Editing of posts by Mods

[stretch37]

Originally Posted by LucyK!

To be honest, if the thread is going to be edited to within an inch of its life then there's very little point in keeping it open.

100% with you there. While I know Mouse and our mod team here are doing their utmost to put out fires left right and center, it often results in a person's own words being altered or removed to do so...And although I know this is a last resort measure, I don't feel that it is last resort enough, and it takes away a person's own right to decide. Having said that, I think a huge credit to the mod team though, because honestly, what they have is a community of Meat fans that runs high in emotion, and vastly differing opinions, and tempers. Consequently (from what i've seen around the net), a greater volume of inappropriate things are said on this forum than I've ever seen elsewhere. This is usually because of said differing opinions, emotions, anger or frustration at what another person has said. At the end of the day, many of us are unapolagetically ourselves on here, and that I think is the ultimate reason why there is more inappropriate behavior than any other fan forum I have seen. I like to think it is because we are tighter-knit than said other forums :P And its great that we can be ourselves and have fun. But as with any family or tight group of friends, usually we get to see more of each other - in both good and not so good ways. Moderating this in the past has caused upset, but we have caused ourselves upset, equally, by the words we say and vibes we give out.

So, the mods have their work cut out for them, and they do what is needed to put out the fires WE create What I think is needed is a slight change to policy. If something is said that is deemed inappropriate:

1. PM the user and instruct them to re-phrase or alter their own post to be more appropriate.

2. If the thing that was posted was *really* bad, Put the message in spoiler tags, and send the user a PM. This way, less users will see the post in passing, and it does not alter a person's own words, which I find greatly inappropriate in itself.

3. Mods do not edit a user's words ever. If a user has ignored the Mod's request to make their wording more appropriate, the user is banned for a short time. If a user repeatedly does this, the user is banned for longer, or perma-banned for not following the rules. Simple. Cut. Dry. :)

Of course, there's also the issue of what is "inappropriate". Is "~~~~ you" more inappropriate to repeatedly, aggressively arguing your point and minimizing the validity of another's point - without the use of swear words our foul language - but making a person feel like their opinion is garbage because someone has given 9,432 reasons why its garbage? I find "~~~~ you" far less offensive, and far more to the point :P However, we need to address both issues. Neither should be allowed to fester. Ultimately I find the latter issue - Inappropriateness so well written that you have to read between the lines to see it - is the one that is missed COMPLETELY on here, where a simple eff you is jumped on like its a sin. This is wrong IMO, for the simple reason that if a person consistently and vigorously tells you that there are 500 reasons why your opinion is not entirely accurate or complete, or valid, or you missed something, it can be FAR more hurtful FAR more often because it is psychological abuse, and it is detrimental to other user feeling free to express themselves because it promotes the fear that you will soon be invalidated. It is negative energy, and can easily cause a derogatory remark to be thrown out in frustration that ones own opinion has been torn to shreds in detail persistently enough that that person feels just like someone hammered "~~~~ your opinion" at them multiple times for stating an incorrect opinion. HAVING SAID THAT, IMO resorting to swear words or derogatory remarks towards others can be extremely hurtful, and is neither acceptable nor a "better alternative", and I am in no way defending the use of it...It was used as a comparison to bring light to other forms of unacceptable things said.

Once a mandate for what *is* inappropriate has been determined (or perhaps posted somewhere or updated if it already exists), we should be good to go. And "spiral" threads can stop spawning every time something newsworthy happens. With the ultimate goal of having more positives vibes and an atmosphere more open to discussion. Isn't that what this place is here for? :P

[CarylB]

I think Rainer and his team have a perfectly good system of moderating. The thread you are quoting from is rather different. It's not about exercising a set of rules generally on a forum, but an attempt to get a contentious thread cleaned up and some of the anger moved so it can stay open.

Personally I prefer calm and rational argument any day that the hurling of epithets and personally offensive remarks. We shall have to differ on that one

[stretch37]

Originally Posted by Adje

Ough,

I guess it's fingerpointing but Mouse, don't ever consider a job as an editor... And I don't mean that in a funny way.

