Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Andrea
    • By MSE Andrea 18th Jun 18, 10:28 AM
    • 9,109Posts
    • 21,954Thanks
    MSE Andrea
    Brexit discussions
    • #1
    • 18th Jun 18, 10:28 AM
    Brexit discussions 18th Jun 18 at 10:28 AM
    Hi folks

    We're considering placing a ban on all discussion about Brexit.

    It would be a shame to do this. We feel many of you are able to discuss the topic in a friendly manner.

    However, my team is receiving too many reports about posts that are

    a) rude about another forum member
    b) argumentative
    c) disagreement
    d) opinionated
    e) don't break our rules.

    Please help my team out by being considerate of other forum members and not reporting posts simply because you disagree with what's being said.

    Thank you
    Could you do with a Money Makeover?


    Follow MSE on other Social Media:
    MSE Facebook, MSE Twitter, MSE Deals Facebook, MSE Deals Twitter, Forum Twitter, Instagram, Pinterest
    Join the MSE Forum
    Get the Free MoneySavingExpert Money Tips E-mail
    Report inappropriate posts: click the report button
    Point out a rate/product change
    Flag a news story: news@moneysavingexpert.com
Page 5
    • davidwood681
    • By davidwood681 20th Jun 18, 10:20 AM
    • 478 Posts
    • 1,444 Thanks
    davidwood681
    Will the admins be also banning all discussions about Scottish independence?
    • cepheus
    • By cepheus 20th Jun 18, 2:03 PM
    • 19,216 Posts
    • 20,336 Thanks
    cepheus
    To be honest Andrea... I think admin have made a rod for their own back. There will always be people who whinge as a response to genuine debate... but because Admin seem to give credence to such it encourages more of it. It is frustrating trying to give an informed opinion and spending half an hour doing so only to click the post button and find the thread no longer exists. And clearly many have similar experience... the result is you get less well informed opinions... and more of the sorts of comments which will generate reports of complaint.....

    Anyway.. my honest opinion... but if a massive issue like Brexit can't be discussed.. then i think you have to say it's not working.
    Originally posted by Muttleythefrog
    This was exactly the point I was going to make. Some posters appear to use the draconian and inconsistent responses to complaints to 'game the system'.

    However instead of shutting the forum down, I suggest adopting the following procedure:

    If anyone is offended by a remark, they politely ask the author to remove/edit it, citing the rule that's been infringed.

    If it's not been removed or edited to within the rules within 24 hrs, then it can be reported to admin.

    Only if remarks are considered libellous or dangerous to MSE should they be reported immediately.

    This serves a number of purposes.

    a) it identifies the people complaining, making themselves subject to scrutiny. I don't think people who complain without reason would be popular, and this board is full of those seeking popularity.

    b) it provides the chance for the author to correct a genuine mistake or uncharacteristic post contributed in a state of emotional stress.

    both a) and b) will reduce the number of complaints being passed to admin.

    I would also remove the like button for DT. If someone says something derogatory about a post, then lots of people like it, it seriously inflames the situation. It's effectively used as a dislike button.
    • EachPenny
    • By EachPenny 20th Jun 18, 2:53 PM
    • 6,125 Posts
    • 16,105 Thanks
    EachPenny
    If anyone is offended by a remark, they politely ask the author to remove/edit it, citing the rule that's been infringed.

    If it's not been removed or edited to within the rules within 24 hrs, then it can be reported to admin.
    Originally posted by cepheus
    I tried this last night with a post which used an offensive term to insult fellow forum members. The poster denied that the remark was insulting anyone and didn't appear willing to accept the comment was offensive in its own right.

    To have pursued the point would have resulted in an argument (oh yes it is/oh no it isn't) of the type we are trying to avoid, so I dropped it.

    This morning the post(s) have been removed. But it wasn't me that reported it.

    In an ideal world your proposal would work cepheus, but this isn't anything like an ideal world and polite requests to comply with the rules will just be ignored or result in more arguments. And waiting 24 hours before reporting something genuinely offensive is too long... by then the damage has been done and it is 'old news'. How many regulars on the forum ever look at posts which are more than a day old?

