# The Ubuntu Forum Community > Ubuntu Community Discussions > Resolution Centre >  Censorship in "Syd's Thread"

## openmind

Why have all but one of my posts been removed from the "RIP Syd Barrett" Thread? 
KiwiNZ has said he doesn't condone using someone's illness against them, but I only mentioned it in the context can someone who has been Mentally Ill for the last 40 years (he had virtually no memory of his days in Pink Floyd) be remembered for a lifetime of Musical Achievment? 
I never used it (nor would I) as an insult. I never used "Crazy", "Loony" or any other form of abuse, indeed, I referred to it as "Sad". I've checked the guidelines (again) and don't believe I came close to breaking a single one of them. 
From my standpoint, it looks like I was censored for having an alternative view to the majority. Disagree with me, vehemently if you like, hell, call me names, (most have!) move me to the "Jail", *I Don't Care*, but just removing my posts because somebody doesn't agree with them smacks of the worst excesses of Dictatorships around the world. 
Interestingly, a post by "Papawhiskas" supporting my freedom to voice my opinion was also removed.................................. 
Free as in beer? .......................................Check. 
Free as in speech? .......................................Hmmmm, jury's still out.

----------


## kassetra

I'm going to give you just a few notes from our guidelines here first, so that you can see what direction the staff takes in matters such as this:

From the CoC (which is linked as our first set of guidelines):



> *Be considerate. * *Be respectful.*


From the guidelines page:



> It should also be noted that this is a privately owned and operated site by Ubuntu-Geek; therefore posting here is a privilege rather than a constitutional 'right' to free speech and freedom of expression, we ask that the forum rules are followed at all times.


Your posts were reported by multiple people as inappropriate for the thread. Because you chose to continue posting comments which question (and in some cases attack) others for posting their respects, your aggressive tactics threatened to completely derail the thread topic, and as such, were move into a new thread of it's own, so that you could have your say, and others that did not appreciate your comments could have theirs.

This method was chosen so that you could continue your questioning.

I am discussing this matter with staff to provide you with full information as to the events that happened from the time the thread was split.

----------


## openmind

Thanks for the reply Kassetra. 
I still have issues with the way that this was initially handled, but for the sake of moving on it's time it was let go. I will just say that initially there was no "split" just a removal of my posts from the thread, and that I've seen many more "animated" threads let go. 
Many thanks to Frodon for his/her helpful and respectful PM's, who was instrumental in settling this issue without mention of "Runny Crap"! (Give 'em a Promotion!) 
Thanks again.

----------


## kassetra

> Thanks for the reply Kassetra. 
> I still have issues with the way that this was initially handled, but for the sake of moving on it's time it was let go. I will just say that initially there was no "split" just a removal of my posts from the thread, and that I've seen many more "animated" threads let go. 
> Many thanks to Frodon for his/her helpful and respectful PM's, who was instrumental in settling this issue without mention of "Runny Crap"! (Give 'em a Promotion!) 
> Thanks again.


The thread was first moved to the backyard, and then split into two threads, one in the cafe, and one in the backyard.  The one in the backyard contains all of your posts (that I can tell.)  It has since been locked, but I believe all of your posts are still there.  I have not seen any evidence that any of your posts have been removed (checking more detailed information now.)
http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=213783

----------


## KiwiNZ

openmind I quote

"The Dude's been Mentally incapacitated for the last 40 years almost!! Probably as a result of some really intense Drug use!! :Confused:  He bricked up his windows, spent long hours staring at the door. He only left the house to get tobacco or visit his sister and had no input into "Dark side" or "The Wall" :Think:  

Hardly inspiration for a generation is it? :Roll Eyes (Sarcastic): " 


How is that not using is disability to attack him? 

Disability be it mental or physical is not to be used to attack an individual or groups.
Everyday those suffering endure the predjudice, the redicule and the ignorance of those who will use their conditions against them.

I am disabled, I am in a wheelchair and I know all to well that predjudice that ignorance.I have to endure almost daily and believe me it hurts.

But fortunately there is right on the side of those who suffer disablilty, those being the UN Declaration of Human rights. And no doubt the statutes of you own Country. Also the rules of this Forum and the Ubuntu Code of Conduct.

If I see that behaviour here I will always take action accordingly.