No disrespect Adje :P But I'm thinking we do need to give him far more credit than that. Mouse and our mods been putting out our fires for years, and much respect for the care they have taken to let our discussions fly until things get out of hand I don't think the problem is our mods - they are ~~~~ing great - I think we may just need a policy that gives some power back to the people. Of course, with that power comes more responsibility Which may be a good thing. It may cause people to think before laying hands on the keyboard (or touch screen I guess nowadays )

[stretch37]

Originally Posted by CarylB

Personally I prefer calm and rational argument any day that the hurling of epithets and personally offensive remarks. We shall have to differ on that one

That's exactly the point I'm putting out there for discussion Caryl . Calm and rational argument - in the case that we have an argument on our hands - is preferable any day, and could possibly help to open up new avenues and ideas in those discussions.

[Adje]

Originally Posted by stretch37

No disrespect Adje :P

None taken

[Butcher King]

After many years here and a name change I still consider myself a newbie compared to many MLUKFC veterans. There is one thing I still notice and that is everyones definition of "inappropriate" is different and that includes myself. So the "power to the people" mode may not work here or at any other board. There also seems to be three camps posting here, people who question Meat, those who don't, and others who stay in the middle. The first two tend to go after each other often which IMO is the reason why the mods are needed. Granted, I don't see anything wrong with tough and expressive conversation but if everyones definition is different then it will never work.

[CarylB]

Originally Posted by stretch37

That's exactly the point I'm putting out there for discussion Caryl . Calm and rational argument - in the case that we have an argument on our hands - is preferable any day, and could possibly help to open up new avenues and ideas in those discussions.

Yet you say "if a person consistently and vigorously tells you that there are 500 reasons why your opinion is not entirely accurate or complete, or valid, or you missed something," that you find this hurtful, and label it as "psychological abuse".

I'm not sure I could find 500 reasons to use repeatedly in any argument, nor have I seen anyone use anything like that number, and certainly not the 9,432 reasons why anyone's opinion would be garbage that you refer to (Something I wouldn't say. I might say that in my view it's wrong, or not informed, or unfair, but not "garbage").

However, if you are going to support logical argument rather than emotional and angry statements/judgements (and I would wholeheartedly support that), you must surely expect that people will hold their ground. If you find that aggressive rather than assertive I can't help feeling that you have the issue

Calm and logical argument surely would be consistent. And why should anyone put their point weakly? I'm not sure what your definition of "vigorous" is when using the written word, but I can't see how that is likely to be hurtful or psychologically abusive? To be honest I only feel overwhelmed by someone's argument when they have more facts I cannot ignore, than I have to support my view .. at which point I usually realise they're probably right Or that we just have different tastes or standpoints, so we agree to differ.

I said I thought there was a pretty robust system of moderation in place already. One suggestion you proposed was "Mods do not edit a user's words ever." That I disagree with profoundly. I think people on here are perfectly well aware of what is simply out of order and grossly rude. I see no reason if they post in that way to or about other members for it to remain while they are asked to remove it. Do I support Mouse removing the assertion that I, out of all those who posted here that Meat got better every show this tour (and I am not sure I actually did!) am singled out as an arse-kissing sycophant whose reviews are tiresome? Frankly, yes. In my view he was right to remove that under the forum rules that I am perfectly sure the poster was aware of

[Monstro]

Originally Posted by Butcher King

After many years here and a name change I still consider myself a newbie compared to many MLUKFC veterans. There is one thing I still notice and that is everyones definition of "inappropriate" is different and that includes myself. So the "power to the people" mode may not work here or at any other board. There also seems to be three camps posting here, people who question Meat, those who don't, and others who stay in the middle. The first two tend to go after each other often which IMO is the reason why the mods are needed. Granted, I don't see anything wrong with tough and expressive conversation but if everyones definition is different then it will never work.

The like button just didn't do it for me, I REALLY like this post!!

[Wario]

Exactly what Butcher said. Id like to add the disgusting editing that went on in the Termination thread.

I dont really understand definitions either. ive made some comments and I too have a different definition was inappropriate or whatever.

I can see editing personal attacks but when we are discussing PUBLIC FIGURES like Meat and Patti its opinion!

[The Flying Mouse]

Originally Posted by stretch37

1. PM the user and instruct them to re-phrase or alter their own post to be more appropriate.

The problem with that is this...........

1:00AM Poster A insults poster B.

1:05AM Poster A goes offline.

2:00AM Mod A reads the message. Sends poster A a message asking them to edit their words. Logs out.

3:00AM Poster B logs in.

3:01AM Poster B reads poster A's message.