    I would also remove the like button for DT. If someone says something derogatory about a post, then lots of people like it, it seriously inflames the situation. It's effectively used as a dislike button.
    Originally posted by cepheus
    Which 'like button'? Not meaning to be pedantic but the button is for saying 'thank you'. There are plenty of discussions on DT where the nature is informative, and some of the contributions people make are genuinely worthy of praise. If someone has added something informative or helpful to a discussion, even if it is one on DT, it is just as worthy of a 'thanks' as a similar contribution on the main boards.

    In some cases that 'thanks' may simply be that it has saved another poster from making the same point.

    Removing the 'thanks' button would probably result in more people making posts saying 'I agree' or 'Thank you', and still risks inflaming a situation, perhaps even more so as the 'thanker' might add their own inflamatory commentary as well.
    "In the future, everyone will be rich for 15 minutes"
    • Muttleythefrog
    • By Muttleythefrog 20th Jun 18, 3:00 PM
    • 12,465 Posts
    • 23,942 Thanks
    Muttleythefrog
    There are plenty of discussions on DT where the nature is informative, and some of the contributions people make are genuinely worthy of praise.
    Originally posted by EachPenny
    ... and probably the majority of them have vanished..lol.. the posters and their posts or threads. If I were to pull out my top 100 posts I'll bet only a handful still exist on the site. Problem is a deep inconsistency of policing... it is almost random in nature... so rules are a nonsense... I'd expand on that with facts but I'd end up... oh.. let's not go there..lol
    "Do not attribute to conspiracy what can adequately be explained by incompetence" - rogerblack
    • Mrs Arcanum
    • By Mrs Arcanum 20th Jun 18, 6:10 PM
    • 18,007 Posts
    • 37,534 Thanks
    Mrs Arcanum
    ... and probably the majority of them have vanished..lol.. the posters and their posts or threads. If I were to pull out my top 100 posts I'll bet only a handful still exist on the site. Problem is a deep inconsistency of policing... it is almost random in nature... so rules are a nonsense... I'd expand on that with facts but I'd end up... oh.. let's not go there..lol
    Originally posted by Muttleythefrog
    I must admit, it would be nicer if they closed troublesome threads rather than deleting them. That way at least the more interesting points would still be available and posters could see where/why it got closed.
    “We put all our politicians in prison as soon as they’re elected. Don't you?" "Why?” “It saves time.” - Terry Pratchett, The Last Continent.
    • vivatifosi
    • By vivatifosi 27th Jun 18, 7:37 AM
    • 18,227 Posts
    • 113,117 Thanks
    vivatifosi
    Perhaps access to DT and Debate should be restricted to people who have

    a) Been members for over a year, and
    b) Made over 100 posts

    That way people will take the ramifications of PPR far more seriously as they would t be able to pop up again the next day as an AE. Also they won't be able to have a batch of accounts pre registered and ready to go, as they will have had to invest time and effort to get to say 100 posts.

    Doesn't need to be 1 year and 100 posts, could equally be 6 months and 50 posts, or 3 months and 25, the latter may well be fairer, it's the deterrent effect that counts.
    Please stay safe in the sun and learn the A-E of melanoma: A = asymmetry, B = irregular borders, C= different colours, D= diameter, larger than 6mm, E = evolving, is your mole changing? Most moles are not cancerous, any doubts, please check next time you visit your GP.
    • HornetSaver
    • By HornetSaver 27th Jun 18, 7:51 AM
    • 2,663 Posts
    • 4,387 Thanks
    HornetSaver
    Perhaps access to DT and Debate should be restricted to people who have

    a) Been members for over a year, and
    b) Made over 100 posts

    That way people will take the ramifications of PPR far more seriously as they would t be able to pop up again the next day as an AE. Also they won't be able to have a batch of accounts pre registered and ready to go, as they will have had to invest time and effort to get to say 100 posts.

    Doesn't need to be 1 year and 100 posts, could equally be 6 months and 50 posts, or 3 months and 25, the latter may well be fairer, it's the deterrent effect that counts.
    Originally posted by vivatifosi
    This is actually a brilliant idea.

    First up, let me make clear that I think the balance of opinions on these boards regarding Brexit does genuinely reflect the overall makeup of the site, and I say that despite not liking the balance of opinions on these board and having on occasion fallen into some of the aforementioned categories.

    But while many people on both sides have strong opinions and find themselves discussing it a lot, I believe there are several posters, also on both sides in each regard, who are literally just here just to talk about Brexit, Scottish independence, terrorism and other similar topics in which there will always be irreconcilable differences. This proposal would solve that problem.

