes him think he can argue with a teacher at school and ever win? I'm not talking about arguing about the correct answer to a question on the homework, I'm talking about doing something stupid, getting caught, and then arguing about whether or not you were doing exactly what the teacher just witnessed you doing. You just did a chin-up on the door frame. The teacher clearly saw you do a chin-up on the door frame. Doing chin-ups on the door frames is strictly forbidden. Why on Earth do you think that you're going to be able to stand there and say to the teacher, in effect, "I didn't just do what you so plainly saw me just do" and argue the point for five minutes without just digging yourself deeper and deeper into a pit of trouble? Do 14 yr old boys really think that they will ever win such an argument? I've even said to many of these boys, "Look, if I catch you doing something you're not supposed to be doing, pretty much all you have to do is apologise to me and promise me you'll never do it again and even though we both know that you will do it again, I'll let you off the hook, because I'm a sucker for a half-hearted apology." But still they argue!

    Is Martillo a West Ham supporter? B*st*rd better not say anything to me about Saturday's match until Monday, if he is. When I watch my Trotters on Sunday night, I like to pretend it's live.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Well there goes another misconception. I didn't think American teachers shouted. Aren't you meant to calmly hand them a green slip of paper indicating "oppositional tendencies" which they take to a counsellor? Then if that fails to work, they send for Dr Marvin Monroe. Well that's the impression I'd always had.

    Mind you, we fare little better with the media's portrayal of schools over here. We're very big on the naive, idealistic new teacher being thrown into the lion's den at a 'challenging school' (we love our educational euphemisms). The worst they ever seem to face is a wall of blank faces. No screaming, no chaos, no obscenity; just uninspired, kids lacking motivation who are soon turned around once the gangsta rap version of Macbeth, forces them to confront that the eternal human condition can be addressed in many equally valid ways. Then they put on a performance which is much better than the posh school's down the road.

    As for the 14 year old, I can sympathise. When I started school, I was told "deny everything". I assumed this wouldn't cut it if I'd actually been witnessed however. But that was in the pre-video age. Now for many 14 year olds, if it isn't on video, it didn't happen. When they deny it, it means "you can't prove it". Just think how many Police interviews they've witnessed over the years where guilt or innocence is an irrelevance; if you haven't got the CCTV footage or the DNA, "there ain't a damn thing you can do about it, when my lawyer gets here I'm straight back on the street".

    ReplyDelete
  74. I wouldn't of argued. You both know he did it, he's just trying it on to see how much he can get away with. Plus once you get into an argument, his massive and fragile fourteen year old ego wont allow him to lose. If he loses the argument, he's going to have the piss taken out of him by his mates in school, esp if he thinks he's got a bit of a 'rep'. Don't give him the option - calmly tell him that if he does it again, he's going to the principal and immediately move on.

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  75. I dont know about needing a focus, its quite enjoyable as a sort of space outside the law where you can comment on CIF without having to play by CIF rules. You can reproduce unfairly deleted comments, discuss moderation, you can use more imaginative language to discuss Julie Bindels literary merits, i think its quite handy as it is. But, i do think more Ciffers need to be made aware of it, the more you have, the less need there is to have a focus as there will always be someone with something to discuss.

    Socialists with villas. A bit like Goebbels dating a Jew.

    ReplyDelete
  76. On the issue of the 14 yr old, i would remind everyone of the following very useful little gem:

    "Never underestimate the power of denial."

    Now, when someone has watched you do something, thats different, but in most cases, a robust and unflinching denial really is incredibly powerful.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Martillo spent the day in question trying to avoid the various time-wasting activities which usually take up the greater part of his day. This meant he was able to correct all the exams he'd been intending to leave until the last possible moment. He also managed to go to the cinema for the first time in months. He saw 'Slumdog Millionaire' in which, disappointingly, he found nothing reprehensible whatsoever. He had, in fact, what the unsophisticated call 'a good time'. Still, he promises to 'read' the next film he sees rather than sitting back and watching it uncritically.