3:59AM Poster B finally finishes their post telling poster A various new and inventive ways they can go f##k themselves. Plays arcade for a few mins, goes offline.

5:00AM Poster C turns up. Reads Poster B's message and comes to the
defence of Poster A telling Poster B that they are an asshole for overreacting.

6:00AM Mod B logs in.
Reads the thread, sends posters AB&C messages to edit their posts.

7:00AM Posted D logs in.
Tells everyone to get along.

8:00AM Poster E "likes" Poster D's comment.

9:00AM Poster F yells at Poster A.

9:30AM Mod A logs back in.
Knowing they have already sent a message to Poster A, they send messages to Posters BC&F.

10:00AM Mod C logs in.
Reads thread and sends Posters ABC&F PM's asking them to change their posts.

11:00 Poster A logs in to a full PM box.
Edits message, but not enough to be acceptable.

11:30 Mod D logs in.
Sends messages to ABC&F telling them all to edit their messages, and logs off.

11:31AM Poster A sends PM to Mod D saying they've already done it.

In the meantime Posters GHIJKL&M have also put their $00.02 in.

11:43AM Mod E logs in, sees thread, runs for dear life.

That's a whole lot of PM's, and it's not even noon yet

And that's just one thread.

Originally Posted by stretch37

2. If the thing that was posted was *really* bad, Put the message in spoiler tags, and send the user a PM. This way, less users will see the post in passing, and it does not alter a person's own words, which I find greatly inappropriate in itself.

It wouldn't work.
Human nature would make most posters click the hide button to see what's been said even though (or perhaps, especially) because they think it's because somebody has posted something offensive.

Example.

You don't know how tempted I was to put your whole post in hide tags, just for japes, of course

[Dave]

The HIDE button does not HIDE anything in my mobile app.

[Wario]

Originally Posted by Dave

The HIDE button does not HIDE anything in my mobile app.

thats true. Sucks when you're on a walking dead forum on your phone

[stretch37]

what a nightmare just close the thread if your going to be deleting posts. It changes the flow of the conversation, and misconstrues what people originally reacted to. It alters context. Not to mention all of the people's words that were changed or outright removed on here. It wasn't even my words and I find that disgusting, and disrespectful to the person who wrote them. If it was inappropriate, PM them to at least give them a chance to alter what they wrote, and state that it was altered to remove defamatory remarks, that way the flow of the conversation remains intact. Nobody should be above the law on here. I'm so tired of seeing things get swept under the rug. People need to take responsibility for what he or she writes because it does effect others.

[JennaG]

Originally Posted by stretch37

People need to take responsibility for what he or she writes because it does effect others.

I won't disagree with you on that but I also think that taking responsibility for what you say is not whining if your posts are edited to remove offensive content by a moderator, just accept that you said somet6hing you shouldn't and move on.

[loaferman61]

Originally Posted by stretch37

what a nightmare just close the thread if your going to be deleting posts. It changes the flow of the conversation, and misconstrues what people originally reacted to. It alters context. Not to mention all of the people's words that were changed or outright removed on here. It wasn't even my words and I find that disgusting, and disrespectful to the person who wrote them. If it was inappropriate, PM them to at least give them a chance to alter what they wrote, and state that it was altered to remove defamatory remarks, that way the flow of the conversation remains intact. Nobody should be above the law on here. I'm so tired of seeing things get swept under the rug. People need to take responsibility for what he or she writes because it does effect others.

I agree that cens.. er I mean "cleaning up" is not a solution. People wrote what they wrote. I stand behind my posts and if necessary will apologize should I feel the need to, but only if I feel I posted something that was wrong or hurtful.

[stretch37]

Originally Posted by JennaG

I won't disagree with you on that but I also think that taking responsibility for what you say is not whining if your posts are edited to remove offensive content by a moderator, just accept that you said somet6hing you shouldn't and move on.

That's the thing (and I'm not sure if you meant this or not Jenna) but my posts weren't even edited this time. I watched it happen to others, and saw them react and feel downright terrible about it occurring. No mod should have god-like powers to alter what a person says. Give the person the right to change their own wording. They are they only person who truly knows the point they were getting across. Therefore, a mod changing those words adds a bias to the original statement. Not to mention it is downright rude to dictatorially decide that *usera* is not allowed to make *pointb*. What I find truly disconcerning about that is certain things are removed, while others are above the law consistently. Who do I pay so I can have this too?