    As for an all-out ban, MSE has the right to choose to do as it pleases, but I don't understand how it will work. How can we not discuss the financial upsides and downsides to the individual before and after March 2019, and before and after the end of the transitional period? And, assuming that discussions directly relevant to the core aim of moneysaving are allowed, how could these possibly not turn into opinions on the trade-offs?
    I'm standing by my pre-referendum prediction: "Brexit will lead to a recession"

    forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=70662330
    • EachPenny
    • By EachPenny 27th Jun 18, 9:07 AM
    • 6,125 Posts
    • 16,105 Thanks
    EachPenny
    As for an all-out ban, MSE has the right to choose to do as it pleases, but I don't understand how it will work. How can we not discuss the financial upsides and downsides to the individual before and after March 2019, and before and after the end of the transitional period? And, assuming that discussions directly relevant to the core aim of moneysaving are allowed, how could these possibly not turn into opinions on the trade-offs?
    Originally posted by HornetSaver
    I completely agree with this. As Brexit day approaches and passes there will be endless 'money saving' questions about jobs, housing, holidays, investments, etc etc.

    If discussing Brexit is banned then a lot of people are going to fall into the trap of saying something in response to a question which is deemed to be Brexit discussion. E.g.

    Q: My flight to Spain has been cancelled because the pilot is a UK national and her licence is no longer valid for flights in EU27 airspace. Can I get compensation or will my travel insurance cover it?
    A1: No, this was a predictable outcome of Brexit. Tough luck.
    A2: It didn't have to be an outcome of Brexit.... blah blah, continues for 100 pages.

    At what point in that exchange does a 'money saving' answer become 'Brexit discussion'?
    "In the future, everyone will be rich for 15 minutes"
    • Boredatwrork
    • By Boredatwrork 27th Jun 18, 9:56 AM
    • 1,418 Posts
    • 3,455 Thanks
    Boredatwrork
    If it's not been removed or edited to within the rules within 24 hrs, then it can be reported to admin.
    Originally posted by cepheus

    I think the elephant in the room that appears to be sorely missed by many is that the admins are looking to decrease work for themselves, rather than increase it.


    They want us to play nice so they don't have to keep coming over and telling us off. That leaves ultimately two options:


    1. Banning certain topics outright (and anyone who mentions them)

    2. Asking people to grow up.


    As someone who has never reported anyone for anything and an advocate for free speech over censorship and can't abide snowflakes on either side of the fence, If we had to choose I would always opt for option 2 as I hope most grown ups would.
    WRORK is an acronym for the company I used to work for...for the 10th time ..and relax.
    • Running Horse
    • By Running Horse 27th Jun 18, 12:27 PM
    • 10,553 Posts
    • 21,212 Thanks
    Running Horse
    The mistake some people here make is believing what they type influences or changes the minds of anyone. Posters here are a tiny percentage of a tiny minority who publicly argue for what they believe, and most of the writers and audience are not going to have their minds changed by a brilliantly crafted persuasive post...or by name calling.
    I was present at wreath-laying but don't think I was involved.
    • Boredatwrork
    • By Boredatwrork 27th Jun 18, 12:29 PM
    • 1,418 Posts
    • 3,455 Thanks
    Boredatwrork
    The mistake some people here make is believing what they type influences or changes the minds of anyone. Posters here are a tiny percentage of a tiny minority who publicly argue for what they believe, and most of the writers and audience are not going to have their minds changed by a brilliantly crafted persuasive post...or by name calling.
    Originally posted by Running Horse

    Thats why as a poster, you are not trying to change your opponents mind (theirs is set), more just present you case to a wider audience.


    Hence why just insulting someone on its own often doesn't strengthen your case.
    WRORK is an acronym for the company I used to work for...for the 10th time ..and relax.
    • ben501
    • By ben501 27th Jun 18, 12:38 PM
    • 337 Posts
    • 555 Thanks
    ben501
    Hence why just insulting someone on its own often doesn't strengthen your case.
    Originally posted by Boredatwrork

    I hope that's just poorly phrased, otherwise you're suggesting that insults on their own sometimes do strengthen your case.
    • HornetSaver
    • By HornetSaver 28th Jun 18, 11:38 AM
    • 2,663 Posts
    • 4,387 Thanks
    HornetSaver
    I hope that's just poorly phrased, otherwise you're suggesting that insults on their own sometimes do strengthen your case.
    Originally posted by ben501
    They sometimes do in politics. And this is not a flippant comment about one or more current politicians, but a long-standing feature of politics in many countries, political leanings and forms of government.