    Full of the satisfaction of a productive day behind him, he served himself and his wife the delicious squid and meatball dish he'd prepared earlier, accompanying this with a rather nice Rioja currently on offer at his local Bodega. As luck would have it, there were two films on tv, 'La Niña de tus Ojos' and 'Jamón Jamón'. He stayed awake for the whole of the former but the latter was to prove too much after such a full day, so he went to bed, tired but proud of himself.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Now, do we need a focus? In a way, I agree with Jay, and like the idea of a single meandering thread. On the other hand, if/when it reaches 10,000 comments, it might be a little time consuming to look back at something you've just remembered (also, would it take even longer to load than some cif threads?). Maybe some separation would be nice. Earlier in the thread, I threw something onto the stoop: so far none of you cats have licked it up. What about 'my week on cif' by whoever wouldn't mind starting it (comment on 16/2 at 23:08)?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Jay said

    But, i do think more Ciffers need to be made aware of it, the more you have, the less need there is to have a focus as there will always be someone with something to discuss.

    I would agree with this - got to get the word out. Although the odd focus/theme wouldn't hurt. Anyway, here's my two penn'orth for today:

    I am very pleased to report, that after Bidisha's bizarre piece, "Othello? Don't do it, Lenny", the boy Henry done good! Here's a couple of the first night reviews. I hope that Bidisha reads them and they really piss her off. Go, Lenny! :o)

    THUNDEROUS applause greeted the end of this performance of Othello and no one was smiling more than Lenny Henry.
    The comedian showed he could really do serious and held his own as the lead in a slick and beautifully directed production of the Shakespearean tragedy.
    For a man who came to director Barrie Rutter with no experience of Shakespearean acting, his portrayal of the great soldier is convincing and, at the end, heartbreaking.

    http://www.halifaxcourier.co.uk/reviews/Othello-A-seriously-good-show.4989319.jp

    Frankly, I was expecting to review a theatrical car crash. What a pleasure then to report that Henry truly triumphed last night....
    ...This is one of the most astonishing debuts in Shakespeare I have ever seen. It is impossible to praise too highly Henry's courage in taking on so demanding and exposed a role, and then performing it with such authority and feeling.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/culturecritics/charlesspencer/4696028/Othello-with-Lenny-Henry-at-the-West-Yorkshire-Playhouse-review.htm

    ReplyDelete
  80. lol, my week on cif, i think thats a really good idea. I think people would have to keep a little diary for the week, but it would be really interesting to read someones account of what they debated, how they debated, what arguments they found good, bad, what has given them food for thought, what they are uncertain of, what they have learnt, if anything, etc etc. I'm not volunteering to go first, obviously, i am an exceptionally lazy man by nature, thats why i spend the day on CIF instead of doing my work, but someone should get the ball rolling. And, if we stick to the rules of flatulence, 'smelt it dealt it': martillo to begin.

    ReplyDelete
  81. What, Biddy wrote a load of bollocks? She is the broken clock that is actually never right.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Heh! Rude boy Monkeyfish just got deleted for suggesting that Harry Phibbs is no slimmer than he ought to be.

    Actually, Jay, I've already overcome my own (probably superior) laziness to write a 'cif and me' thing on the blog I set up (montana stepped up and did it more quickly and rapidly than I would've done). Come on Jay, Kizbot's been suggesting for ages that you did something...

    ReplyDelete
  83. Kiz says all sorts of outrageous things, she lives in a permanent state of caffeine overload due to her tea consumption. I'm just too lazy, i'd never get round to it, and im on holiday for the second half of next week and the beginning fo the week after, so would be a fortnight or so before i could even do it. Whereas you other folk, you could get cracking today on your 7 day diary!! I tell you what i would pay good money for, "My week on CIF - by Ultimathule."

    ReplyDelete
  84. So, what did you say, you naughty monkeyfish? We're all adults here.

    ReplyDelete
  85. "My week on CIF - by guess who?"

    Mon: Didn't post. Too busy with my 17 young boyfriends.

    Tues: V. interesting article on some research that shows that women are 10 times smarter than men. Usual male chauvinists were offended (fucking wimps) so I personally insulted loads of them (only 7 deletions!) and I think they got the point.

