Jazzbutcher

I recently received an email threatening to suspend or ban me based on a comment I made about the director of Powder and Jeepers Creepers, Victor Salva. He is a convicted child molester.

Read for yourself here:

Although the person starting the thread was discussing the amazingly low price of 70% of "Powder", and warned against commenting on Salva, I still had to say something. As a father of two, I find it hard to believe that anyone would support this man or his "artistic" efforts. If you care about kids, please vote with your wallet.

With regard to the moderators and their concern for "flow":

I certainly wasn't rude in my post. In terms of "intererfering", I have been visiting this forum for several months and I see conversations going all over the place on some of these threads.

Discussion is a two way street. Trying to squelch commentary goes against everything that is good about the web and smacks of censorship. If you don't agree with my views, fine. Just don't delete them. There may be some uninformed people out there saying "Hey! 70% Off!!! Maybe I'll go pick up Powder today!"


Sorry, I just had to vent.

twikoff

[Moving to Feedback Forum]

Bandoman

George Luca$ is the devil.

Sorry, what was the topic again?

Wizdar

Jeez, another “censorship” whining.

You’ve spoiled an eloquent complaint with the totally improper use of that word. Consider doing some research on the concept, what is and is not censorship, the idea that a “public” forum is still “owned” by somebody and therefore has rules, etc. etc.

Oh, and your sig is too long.

Wizdar

Oh, yeah. I forgot.

Star Wars Sux!

dek

I agree about voting with your wallet, the director is a POS dirtbag who preys on children. to Pedophiles.

PS - Andrew Vachss rules

Dave99

Nice complaint. You forgot to mention the part that this site is owned by somebody who sets the rules as to what he does/doesn't want to see in various forums and threads.

Dave

FonMan

I agree with you.
It is very interesting to watch what people get "repremanded" for on this web site. I appreciate the site and have a good time here, but some of the mods have a very hard time distinguishing between out-of-line behavior and somebody having a contrarian view. The political correctness of some of the mods is so obvious that I stay clear of some areas just to avoid them.

It seems you have full freedom to condem a person if he is pro-gun, anti-abortion, pro-business, or does not agree with environmentalists. Anything goes attacking these people. But if you have a disagreement with any subject relating to gays, environmentalist, anarchists, animal rights, or SUV's, you better watch your step.

As I said above, I enjoy the sight and appreciate Geoff's efforts to keep it going. But some of the mods are a joke and their only qualifications seems to be that they spend their life posting here.

......of course this will be the last post I am allowed and will now disappear into the black hole of banned users

tygloalex

You're missing the whole point. In a thread titled Powder 70% off, don't talk about the director's past. In a thread titled Victor Salva's past, talk about the director's past. Threadcraps do suck.
If you want to talk about Victor Salva, start your own thread.

Jazzbutcher

Main Entry: cen·sor·ship
Function: noun
Date: circa 1591
1 a : the institution, system, or practice of censoring b : the actions or practices of censors; especially : censorial control exercised repressively
2 : the office, power, or term of a Roman censor
3 : exclusion from consciousness by the psychic censor

Gee Wizdar, that took a lot of research. As for the comments that the forum is "owned" by someone, this sounds a lot like my three year old refusing to let another three year old play with his toys. If you don't want to see opposing views you are in the wrong business.

Iron Chef

First of all, you blatently threadcrapped in a bargain thread that had absolutley nothing to do with the contents of the movie Powder or its director. It had to do with the fact that it was being sold for $9.07.

Second of all, this is a private website wholly owned and operated by Geoffrey Kleinmann who can set whatever rules he wants to. When you registered to this forum, you digitally signed a document full of rules that you need to follow in order to remain a member.

Bandoman

tdirgins - I think the point, as tygloalex stated, is that no one is saying you can't state your views about this director, just that you can't hijack a thread devoted to one topic and make it about another. This may be enforced more strictly in the DVD Bargains forum than here in Other, for obvious reasons. Thus your views are not being censored, the mods are just trying to keep this site flowing by keeping threads on topic.