----------


## openmind

> _openmind I quote
> 
> "The Dude's been Mentally incapacitated for the last 40 years almost!! Probably as a result of some really intense Drug use!! He bricked up his windows, spent long hours staring at the door. He only left the house to get tobacco or visit his sister and had no input into "Dark side" or "The Wall"  
> Hardly inspiration for a generation is it?"  
> 
> 
> How is that not using is disability to attack him?_


 "The dude's been mentally incapacitated for the last 40 years almost" -*Fact.* (note: "Mentally incapacitated", not "loony" or some other derogatory term!) 
"Probably as a result of some really intense drug use" - *Fact.* 
"He bricked up his windows" - *Fact.* 
"spent long hours staring at the door" - *Fact.* 
"He only left the house to get Tobacco or visit his sister" - *Fact.* 
"and had no input in The Dark Side or The Wall" - *Fact.* 
"Hardly inspiration for a generation is it?" - My Strong Opinion. 
Hardly material to report to The UN Crimes Commission is it? No ridicule or attacks, just a series of Hard, Sad facts and my assumption at the end. Perhaps you saw something that just wasn't there? 


> Disability be it mental or physical is not to be used to attack an individual or groups.
> Everyday those suffering endure the predjudice, the redicule and the ignorance of those who will use their conditions against them.
> 
> I am disabled, I am in a wheelchair and I know all to well that predjudice that ignorance.I have to endure almost daily and believe me it hurts.
> 
> But fortunately there is right on the side of those who suffer disablilty, those being the UN Declaration of Human rights. And no doubt the statutes of you own Country. Also the rules of this Forum and the Ubuntu Code of Conduct.
> 
> If I see that behaviour here I will always take action accordingly.


 Your disability means nothing to me. There's undoubtedly things you can do that I can't, there's probably things I can do that you can't, just like anyone else. Doesn't mean that you can't be a D*ckHe*d just like everyone else, (even me!) I shouldn't need to tell you that you are *Far* more than your disability, just as Syd was. Doesn't mean to say that he was a musical genious either.
 
I'm sorry that you have to go through ignorance and predjudice, most of us do for one reason or another, but (again just my opinion!) if you let it rule the decisions you make every day it's going to be a long, hard journey.

----------


## openmind

Edited by Openmind to reflect removal of previous post: No message.

----------


## KiwiNZ

It is my considered opinion that the posts concerned were in breach of the Ubuntu Forums policy and in breach of the Ubuntu Code of Conduct.

The staff reserve the right to moderate these forums as deemed appropriate.

"The web-master, administrators and moderators of this forum will preserve forum content when possible. However editing, locking and deleting content may be necessary at the sole discretion of the web-master, administrators and moderators when policy has been violated."

"You agree not to post any abusive, obscene, vulgar, slanderous, hateful, threatening, sexually-orientated or any other material that may violate any applicable laws (please see the backyard for specific rules for that venue).  Doing so may lead to you being immediately, permanently or temporarily being banned (and your service provider being informed)."

----------


## openmind

Look guys, I know that I should be letting this go, but something deep inside won't let me. I know that I'm flogging a dead horse, (and any other metaphors you can imagine) "Pushing my Luck"? 

Yes, I'm tired of this too. Look, I'll make ya'll a deal; after all of this, I'll leave ya'll in Peace. I promise I'll De-Register (If someone tells me how!) or you can ban me, "Report me to my ISP"(??) or whatever else you want, but this is "The Resolution Center" and "The Resolution" right now looks strangely like something my dad told me when I was 6.

"Because I said so".

I guess I expected more from The Ubuntu Forums, was I wrong? 

The latest "Resolution" is Admin quoting chunks of the Forum Guidelines *At* me. 

That was an insult to my intelligence, (And that's extremely hard to do, trust me!) I've read those guidelines 2 or 3 times in the last couple of days vainly looking for something I broke.

Look, I'm not a kid, I don't have to "win" or be "proven right", I just want a clear picture of what happened, and right now it's as clear as Mississippi Mud. As far as I can tell, (but I might be wrong!!) two major reasons have been given;I disagreed with the majority in the thread. (A different Opinion?) Causing some members to become upsetI mentioned some historic facts about a Mentally Disabled person. (The Admin who "took care of business" also happens to be disabled)No need to go into great detail, if I'm right on these points just "Yes" will do, and I'll hand in my badge and be on my way, but you probably need to put those points in the Guidelines to warn folk in future that "Dissent" or *any* mention of a disability is also Forbidden. That way when you come up against Hard-Headed A-Holes like me you can just say; "Look, no dissent allowed, it's in the guidelines," or "You mentioned that he was disabled, seeya!"

----------


## kassetra

openmind: I will give you an answer to #1, and a "best explanation I can give" to #2.

#1: No.  You were posting your questions about the way a society handles people after they die in a thread that would be a "representation" of what you were questioning - and many people complained; the problem became your continued posting along this same line, hijacking the topic completely away from the people that wanted to post respects.  Since you had posted many times about the same question, derailing the topic, and in some cases presenting what others thought to be attacks against both the deceased and the people posting their respects, your comments were split out of the main thread and put into the backyard where you could continue your societal questioning, and the rest of the thread would not be hijacked.  You had a place to pose your questions and others had a place to post their respects.  The complaints were secondary to the fact that you had skewed the topic off course with your continual (and some would say inflammatory) postings.  (Dissents are encouraged - but not in the manner you presented them.)