    Wed: A very good day - there was an article about Russia, and although it wasn't in any way relevant to the topic I managed to get 5 or 6 comments past the moderators on how much the Finns hate the Russians. No recommendations though. People are so stupid!

    Thurs: Bidisha really is brilliant! She hates men almost as much as I do. I wish I had a column on Cif. The CifEditor never replies to my E-mails on this. I'll bet he's a man.

    Fri: I was too depressed to post today. There were loads of articles where I could really have slagged off British society and bigged Finland up, but one of my Scottish boyfriends has dumped me so I drank three bottles of wine and went out to get another one. All the men thought I was a prostitute, so I just came home.

    Sat: Oh, my head. No posting today. I'll bet Jay will miss me. I wish he didn't attract me so much - it seems wrong somehow.

    Sun: Note to self. Less posting, more quality time with sprog - that's very important and only women do it. Also, remember to use phrase "a woman I know once said to me that I'm more of a gentleman than any man she knew." Haven't used that for a while, I think.
    Roll on Monday! I can't wait!

    ReplyDelete
  86. LOL


    Thats one of the funniest things i've read on CIF (this is sort of CIF). Someone must show that to Kiz and Cath, i think they will find it particularly amusing.

    Scherfig takes 'post of the day'.

    ReplyDelete
  87. Thanks jay. Subject to cifthreadrefugee approval, Woollymindedliberal's diary might be next week's effort.

    ReplyDelete
  88. WML will be thrilled at the prospect, im sure.

    ReplyDelete
  89. What about: the time I got stuck in the lift with Bidisha.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Loved scherfig's diary. . .

    . . .but can I tentatively make a suggestion about house rules for this blog? Not making demands, just holding something up for discussion.

    Can I suggest we all try really hard not to let this blog become a place to attack / mock / gently tease other Cif regulars? (unless they're here, of course, which is fair game)

    The nature of this site is that there's a real risk it could become a clique of like-minded souls which could then make it a bit exclusive and unwelcoming to those who happen by.

    Seems to me a bit rude to be giggling about people behind their backs.

    Above the line contributors (self included) are an entirely different kettle of fish, of course. Let rip.

    Whaddya think folks?


    There's a real risk that an offshoot

    ReplyDelete
  91. Point taken, Ally. But the nature of this site is surely that it is not Cif. Everyone has right of reply here if they wish to contribute (unlike Cif). I don't believe that it will descend to some sort of lowest common denominator as you fear. If it does, so be it - I, for one, won't stick around. So far there have been less than a dozen contributors and we're already discussing some sort of moderation or house rules? What about trusting people's common sense and decency?
    Anyway, as far I'm concerned, it's Montana's thread and she can decide how she wants it to be. It won't appeal to everyone and nor should it. It's something different and the risk that it might be "exclusive and unwelcoming" is probably a risk worth taking. Being a consensus sort of person, I'm happy to hear other views on this, but I will make up my own mind accordingly. (Incidentally, why make a distinction between ATL and BTL contributors? It's all opinion put into the public domain and should stand or fall on its merits.)

    ReplyDelete
  92. Ally, I agree that it wouldn't be good to turn this into the "cool kids" table in the school lunchroom. I think most of us can be trusted to play nice. So far, no one who's come over here is anyone who seems prone to unjustified meanness. There are, after all, some BTL contributors who are almost as far off their chumps as Bindie & Biddie.

    And please, scherfig, I don't want anyone to think of this thing as my little demesne - I really did just want to get a place going. Unless, of course, this being my demesne would make you all my vassals. I kinda like the thought of having some vassals.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Hi all, Dotterel here

    Thanks scherfig for the tip, has anyone told kiz?

    Can we have more of scherfig's diaries please?

    But I think we should be pushing for JayR's piece to go on CIF, it needs a wider audience!

    Anyone for tea and biccies?

    ReplyDelete
  94. AllyF has a point about not attacking other CIF posters on here. But I'll happily make an exception for ultimathule and woollymindedliberal.

