I disagree. The messages which have been removed are usually ones that are vitriolic, angry, abusive and in no way any fair reflection on the shows .. also many of them are clearly the work of one or two posting again and again under different names (identical poor spelling, absence of punctuation and same old phrases are a dead giveaway). It was pretty obvious that some had not even attended the concerts they were rubbishing. They have also removed messages from someone trying to sell illegal bootlegs. They do not ban people lightly, and would not ban anyone who is not abusive to Meat or people posting there.
The site is Meat's official international fanclub, and imo there's no reason why abusive posts should be left there. Freedom of speech does not cover libellous comments intended to damage the reputation of someone, nor does it excuse verbal abuse scattered graffiti-like by internet vandals. To refer to either Vee or Wez as "worse than ~~~~~~" is imo to abuse the very freedom of speech you say is so important.
Even here if abuse gets bad enough it is dealt with. Why shouldn't a website ban people who just seek to vandalise a site with abuse intended to hurt and upset Meat and his fans? Frankly I get tired of people going on about freedom of speech. This freedom was intended to allow people the freedom to criticise and stand up against such things aas tyranny, unfair treatment and "establishment" abuse. It was not intended to allow libel or slander, nor should it be used imo by cowards who use profanity solely to upset others, and who hurl abuse at individuals from the safety of assumed names on the internet.
Laws come with some level of responsibility on those who use them to justify what they do, and common decency should be observed in public forums. If someone abuses your telephone line it is entirely reasonable to have them blocked and dealt with. If someone abuses your email system the same is true. So, imo, is it with public message boards where if the standards of common decency are upheld and wanted by the majority, and those standards explained on them, to prevent those who are incaphable of behaving from posting is democratic.
Anyone is entitled to hold any opinion they choose, but this is about how they express it, and I applaud anyone who makes a stand against the abusive, the profane, the internet vandals and those who are incapable of expressing themselves in a civilised way.
|