Its really very simple. And no, it is not *more* time consuming than spending an hour cleaning a 10 page thread, and having Meat start a new thread because the first thread was locked, and then having to merge and clean both. And them re-moderate and clean again. Gods, how many times has this happened? How many hours has it taken from our mods lives?

Give the people the power to make their own decision on the matter. Lets make a use case! :)

Use case 1:
There is a thread about Patti's dismissal from the band. Conversation spirals out of control, hurtful things are said. Its 5 pages long.

Solution: Lock the dismissal thread. PM those who said things in a hurtful way. Lets say there were 15 posts that need to be macheteed to death. Each of those users gets a chance to change their own post. They have a timeframe. Pick a number depending on the topic. If its HOT, give the person 5 hours to change it. PM's send an email to the inbox, so the person should receive a reminder email. No need to add new functionality. Next, wait for the time to elapse. If the time elapses and not all 15 users have edited their own post, DELETE THE POST. I REPEAT, NO ONES WORDS SHOULD EVER BE EDITED BY ANYONE. Add a message to the deleted post. "user did not respond within timeframe to edit defamatory remarks, and therefore, post has been removed as per forum rules". As a last resort, this at least helps the conversation flow still make sense . (Eg. a reaction to a removed '~~~~ you') Immediately make a new thread with a shpiel similar to what Mouse did for this one, stating to please keep speculation to a minimum and that any further defamatory remarks will cause an immediate 5 hour user ban. Yes, it seems a bit extreme, but its honestly far LESS extreme than having someone alter a user's own words without consent. That is outright disgusting and rude.

Its that simple. Discuss and refine the process. What I said is just one idea from one brain and two eyes :P To state the most stupidly obvious thing. And we as a group can come up with better.

[AndrewG]

Stretch, I am not comfortable with you trying to rewrite board rules.

I am not happy when my posts are edited sure but I do not own this place so everything I post can be deleted and I can't do anything about that and that in fact is fair I think. In fact the owners can do what the hell they want really as long as they don't bully anyone. It is entirely funded by them and can thus be controlled by them. There is nothing that states this is a full democracy or that it requires to be that. And in fact a democracy does not work in all cases. For example there is 1 sheep and 2 wolves. The two wolves, who have the majority of the vote can in a full democracy vote to eat the sheep!!

[loaferman61]

Originally Posted by stretch37

That's the thing (and I'm not sure if you meant this or not Jenna) but my posts weren't even edited this time. I watched it happen to others, and saw them react and feel downright terrible about it occurring. No mod should have god-like powers to alter what a person says. Give the person the right to change their own wording. They are they only person who truly knows the point they were getting across. Therefore, a mod changing those words adds a bias to the original statement. Not to mention it is downright rude to dictatorially decide that *usera* is not allowed to make *pointb*. What I find truly disconcerning about that is certain things are removed, while others are above the law consistently. Who do I pay so I can have this too?

Its really very simple. And no, it is not *more* time consuming than spending an hour cleaning a 10 page thread, and having Meat start a new thread because the first thread was locked, and then having to merge and clean both. And them re-moderate and clean again. Gods, how many times has this happened? How many hours has it taken from our mods lives?

Give the people the power to make their own decision on the matter. Lets make a use case! :)

Use case 1:
There is a thread about Patti's dismissal from the band. Conversation spirals out of control, hurtful things are said. Its 5 pages long.

Solution: Lock the dismissal thread. PM those who said things in a hurtful way. Lets say there were 15 posts that need to be macheteed to death. Each of those users gets a chance to change their own post. They have a timeframe. Pick a number depending on the topic. If its HOT, give the person 5 hours to change it. PM's send an email to the inbox, so the person should receive a reminder email. No need to add new functionality. Next, wait for the time to elapse. If the time elapses and not all 15 users have edited their own post, DELETE THE POST. I REPEAT, NO ONES WORDS SHOULD EVER BE EDITED BY ANYONE. Immediately make a new thread with a shpiel similar to what Mouse did for this one, stating to please keep speculation to a minimum and that any further defamatory remarks will cause an immediate 5 hour user ban. Yes, it seems a bit extreme, but its honestly far LESS extreme than having someone alter a user's own words without consent. That is outright disgusting and rude.