    ReplyDelete
  95. Oh darlings, our first tiff!

    Not sure how I feel about this. I thought the diary was funny, though it felt a little weird laughing at someone who may not know about this page. I sure don't want to see a list of posting rules. Hmmm

    ReplyDelete
  96. "Oh darlings, our first tiff!"

    The best part of breaking up, is when we're making up. Snogs all round.

    "Not sure how I feel about this. I thought the diary was funny, though it felt a little weird laughing at someone who may not know about this page. I sure don't want to see a list of posting rules. Hmmm"

    Pretty much my feeling too. I wasn't really suggesting a list of rules, more kind of informal agreement amongst ourselves.

    sherfig's question about why drawing a distinction between ATL and BTL contributors... It's a good point, it just kind of *feels* different to me.

    Oh, and I didn't think the original 'diary' was at all cruel or offensive, but it just made me think about what might happen when someone does forget to play nice, coz it will happen sooner or later, bound to.

    I also think there's a difference between "Did you see what AllyF just wrote on the Toynbee thread? What a plonker!" which is fine, and "You know that AllyF? What a plonker!" which seems a bit out of order. Although true, obviously.

    Anyway, as I said, I was really just holding a proposal up for discussion to see what people think. Like scherfig, I'm quite happy to go with the consensus. If people would rather have a total free-for-all then fair enough, I'm game. But be warned, it might get ugly.

    ReplyDelete
  97. It might indeed get ugly. Maybe we could have a separate 'dark room' thread.

    ReplyDelete
  98. I suppose it must be entirely down to the posters decision. In here, I'll moan all day about the usual above the line suspects but I'd rather Ultima sees the..umm..whites of my eyes if I'm narked about a comment she's made.

    PS I think the Guardian has just been outed as pro-Harman for any lab leadership contest.
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/20/harrietharman-labour?commentpage=2

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  99. AllyF - "more kind of informal agreement amongst ourselves."

    I think this is the only way to go. If someone crosses the line, then other commenters should say so.

    AllyF - "but it just made me think about what might happen when someone does forget to play nice, coz it will happen sooner or later, bound to."

    A pessimistic view, but if it happens there is very little we can do. I would prefer to think that commenters here would show each other some respect. There have been no nutters so far, but I would hope that if they turned up and misbehaved, then they would be thoroughly castigated by all and sundry.

    Martillo - "Maybe we could have a separate 'dark room' thread."

    I like it - all the Luke Skywalkers on the vanilla thread being kind and reasonable and all the Darth Vaders in a seperate forum ripping each other to pieces. Dare you embrace the dark side?

    ReplyDelete
  100. I think that self-policing is probably the way to go. Back in those near-forgotten days of the early 1990s, when Usenet was pretty much all there was to the internet and this WorldWideWeb thingie was just a few CompSci students with pages about their hobbies, I was a regular on a usenet group that, pretty much from day one, developed an ethos of discussing just about anything but the actual intended topic of the group. We became a pretty close-knit (I'm not ashamed to say this) clique. Lots of in-jokes and lots of good-naturedpiss-taking. When newbies came along who didn't understand the unspoken rules and got personal or vicious with one of the regulars - the rules were spoken and they were told to shape up or go away. Newbies who didn't figure it out were flamed away pretty mercilessly.

    Now, I'm not suggesting merciless flaming, but my point is that those of us who are here so far are all decent enough people to be good to each other and gentle nudges with anyone who comes along and steps over the line should be told where the line is and invited to either stay this side of it or leave.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Martillo- I wouldn't have missed that thread for the world it was utterly hilarious... And even funnier that Jay got a whole day premod and I only got 5 posts... Doohnibor got off scot free and she was even more viscious than me or Jay! I did save a couple of posts before the mods got them but there on my work computer so I'll post them for a laugh another time..
    I thought scherfig's diary was very funny but he should tell ultima how to find this site so she can rip him to shreds for it! I'd also love a WML diary...
    Any cake there Dotty!

    ReplyDelete
  102. how do I make my name blue? i need info in words of 1 syllable or less pls...