    They certainly shouldn't, but sometimes do.
    I'm standing by my pre-referendum prediction: "Brexit will lead to a recession"

    forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?p=70662330
    • Spidernick
    • By Spidernick 11th Aug 18, 11:14 PM
    • 2,836 Posts
    • 5,513 Thanks
    Spidernick
    Hi folks

    We're considering placing a ban on all discussion about Brexit.
    Originally posted by MSE Andrea
    Did you come to a final decision on this?


    It would be a shame to do this. We feel many of you are able to discuss the topic in a friendly manner.

    However, my team is receiving too many reports about posts that are

    a) rude about another forum member
    b) argumentative
    c) disagreement
    d) opinionated
    e) don't break our rules.

    Please help my team out by being considerate of other forum members and not reporting posts simply because you disagree with what's being said.

    Thank you
    Originally posted by MSE Andrea
    Presumably this is exactly what continued to happen?

    Unfortunately, we have reached a point now at which it seems impossible to discuss anything of any importance here, not just Brexit, without it being shut down. Can somebody who helps run the site please give us an update on what is happening and at what point (if at all) the reins will be loosened again. As it stands you are likely to lose people as it hardly seems worth coming on here at present, to be frank.
    'I want to die peacefully in my sleep, like my father. Not screaming and terrified like his passengers.' (Bob Monkhouse).

    Sky? Believe in better.

    Note: win, draw or lose (not 'loose' - opposite of tight!)
    • Wild_Rover
    • By Wild_Rover 11th Aug 18, 11:50 PM
    • 5,532 Posts
    • 18,411 Thanks
    Wild_Rover
    Did you come to a final decision on this?



    Presumably this is exactly what continued to happen?

    Unfortunately, we have reached a point now at which it seems impossible to discuss anything of any importance here, not just Brexit, without it being shut down. Can somebody who helps run the site please give us an update on what is happening and at what point (if at all) the reins will be loosened again. As it stands you are likely to lose people as it hardly seems worth coming on here at present, to be frank.
    Originally posted by Spidernick
    Apart from anything else, the post you quoted was grammatically incoherent....

    e.g.

    "However, my team is receiving too many reports about posts that are

    a) ........
    b) ........
    c) disagreement
    d)
    e) don't break our rules."

    Point c) is hilarious... "discussion" WITHOUT "disagreement"?

    Point e) says in so many words that they are receiving reports about too many posts that DON'T break their rules.

    However as the folk at MSE Towers are beyond question or criticism, no clarification or apology for inaccuracies is ever forthcoming.

    As an example, I posted a perfectly reasonable question on "The Forum Policy & Rules Discussion Board" on the 8th of July and have not even has the courtesy of a response from MSE Admin.

    Post a factual comment in response to an idea and they'll come down in you like a ton of bricks; ask a fair question and you get ignored.

    Maybe MSE Towers could do a survey of all forum members to see what members think of the rules and see if there is some wriggle room before even more folk leave or just end up posting the sort of drivel that permeates the place at rhe moment?

    I suspect that woukd take a pretty grim view of an organisation that routinely ignored questions or criticism.

    What do other members think?

    WR
    Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities. Voltaire
    Why should I allow that same God to tell me how to raise my kids, who had to drown His own? RG. Ingersol
    I find the whole business of religion profoundly interesting. But it does mystify me that otherwise intelligent people take it seriously. D Adams
    • walesrob
    • By walesrob 12th Aug 18, 7:54 AM
    • 551 Posts
    • 1,406 Thanks
    walesrob
    I'm a forum admin myself, and we've also had many problems with politics being discussed. In the end, we decided to move any discussions about politics into a hidden part of the forum, and members would request access. It's worked well, a private area where bickering old ladies can have it out with each other, without spilling over on to the main forum, and potentially putting off new members.



    Maybe MSE should consider the same.
    Why do they always send the poor?
    • Tabbytabitha
    • By Tabbytabitha 12th Aug 18, 8:53 AM
    • 3,605 Posts
    • 5,896 Thanks
    Tabbytabitha
    I'm a forum admin myself, and we've also had many problems with politics being discussed. In the end, we decided to move any discussions about politics into a hidden part of the forum, and members would request access. It's worked well, a private area where bickering old ladies can have it out with each other, without spilling over on to the main forum, and potentially putting off new members.