Its that simple. Discuss and refine the process. What I said is just one idea from one brain and two eyes :P To state the most stupidly obvious thing. And we as a group can come up with better.

I know it is "house rules" but free speech sure is a much easier way. Let people have their say. Nine out of ten forums I visit are totally gloves off and I have had my fair share of lumps, but it made me defend and argue my positions. Most posters here would not survive a single post on some boards I frequent.

[loaferman61]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Stretch, I am not comfortable with you trying to rewrite board rules.

I am not happy when my posts are edited sure but I do not own this place so everything I post can be deleted and I can't do anything about that and that in fact is fair I think. In fact the owners can do what the hell they want really as long as they don't bully anyone. It is entirely funded by them and can thus be controlled by them. There is nothing that states this is a full democracy or that it requires to be that. And in fact a democracy does not work in all cases. For example there is 1 sheep and 2 wolves. The two wolves, who have the majority of the vote can in a full democracy vote to eat the sheep!!

Can we call editing what it really is yet?

[Evil One]

Originally Posted by loaferman61

Can we call editing what it really is yet?

Yes. Bollocks isn't censored.

[stretch37]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

Stretch, I am not comfortable with you trying to rewrite board rules.

I am not happy when my posts are edited sure but I do not own this place so everything I post can be deleted and I can't do anything about that and that in fact is fair I think. In fact the owners can do what the hell they want really as long as they don't bully anyone. It is entirely funded by them and can thus be controlled by them. There is nothing that states this is a full democracy or that it requires to be that. And in fact a democracy does not work in all cases. For example there is 1 sheep and 2 wolves. The two wolves, who have the majority of the vote can in a full democracy vote to eat the sheep!!

Hey man, I'm not trying to re-write anything. They were ideas, ponderings, ways to try to fix the problem. Those are your words not mine Andrew, and I'm sorry what I wrote gave you that impression.

Bottom line is that people don't like when their posts get rewritten or removed. All I did...Let me repeat, ALL I DID, was put out an initial idea, just an inkling, a suggestion if you like, of how we could stop everyone from being upset all the time by their posts being torn apart. This is a discussion forum, and as such, I was discussing ideas for avoiding upset. Apparently, discussing that is actually causing upset though So perhaps its easier to sweep things under the rug. Its all good, whatever works. I really don't care. Just trying to help. I come here because of Meat, and because there are some people here who are great fun, yourself included

But what really peeves me is when I make a suggestion, and in that suggestion I say *hey, this is an idea, lets discuss it*, and rather than discussing it, everyone gets mad at me for trying to help solve the problem that upsets them, and 2) point fingers at me like, "MATT YOU ARE TRYING TO BE GOD AND REWRITE THE RULES". That is so far from the truth hahah! Its an IDEA, not a mandate. I have no desire to be a mod! nor do I think I'm above or below anyone on here, nor am I trying to dictait something to the mods, nor do I think anything EXCEPT that a user's words perhaps shouldn't be edited, and here are some suggestions for working around that if the people want it. The mods on here do a great job, AS I POSTED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE THREAD This is about what the people want, what everyone feels is right! So can we stick to that rather than finger pointing? :P

[AndrewG]

Originally Posted by stretch37

Hey man, I'm not trying to re-write anything. They were ideas, ponderings, ways to try to fix the problem. Those are your words not mine Andrew, and I'm sorry what I wrote gave you that impression.

Bottom line is that people don't like when their posts get rewritten or removed. All I did...Let me repeat, ALL I DID, was put out an initial idea, just an inkling, a suggestion if you like, of how we could stop everyone from being upset all the time by their posts being torn apart. This is a discussion forum, and as such, I was discussing ideas for avoiding upset. Apparently, discussing that is actually causing upset though So perhaps its easier to sweep things under the rug. Its all good, whatever works. I really don't care. Just trying to help. I come here because of Meat, and because there are some people here who are great fun, yourself included

But what really peeves me is when I make a suggestion, and in that suggestion I say *hey, this is an idea, lets discuss it*, and rather than discussing it, everyone gets mad at me for trying to help solve the problem that upsets them, and 2) point fingers at me like, "MATT YOU ARE TRYING TO BE GOD AND REWRITE THE RULES". That is so far from the truth hahah! Its an IDEA, not a mandate. I hope that clears up where I was coming from.