    ReplyDelete
  103. Can i just say that the "diary" was written by "guess who". Why on earth would people connect it with ultima?

    ReplyDelete
  104. God i've missed a lot already, i was only away for one school day! Hello Dot, glad to see you've joined us old chum.

    I think Ally makes quite a good point actually, maybe actual rules would be to.. er.. CIF for my liking, but i think there is quite a real danger of the thread becoming a little unwelcoming, a little clique-y, however you spell that silly word.

    As for the Thule, if you got her on a good day the 'mystery' diary might make her laugh, but if you get her on a bad day, well... Would be good to see her here though, and Millytante, and the new one, possibly a future leader, Suhasini. Going by what they write on CIF, when the gloves came off on here, they would come out with some pure gold, im certain of it.

    I see Kiz has got here too, greetings dearest - the premodding was fairly painless in the end, luckily, a day i can handle, its the week that killed me, but still, very hurtful that the mods would single me out for a whole day for what was, really, one fairly harmless comment about blue meanies, yet Doohnibor got nothing (!) and you got 5 posts! The injustice...

    I think self policing could work, if sonmeone says something out of line i think people would say so.

    A dark thread.... mmmmm..... it would turn into world war 3 within minutes. I say no, but its montanas site and im easy either way, i may stroll in occasionally when my Ultimameter breaks....

    ReplyDelete
  105. Cake? Yes, I'm experimenting with a coffee cake recipe in order to use it all up so the coffee drinkers don't get any!!!

    Anyone like to try a piece?

    Dot

    ReplyDelete
  106. I'm in for anything that persecutes coffee drinkers.

    Though, unsurprisingly, im not a big coffee cake fan, but i'll battle through...

    ReplyDelete
  107. You won't taste the coffee, I raided Kiz's stash for the "special ingredient"

    Dot

    ReplyDelete
  108. I wondered where she was, havent seen her all day, she's clearly doing the rounds of Athens trying to replenish her stock...

    ReplyDelete
  109. Huzzah! Turns out us (western) men, are going to be able to get just as worn out and knackered as our fellow sisters
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/24/life-expectancy-atheism

    Main contributing factors seem to be not dieing, en masse, during wars and not working down t'pit anymore.

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  110. Wow. Thanks for the tip off Scherfig. It's like stumbling across a group of survivors after an apocalyptic plague has wiped off most of humanity. Well, all analogies have to break down somewhere, and that one broke down in the drive. But you get what I mean.

    On the 'what do we do about not becoming too not nice' question...has anyone read 'The Lottery' by Shirley Jackson?

    http://www.classicshorts.com/stories/lotry.html

    ReplyDelete
  111. "It's like stumbling across a group of survivors after an apocalyptic plague has wiped off most of humanity."

    Made me laugh. I think its quite apt. When each new face pops i always get the "you made it!" feeling, its like the cupboard into Narnia, a glistening, white land of purity where the dark forces of Moderation cant reach us... or perhaps a Lord of the Rings analogy would work better, just to be able to call them the dark forces of Mordoration...

    I'll get my coat....

    ReplyDelete
  112. 'My lord, they've discovered the Mordoration pun.'

    'Bollocks. I knew this would happen. I told Sauron. "Who's got the eye, dog?", he kept saying. Why are evil leaders so bloody myopic? Unleash the Orcs.'

    'Do you mean Bindel?'

    'I thought we said we're not making nasty jokes about people off-site? We'll get those little shits.'

    Speaking seriously, wouldn't this feel more CiF homely if the far from most offensive posts were sporadically deleted without explanation? I'd certainly feel more comfortable if...aaaaah!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  113. This comment has been removed by a morderator. Replies may also be deleted.

    ReplyDelete
  114. ChooChoo said:
    Speaking seriously, wouldn't this feel more CiF homely if the far from most offensive posts were sporadically deleted without explanation? I'd certainly feel more comfortable if...aaaaah!!!!

    It would certainly be more "homely" but this is the badlands of anodyne comment.Surely the least offensive comments should be deleted (ridiculed and trashed first, then deleted.) If you can't say anything bad about somebody, then don't say anything at all.