    Maybe MSE should consider the same.
    Originally posted by walesrob
    Perhaps MSE doesn't want to encourage ageist and sexist ideas?
    • ben501
    • By ben501 12th Aug 18, 9:29 AM
    • 337 Posts
    • 555 Thanks
    ben501
    Unfortunately, we have reached a point now at which it seems impossible to discuss anything of any importance here, not just Brexit, without it being shut down.

    As it stands you are likely to lose people as it hardly seems worth coming on here at present, to be frank.
    Originally posted by Spidernick
    The cynic in me says that the whole 'Arms area is little more than a fly in the ointment for MSE, at least from the viewpoint of running the site.

    So what if a few members decide to abandon ship. If all you use the forum for is DT, then your only use to the site is the +1 to the total membership count, and whether you leave or get banned your account remains. Your job is done, goodbye.
    If you do use other parts of the site for money saving, even better. You'll maybe spend more time on parts of the site that do actually help people financially, hopefully sharing a few pearls of wisdom with others.

    There have been plenty of 'official' comments on the subject before, and I thought Martin himself had made at least one but couldn't find it. Maybe it was in a thread later deleted.
    This one sums up up well enough.
    Being completely blunt with you we just don't have the time or resource to wade through a lot of "he said/she said" on a part of the forum that has nothing to do with saving money. It's just as simple as that.

    you guys who only spend your time there and not on other parts of the forum are in a bit of a bubble and it appears to you as though lots of people are getting infractions.

    We'd much rather you all just get on with each other and, if you don't use the ignore button.

    That will help us spend more time saving people money.
    Originally posted by MSE Andrea
    • Mum of 1
    • By Mum of 1 12th Aug 18, 11:56 AM
    • 26 Posts
    • 43 Thanks
    Mum of 1
    I'm a forum admin myself, and we've also had many problems with politics being discussed. In the end, we decided to move any discussions about politics into a hidden part of the forum, and members would request access. It's worked well, a private area where bickering old ladies can have it out with each other, without spilling over on to the main forum, and potentially putting off new members.



    Maybe MSE should consider the same.
    Originally posted by walesrob
    I thought they had?
    In a way at least.
    You can't see either Discussion Time or the other one, Debate House Prices & The Economy without signing up.
    • NewShadow
    • By NewShadow 12th Aug 18, 2:01 PM
    • 3,076 Posts
    • 13,495 Thanks
    NewShadow
    I'd like to formally ask the team to consider vivatifosi's proposal to set a minimum number of posts or a minimum length of membership before new users can see/post on DT.

    It makes a complete farce of the work of the mods for someone to be PPR'd then immediately make a new account for the purposes of continuing to break the forum rules.

    Making it so users have to have been members of the site for - say - a month and have made 100 posts or have gained 100 thanks before being able to access the discussion forums would mean it would be much more difficult for 'professional agitators' to cause trouble.

    The functionality exists - as demonstrated by MSE Labs - and I think it would decrease the work required by the team on these fora.

    Additionally, one of the issues raised in the OP is the number of reports which are made which are not in breach of the forum rules - therefore I would also like mods to consider if there would be benefit to punishing false/vexatious reporting with the same three strike system as for other rule breaches.

    If a user habitually reports other users who are not in violation of the rules of the site they are either doing it maliciously or do not understand the site rules - two warnings give ample opportunity to read the rules or to seek clarity via the site feedback area and a third strike to ban the user shows the team do not appreciate it's time being wasted.
    That sounds like a classic case of premature extrapolation.

    House deposit: 26% = £25,000 + £800pm * 10 months = £33,000

    Goal: Keep the bigger picture in mind...
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

2,186Posts Today

7,556Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • Ta ta... for now. This August, as I try and do every few yrs, I'm lucky enough to be taking a sabbatical. No work,? https://t.co/Xx4R3eLhFG

  • RT @lethalbrignull: @MartinSLewis I've been sitting here for a good while trying to decide my answer to this, feeling grateful for living i?

  • Early days but currently it's exactly 50 50 in liberality v democracy, with younger people more liberal, older more? https://t.co/YwJr4izuIj

  • Follow Martin