I've seen discussions about Salva and why some feel he should be boycotted and others think you should separate the man from the art - there is room in this forum for all views, as long as they are expressed with respect for others. I don't see your complaint as involving censorship at all.

maxfisher

I'm just curious if it would have been alright for him to start a thread in the proper forum and then post a link to it in the 70% off thread. I think it's a valid point that some may see a deal on a dvd and just snag it not knowing about who they're supporting.

movielib

I'm three out of the four (pro-gun, pro-business [or more accurately, I'm pro-free market] and I don't agree with environmentalists). I'm very vocal on these subjects as I'm sure many will attest to. I've never been suspended or even reprimanded in the slightest. I think this is about as open and tolerant a Forum as one can find.

Perhaps most of the time it's not what people's politics are or expressing their opinions on them that gets them in mod trouble but how they say it.

Bandoman

This could get cumbersome if every time anyone started a thread about any movie by Salva, or Roman Polanski or Woody Allen or any director with a controversial past, someone then either discussed in that thread, or linked to a discussion about, how that director is a "bad person" and should not be supported. People who read the bargains forum probably also read some of the other forums, and will likely see such discussions and read them if they are of interest to them.

dek

PS - Do not touch Bandomans hands

AndyCapps

Very well said. The Bargains Forum is for bargains, the Movie Talk forum is for discussing contents of a movie, since there's not a Director Talk forum, discussing the criminal record of a director would probably go in Other. Oh yeah, threads such as this go in the Feedback & Support forum.

Bushdog

That probably would have been the perfect and allowed solution.

Just because you have something to say doesn't mean you should say it anywhere you choose on the site. There needs to be a bit of order kept, for the good of the user experience.

In other words, I think you're over-reacting.

edit: not YOU, but rather the original poster.

FonMan

Actually, it has less to do with outright "BANS" to a more subtle type of censorship. Some mods will hit you with the warning post about "Keeping on topic" or "we have heard this point before in other threads" These warning only come up when certain points of view are expressed.

Bushdog

That's funny. I'm probably more pro-gun than you, surely more pro-business, and I do not agree with environmental regulation and I never feel any pressure against me.

Is it possible you're feeling a bit more like a victim than you really are? Or perhaps it is not your ideas that draw comments, but rather it is how you express them? I honestly am not really familiar with your posts, so I'm just asking, certainly not accusing or suggesting anything.

maxfisher

I don't think it would be that cumbersome if it was just one post allowed in the bargain thread. i.e. "Click here to read more about (insert director)" and then have a link to the thread posted in the right forum. A really good deal thread will end up with tons and tons of thank you posts that contribute no new info to the situation. I wouldn't think one extra post linking to a different discussion would unnecessarily overburden the thread. I'm sure it would be fine in other situations. i.e. If someone posted a good deal on a pretty obscure movie, I'm sure someone wouldn't get in trouble for linking to a thread discussing the movie. Any mods have an opinion on this?

AndyCapps

I'm not a Bargains Forum mod, nor have I ever played one on television, but is there really a difference between posting an off topic comment and linking to one?

FonMan

Who ever said this was me
Although I have experienced it before, I notice it in threads I read all of the time. I am glad your experience has not been tainted by this, and maybe we do not frequent the same areas of DVD TALK (Other than OTHER)

And I doubt your more "pro-gun" then me, at the least we are the same and I doubt more pro-business also.

Dont read more into the previous posts than is actually there. I'm not crying about my posts, its just an environment of intollerance toward certain attitudes.....The original poster has a prime example of one.

joltaddict

FonMan

Why would this be a problem??
I might agree that posting a complaint about a director in the "bargains" forum is a little unappropriate, but allowing people a link to get more info if they want seems to be a perfect way to let people know about this creep. I think your post here is a perfect example of how mods can sensor through indirect posts.
(nothing agains you AndyCapps, you just happen to prove a point I was discussing )