    ReplyDelete
  115. That made me laugh.

    I know we said we would not use this site for personal attacks, and we really shouldnt, but we'll start all that decency and maturity tomorrow.

    Whats that you say? Bindel Wormtongue? No, no, i cant agree with that sort of slur im afraid... Thats not on...

    The analogy does of course cast a few people as plucky hobbits - Cath, AllyF and PikeBishop - three little hobbits who have infiltrated the heart of Mordor itself...

    ReplyDelete
  116. Comments are open on the thread Mendoza mentioned................

    Dot

    ReplyDelete
  117. "Speaking seriously, wouldn't this feel more CiF homely if the far from most offensive posts were sporadically deleted without explanation? I'd certainly feel more comfortable if...aaaaah!!!!"

    Blame Montana. I dont know where she got the idea that harmless comments shouldn't be deleted, probably some ridiculous new fad in America. But she's new to CIF, give her time, in a few months she'll be sweeping the scythe with all the abritrary gusto and spite of a fully armed Mordorator...

    ReplyDelete
  118. Jay are you there? We have a Milly problem.....


    http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/feb/24/alfie-patten-teenage-father?showallcomments=true&commentpage=2&commentposted=1

    Dot

    ReplyDelete
  119. I've just been moderated on the Baggini thread - "Thank you for your comment. This has been submitted for moderation." Granted, I called millytante an idiot but maybe the recommend this thread (to sarka) was a factor. Who knows?

    ReplyDelete
  120. Scherfig you've been sent to the gulag by the sounds of it, our prayers go with you brother. You should email cif and plead for a light sentence, me and kiz did and we got 1 day and 5 posts respectively.

    I am investigating this assault from milly now, though her first lengthy rant actually had some quite interesting points in it i thought, as well as some completely ridiculous stuff, obviously. But i will read on, knowing her it comes more off the tracks as it goes on.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Jay, obviously I'm a broken man now, but there's no way I'm pleading to those morons for anything. I'll survive.

    ReplyDelete
  122. I gave up my dignity entirely, i threw myself at their feet and pleaded without shame, it was a dreadful spectacle, a low point in life, and about 600 words in length, at least, a short essay. I told them they were damaging me as a person by premodding me as so much of my working week is spent posting. It was as pitiful as i could manage. CIF is like an awful addiction, i get very stressed when they put me on premod.

    ReplyDelete
  123. I didn't realise people were still coming down here. I've now been modded three times! (And I'm starting to like it...) I don't mind what anyone says here - especially if you'll indulge me in telling you that I think Leta and LenFirewood ought to hook up. They deserve each other.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Not on topic, but. I had two comments removed in the 'upskirt' thread today, because they were replies to comments that got deleted by the mods. I hadn't realised that my comments would just disappear - not even a 'deleted by moderator'. I'm a bit miffed* about this; if I'd got a 'deleted by moderator', people might have assumed I'd said something dead controversial, hence improving my 'cool' rating which god knows needs a boost.



    *I'm not really, I just wanted to post something on here. Hah well.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Well listen up, I got a post deleted by accident and the mods emailed me to apologise. Heh heh. Still got the email ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  126. You're my idol, Bitterweed! An apology from the mods - I think I'd frame it.

    MattBelmer - I'm wondering if maybe my post on the Cornish thread was a bit of the same - except it didn't disappear entirely. The "This post has been deleted by the moderators" thingy is there. I was responding to Olching, after all. Just seems silly, though.

    ReplyDelete
  127. jay.. you're not the only one who's grovelled. I did. and would again...

    ReplyDelete
  128. I've never been pre-modded..I'm beginning to feel vaguely uncool.

    Mendoza

    ReplyDelete
  129. montana said
    I've now been modded three times!

    I think you mean deleted? Pre-mod is when every comment you submit goes directly to the moderators before reaching the thread. Some get posted an hour or so afterwards, some never get there at all. As bitterweed so eloquently put it, it tends to dull the otherwise cutting edge of some of ones comments.