#2: Since I'm not the admin in question, I can only give you my interpretation.  

You see it as: Syd only produced one album, then possibly did too many drugs and ended up with serious mental illness as a result, and so he was never really an influence to Pink Floyd and why are people overlooking the fact that he did nothing for Pink Floyd now that he's dead and saying he was great?  

People in the thread see it as: Syd helped found Pink Floyd and was instrumental in shaping their sound and lyrics and stage presence before he succumbed to a mental illness that was only made worse by some drugs, and so they pay respects to the man that shaped something they revere.  

That seems simple enough.  The problem, I believe, stems from how you presented your argument.

The staff, and many users, read this when reading your posts:  "Why are all you people admiring this guy with mental illness now that he's dead?  He contributed nothing to Pink Floyd!  He was mentally ill!  He did crazy things!  This is like saying Ken Lay was a saint!  All you people that admire others after they are dead gloss over their true deeds in life!  This person did crazy things as a result of his own drug use and deserves none of your respect now that he's dead.  The world is better off without people that have mental illnesses like this!  I can't believe you're paying respects to this MENTALLY ILL PERSON!"

Since that is how many people read your statements (because of the way they are worded and the fact that you brought up his mental illness more than once,) the thread in the backyard made from your splitting out your questioning posts was closed because it appears you are attacking the person because he has an illness (self-enhanced or not,) *ESPECIALLY* now that he's dead, which many people feel is *not* the time to go over the negative aspects of one's life.


Perhaps now you can see that this is two separate events having to do with the way you have presented yourself to the community when posing your questions.  

If you'd like to question how society "deifies" the dead, do so in another thread, so that you are not derailing a topic; also, do not use a mental illness as the reason someone should disregard what they believe is that person's input to society, (this is from how your posts are written.)  These two items are what caused the problems with your questions: the fact that your posts hijacked a thread people cared very much for, and that you appeared to be attacking both the dead and mental illness with your posts, and attacking people or groups of people aren't allowed.

Communicating via text like this is one of the hardest mediums because people can't see body language and hear the intonations in voice.  It looked to many people like you were saying that no one should respect him because he had a mental illness.  When I re-read your posts, I can easily see how people "see" you claiming that.  It can be really easy to have your posts be read in a way you didn't intend.

You're welcome to post your questions regarding how society seems to deify the dead in another thread, but please remember that it's a text-based-medium and that other people can only read your words, not your intent.

Kass

----------


## openmind

Thankyou, Kassetra.

I appreciate you finding the time to explain what I could not see. Do you realize that's the first time anyone has attempted to do that? Explain where the gap was between what was written and what was read instead of taking aggresive and confrontational positions? (that probably includes me, truth be told!)

Excellent point, even I can see now where the anger was coming from if that's how my posts were read, and now going back and re-reading I can even see where it looked like I was "stoking the fires"!! Not having the *slightest* clue that's what I was doing, and wondering where on earth all the anger was coming from!

Let me sincerely apologize to everyone who read my posts that way, it was certainly not intended that way, I would never denigrate someone *purely* based on an Illness or Disability.


> You see it as: Syd only produced one album, then possibly did too many drugs and ended up with serious mental illness as a result, and so he was never really an influence to Pink Floyd and why are people overlooking the fact that he did nothing for Pink Floyd now that he's dead and saying he was great?


 That's an excellent summary of my intent.

Now, as far as I'm concerned this subject (and hopefully this thread!) is closed.

Thanks again Kassetra.

----------


## kassetra

> Thankyou, Kassetra.
> 
> I appreciate you finding the time to explain what I could not see. Do you realize that's the first time anyone has attempted to do that? Explain where the gap was between what was written and what was read instead of taking aggresive and confrontational positions? (that probably includes me, truth be told!)
> 
> Excellent point, even I can see now where the anger was coming from if that's how my posts were read, and now going back and re-reading I can even see where it looked like I was "stoking the fires"!! Not having the *slightest* clue that's what I was doing, and wondering where on earth all the anger was coming from!
> 
> Let me sincerely apologize to everyone who read my posts that way, it was certainly not intended that way, I would never denigrate someone *purely* based on an Illness or Disability. That's an excellent summary of my intent.
> 
> Now, as far as I'm concerned this subject (and hopefully this thread!) is closed.
> ...


You are very, very welcome.  I have explained this same thing to fuscia in this thread: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=214005

And I have encouraged him to start a thread whereby people can be "critical of the man's work, not his illness" and he has done so here: http://www.ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=215148

If you want to discuss how society deifies people after they die, feel free to start your own thread as well.   :Smile: 

Kass

----------

