Lexi: don't mention it, it only takes me a few seconds to type that :)

Lexi:”As for freedom of speech - there are laws in place regarding things like libel, defamation, hate speech, inciting violence and so on.”

What about the other way round, if you don’t do any of those things but are being told you are not to talk? Are there laws around to help you out?

Yeah rules, moderators, would be a serious mess here without them I imagine. I’m not sure what you are telling me though.

Piper:

All I can suggest is that you re-read the posts on this thread of people's attempts to answer your questions. We can't do more than that. As for being told what not to say - if it's not breaking any rules or laws, then it depends on the circumstances and context in which your speech takes place doesn't it?
A matter of discretion on your part. You wouldn't go around saying inappropriate things at work that your boss or co-workers may find
insulting and offensive, not if you want to keep your job. On the other hand if you feel that you're entitled to express certain opinions at work and you object to being "censored" there are proper procedures in place regarding complaints that workers can take.
There are human resources managers, department heads, unions, that can offer advice. Also most organisations have staff manuals and company policies regarding these matters

May I suggest - if you have questions of a personal nature regarding why certain people were banned (and who did what) et cetera - why not ask the moderator via their email, instead of pursuing this line of inquiry on a public forum where the answers at best will be merely speculation and guesswork - and where the people in question have no right of reply.

Lexi:”All I can suggest is that you re-read the posts on this thread of people's attempts to answer your questions.”

No one has really just spat out what the problem was. You obviously had a big one to be referring to Graham as Hitler or something and several others appeared to have been quite cross over on Cyberia as well.

Lexi:”As for being told what not to say - if it's not breaking any rules or laws, then it depends on the circumstances and context in which your speech takes place doesn't it?”

Yeah that’s why I was asking for OLO answers not Wiki stuff.

Lexi:”There are human resources managers, department heads, unions, that can offer advice. Also most organisations have staff manuals and company policies regarding these matters”

Only if the organization is your friend I guess and you aren’t saying anything that department heads object to. And you’d have to be part of a union. I’m getting a sinking feeling.

Lexi:”May I suggest - if you have questions of a personal nature regarding why certain people were banned (and who did what) et cetera - why not ask the moderator via their email, instead of pursuing this line of inquiry on a public forum where the answers at best will be merely speculation and guesswork - and where the people in question have no right of reply.”

Of course you can. But I wanted other people’s opinion of why they thought it happened and if it was fair. There is always an audience here, speculation and guesswork is fine by me.

Piper:

Speculation and guesswork causes a lot of personal damage and injury to individuals, communities, organisations, governments, and in the past people have been sued successfully for damage caused.

Hiding behind anonymity on this forum does not give the right to people to be offensive, that is basically the message that this thread is trying to relay

Pied Piper

On OLO, some are more 'equal' than others:

"There is a certain clique of posters who've left recently, including Morgan, Severin, foxy, pynchme and a few others. I can't see that the forum is poorer for their absence. Debate is rarely improved by the contribution of hecklers.
Posted by Antiseptic, Wednesday, 3 November 2010 6:12:05 AM"

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4082&page=0#101359

None except for Foxy is able to defend themselves (she chose to leave) and interestingly, Anti has changed his opinion of Foxy:

"Poirot:"I think it really hit home when we noticed Foxy's absence"

That would be because she's the only one of that group who ever actually contributed anything. The rest were simply noisemakers and conversation blockers.
Posted by Antiseptic, Thursday, 25 November 2010 6:05:05 AM

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=4109&page=0#103007

Of course you can always review the posting history of those Anti has named and make up your own mind.