    ReplyDelete
  130. Okay, then - deleted. And I'm up to four now. WTF did they expect people to do when they let Dickhead Perle have some space? Play nice with the little war criminal?

    ReplyDelete
  131. MontanaWildhack

    Looks like a good idea. It can be really annoying when the thread is up and running and everyone is having a nice time with daggers drawn and hands around each other's throats, when the teachers come out into the playground and blow their whistles and it is all over, just as you were about to take that final swing.

    You are welcome to come along to:

    http://politicalnewsblogs.com

    as well, where we are aiming for a mixture of re-hashed and re-heated CiF and while that is brewing and bubbling in the microwave, new stuff as well.

    Keep up the good work.

    Ping!

    Sorry, gotta go!

    ReplyDelete
  132. I think they disappear some comments to save face, otherwise some threads would look ridiculous, there would be too many 'deleted post' messages.

    Did i hear someone say they got an apology from the mods? Sweet jehovah, could it be reproduced here? There's simply no justice on CIF, i type my little guts out and what do i get, mass deletions, no apologies, occasional premodding...

    I'm a victim.


    (There's nothing wrong with grovelling Kiz, we may have lost our dignity but we got light sentences)

    ReplyDelete
  133. Jay
    It was me, they deleted me by accident, it wasn't an apology regarding any appeal I made. Still. I have the email ! Ha ha !

    ReplyDelete
  134. Jay - I see you got deleted today. Forget at the moment which thread - Cath's thread about that heathen Norfolk, mebbe? I wish they'd do a bit of deleting on the Goldberg bit about the end of the Christian Right - my compatriots were out in all their hate-filled Fuck Europe glory. Political asylum. I need political asylum somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  135. Bitterweed, i would dearly love to see any apology from the mods, i have never even heard of one other than this, let alone see one in all its glorious prose.

    Montana

    Yeah they deleted my trivial and completely harmless little post on Caths thread, god knows why, the consequences of leaving it alone would be exactly nil, im not quite sure what they think they are preventing or improving when they delete posts like that.

    I have had a fair few email conversations with various Guardian staff about this modding but you might as well email NewLabour and ask them about those cabinet minutes, i am just relentlessly assured that no post is deleted unless it breaks the sacred community guidelines, i say 'yes they are', they say 'no they arent'. When you know for a fact they are wrong, when you have seen their wrongess with your own eyes hundreds of times, its a little testing.

    ReplyDelete
  136. "I think they disappear some comments to save face, otherwise some threads would look ridiculous, there would be too many 'deleted post' messages."

    Hi Jay,
    Comments that are removed with no trace left are generally ones that refer to an earlier removed comment (if that makes sense). Hence the "Replies may also be deleted" bit in the:

    "This comment has been removed by a moderator. Replies may also be deleted."

    ReplyDelete
  137. Im pretty certain i've had quite a few posts disappeared that werent referring to any earlier post, let alone an earlier deleted post.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Me too, jay. My latest 'up front' deletion was a post where I suggested it would be nice to discuss moderation. Ever so polite it was but zap! Gone. I don't understand why they can't see the relevance of the subject, or why they feel the need to be so arrogant about it. Maybe we should do it here - have a thread exclusively dedicated to moderation.

    ReplyDelete
  139. They certainly do have a strange attitude to it, it mustnt be discussed at any time whatosever. Doesnt do them any favours.

    ReplyDelete
  140. "Im pretty certain i've had quite a few posts disappeared that werent referring to any earlier post, let alone an earlier deleted post."

    Jay - Comments that discuss moderation are generally removed without a marker left as they almost always refer to moderation further up-thread. Moreover, comments about moderation are almost always removed for being off-topic. Hope this helps.

    ReplyDelete
  141. Anonymous - who are you?

    ReplyDelete
  142. I'm anonymous Jay. It says so right there^

    ReplyDelete
  143. Hence my question.

    ReplyDelete
  144. So do we need a thread here about moderation? Is there some way of suggesting to the good folks at the Guardian that they should do an open thread about moderation policies? Whaddup folks?