I completely understand where you are coming from. And also Loaferman who indeed said most forums are completely gloves off. I don't think you are both wrong, I'm just saying what's right is something quite subjective in this case (also considering the artist posts here himself which I can't think happens anywhere else except for on Twitter which mostly sucks I think).

The flip side is, this is pretty much the only message board that I still visit so for me they must be doing something right I think.

We've had plenty discussions about how things could be improved in the past. I just don't see things changing really and this a board on which two recently promoted mods left because of Meat's own actions. However mostly those who are offended/irritated usually come back.
Does all this stuff make it 100% right? Probably not. Does it make it interesting and fun (even the frustration at times)? - Yes.

[stretch37]

Originally Posted by AndrewG

I completely understand where you are coming from. And also Loaferman who indeed said most forums are completely gloves off. I don't think you are both wrong, I'm just saying what's right is something quite subjective in this case (also considering the artist posts here himself which I can't think happens anywhere else except for on Twitter which mostly sucks I think).

The flip side is, this is pretty much the only message board that I still visit so for me they must be doing something right I think.

We've had plenty discussions about how things could be improved in the past. I just don't see things changing really and this a board on which two recently promoted mods left because of Meat's own actions. However mostly those who are offended/irritated usually come back.
Does all this stuff make it 100% right? Probably not. Does it make it interesting and fun (even the frustration at times)? - Yes.

All good Yah its very true, and I'm in the same boat. This is the only forum I keep coming back to as well, and I'm totally with you there that the are doing something right! We have a great thing here, and even the frustration and tension can be interesting and the reason I keep coming back. This place is full of high's and low's, just like Meat's career and any long lasting marriage I'll be here for the long haul regardless. Ideas are always fun to play around with, even if it took a year to figure out some small change, it might just improve things a bit so we can have more fun even with the tension. Who knows right? Just ideas, and I'm glad to hear yours and everyone elses...Glad we cleared this up cuz in all honesty i was just frustrated for others, and wanting to help....Imma hop over to the other thread, looks like Meat's on

[LucyK!]

Originally Posted by stretch37

what a nightmare just close the thread if your going to be deleting posts. It changes the flow of the conversation, and misconstrues what people originally reacted to. It alters context.

This I have to agree with 100%, hense my original comments in the Patti thread. If a thread is that "bad" that it needs be locked for 24 hours for a clean up then honestly, I'd prefer it just to be locked.

I know how difficult a job the mods have here at times - believe me I know, I married one! A thread like the Patti thread was always going to be heated, but you edit one post then you have to edit the reply which may also have a quote and it snowballs from there. What remains is a thread made of posts and replies, none of which are the originals, which to me defeats the object.

[CarylB]

Originally Posted by stretch37

But what really peeves me is when I make a suggestion, and in that suggestion I say *hey, this is an idea, lets discuss it*, and rather than discussing it, everyone gets mad at me for trying to help solve the problem that upsets them, and 2) point fingers at me like, "MATT YOU ARE TRYING TO BE GOD AND REWRITE THE RULES". That is so far from the truth hahah! Its an IDEA, not a mandate. I have no desire to be a mod! nor do I think I'm above or below anyone on here, nor am I trying to dictait something to the mods, nor do I think anything EXCEPT that a user's words perhaps shouldn't be edited, and here are some suggestions for working around that if the people want it. The mods on here do a great job, AS I POSTED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE THREAD This is about what the people want, what everyone feels is right! So can we stick to that rather than finger pointing? :P

I'm a bit lost here. Your suggestions started a similar thread yesterday, yet you made no attempt to discuss the replies Matt. Then when on this thread somebody makes the observation "In fact the owners can do what the hell they want really as long as they don't bully anyone. It is entirely funded by them and can thus be controlled by them. There is nothing that states this is a full democracy or that it requires to be that." you seem to go off on one. No-one has accused you of trying to dictate .. and I'm not sure why you're suddenly seeming to defend yourself against "finger pointing".

Just because some feel the system works pretty well most of the time, that there are pretty clear rules of engagement we should all be aware of, and that it's acceptable for moderators to enforce this by way of editing/removal (and you can always appeal via PM) why do you feel peeved, or it would seem attacked in some way? Not all agree with your proposals, that's all.

The current situation isn't an every day one .. it's not unique, but events were almost guaranteed to create a furore. The moderators will simply do their best to deal with it as it unfolds .. and are.