    -Montana, at work and not logged in

    ReplyDelete
  145. I suggested they open a thread for moderation, like the 'what do you want to talk about' one, and suprise surprise, they didnt want to know.

    You can still log in if you away from your own computer cant you montana? Well, not log in, but choose a name to post under.

    ReplyDelete
  146. do we have a community mod amongst us? Actually... that would be quite cool coz perhaps we could have a proper chat about the vagaries of cif moderation...
    come on then... fess up...

    ReplyDelete
  147. Jay - I'm trying to be somewhat discreet here. I'm in the computer lab with a bunch of kids. It really wouldn't be that hard to log in, I suppose, but .... (I guess Montana is pronounced 'lazy' today).

    -Me

    ReplyDelete
  148. Sarka got deleted on the Michelle Obama's sleeves thread! Sarka! What on earth could one of the calmest, most rational posters on Cif have said about sleevelessness to piss of the mods?

    ReplyDelete
  149. They modded Sarka? Maybe its that special time of the month for the mods, occasionally they seem to go on small purges on an entirely arbitrary basis.

    If there is a mod lurking in the shadows, could they explain what the consequences are when naughty comments arent deleted? Have you been taken to court? If so, how many times? Have you had any letters written in by readers who have been mentally assaulted by the filth they read? Prompted any suicides? Provoked scorn from other media outlets? What is it that is so terrifying that modding has to be done in such a manner? WHat is the consequence, for example, of an 'off topic' comment remaining on the site? Its not exactly armaggedon is it?

    ReplyDelete
  150. JayReilly

    They deleted Sarka ?? Fuck me.

    Here's that apology:
    ________________________
    Dear Bitterweed,

    I am one of the moderators. I'm terribly sorry, but I accidentally blocked one of your posts that should have been allowed to stay. Someone with a similar name to my own had reported it as offensive, and as I had just been in a thread reporting Islamophobic comments, I went down the listblocking them, and didn't notice until too late that this, sitting just beneath them, had been reported by a different Alan. It was on the Jade Goody piece by Michelle Hanson, and read:

    "I don't think she wants people to ever "leave her alone to do what she wants without making judgments". Being constantly available, like water or electricity, is the raison d'etre of the vacuous celebrity grotesque. Not that I really give a fuck either way."

    Please accept my apologies for accidentally deleting it, and please feel free to repost it.

    Thank you for your contributions to guardian.co.uk

    Alan
    Moderator
    ____________________________

    So there you have it ;-)
    PS Have a good Friday night y'all !

    ReplyDelete
  151. I think I'll start our first conspiracy theory fantasy: why can't I see the latest thread?

    ReplyDelete
  152. I can't believe it took me so long to find this!

    Re the question about how people have managed to post comments once a thread's been closed, it's easy. All you have to do if you want the last word on a thread is calculate when a thread is due to shut, ie 72 hours from when it opened, then a short while before that point, open up the posting box on the thread, and keep it open for several hours until you're sure all other comments have gone through.

    You then type in your comment, hit post, and there you are, the last comment on an already closed thread.

    Obviously during this time you need to have another browser open so you can carry on as normal with the rest of your Internet/CiF activities.

    Hope that helps.

    ReplyDelete
  153. You sly old fox Cath....

    Honestly, these above the line mavericks know all the tricks...

    ReplyDelete
  154. Please bear in mind that comments about moderation may be deleted without trace. If you've ever any queries about moderation, please direct them to comment.is.free@guardian.co.uk

    (CommunityMod)

    Wasnt there a mod not long ago claiming the only posts ever 'disappeared' were those referring to an earlier deleted comment? Come on mods, get your story straight.

    ReplyDelete
  155. I cant believe so many regulars have been banned! Nice one Montana with the site. Looks great. CiF is going to ruin itself soon. Graun staff sounding like traffic wardens with their rules and policies.

    Well only popped by to pay my respects as it were.

    Pip-pip!

    ReplyDelete
  156. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  157. And hello to everyone else here that I "know". I've only just "seen" you.

    ReplyDelete