OMG:
MODS seriously, you've been screwing up with this site. Can you please turn OMGUW into a supportive community, rather than the sexist site that it is now? (I.e, don't post sexist crap that insults either gender, and remove comments that insult either gender.) Like seriously, how on earth did you let that post about Laurier girls wanting to fuck Waterloo guys go through? It is so insulting, derogatory, and somewhat sexist. There is just absolutely no need to post that.
MOD'S Long Note: OP, I will address this directly. In general terms, the format of anonymity allows for free expression without burden. If outrageous thoughts cannot be expressed, they cannot be challenged. The original poster of that submission was thoroughly challenged by the users. What you have also alluded to is censorship. This site would not be what it is if every little uncomfortable thing was swept under the rug. In conclusion, this is what users think. A particular user felt a certain way and had to vent it out.
MODS seriously, you've been screwing up with this site. Can you please turn OMGUW into a supportive community, rather than the sexist site that it is now? (I.e, don't post sexist crap that insults either gender, and remove comments that insult either gender.) Like seriously, how on earth did you let that post about Laurier girls wanting to fuck Waterloo guys go through? It is so insulting, derogatory, and somewhat sexist. There is just absolutely no need to post that.
MOD'S Long Note: OP, I will address this directly. In general terms, the format of anonymity allows for free expression without burden. If outrageous thoughts cannot be expressed, they cannot be challenged. The original poster of that submission was thoroughly challenged by the users. What you have also alluded to is censorship. This site would not be what it is if every little uncomfortable thing was swept under the rug. In conclusion, this is what users think. A particular user felt a certain way and had to vent it out.
Posted on
Tuesday, June 26.
You can leave your response.
June 26, 2012 at 10:08 PM
The site's always sort of been like this. If you want to turn it around, start submitting more positive things. Start setting a new tone for the site and if people follow your example, the site will slowly shift toward your ideal version. If they don't follow your example, then you don't have the popular opinion and too bad.
I'd rather pretty much everything that's posted gets through rather than insisting the mods pick and choose what's appropriate. When we start letting them moderate to that extent, OMG UW becomes less of an aggregate anonymous opinion of the campus and more a collection of the mods' opinions.
June 26, 2012 at 10:12 PM
This website that I read has content that I don't want to read! I am outraged and demand they only post things I want to read!
June 26, 2012 at 10:31 PM
I don't agree with OP's point specifically, but I do feel like there could be some fine-tuning with the submissions.
For example, the submissions with the links that were supposedly from the same person. MODs can spread out those types of submissions to avoid that kind of clutter. Likewise, I'd like to see OMGs that are questions moved to the ASKs. That just makes more sense to me.
I do appreciate how the new MODs stopped posting ASKs that were Google-worthy.
I do agree with OP that this term I've been seeing a lot more derogatory and just plain bad submissions. Should they be censored? I don't know, but I do know that willfully allowing people to spread hate in the name of freedom isn't a good thing. OMGUW hasn't gotten to that stage yet, but come on, it's an anonymous forum. Shit will be seen.
June 26, 2012 at 10:59 PM
@2: Exactly!
June 26, 2012 at 11:00 PM
hey mods, if you care so much about free expression then why do posts have to be approved? hypocrites...
June 26, 2012 at 11:30 PM
^Exactly!
You talk about censorship, yet you sensor posts.
June 26, 2012 at 11:43 PM
Mods, yes one should respect freedom of speech. However, by not posting sexist/racist/discriminatory omgs, you are saying that the waterloo community will not tolerate such things. Yes, Freedom of speech, but how do you think the uw admin would react if someone ran around campus saying that gay people are assholes and idiots, publicly? Remember the guy who had posters on walls, saying something about Marie curie, and her being a woman, and hence women not deserving education (or something of the sort), what happened? Cops were involved. The dude was arrested.
Now, if you don't censor any posts, then **maybe** you can make an argument, but the fact is, you pick and choose which omgs to post.
For example, how can you explain allowing the laurier girls wanting to fuck waterloo guys to be posted? But you rejected my post about doctors in Canada making a stand against the harper government?
June 27, 2012 at 12:56 AM
A lawsuit against the creators for something that shouldn't have been approved would change their minds. In many instances, you are perpetuating hate. As previous commenters have noted, you selectively approve posts, employing your own version of censorship.
To the mod that wrote this: I can tell you have a poor grasp of the English language, and probably also have a limited understanding of free speech and its boundaries.
June 27, 2012 at 1:16 AM
@5: Because they don't want people like you posting =)
@8: Have fun suing them. No, really, I think you have a poor grasp of the legal system. Stfu and go back to reddit where people might at least pretend to care about your ramblings...
June 27, 2012 at 1:16 AM
I was thinking the same thing OP, the laurier post was disgusting
June 27, 2012 at 1:29 AM
OP is greek natzi commy.
June 27, 2012 at 2:46 AM
@3 We'll tidy that up. Thank you for pointing it out.
@5/6/8 We check for spam, etc.
@7 The individual was charged with "criminal harassment, personation with intent and mischief to property." Regarding your submission, please post it again.
@8 If you are making legal threats against this site, identify yourself before you comment. Thanks.
June 27, 2012 at 3:15 AM
@Mods you should just embrace the fact that you censor our posts. Almost everyone would be okay with this, and the few that want everything posted can easily find some other site.
The real trick is tailoring the posts that DO go through to suit your vision for the site. Especially for the summer this may mean updating less frequently rather than posting inappropriately inflammatory OMGs (but please continue to approve the appropriate inflammatory ones).
People may complain but Mods please know that you are indeed appreciated.
June 27, 2012 at 6:49 AM
Agree with MODs 100%
June 27, 2012 at 8:59 AM
Saying that Laurier girls want to fuck Waterloo guys is not hate-speech at all... It is likely false, but it is a legitimate opinion.
Also, censoring hate-speech will have the same effect the mod pointed out for unpopular ideas. I approve of mods stopping spam and advertising on OMGUW, but people should be allowed to express whatever opinion they want both here and anywhere else in Canada.
June 27, 2012 at 9:08 AM
Op is just a sensitive little person. Nobody will care when you leave
June 27, 2012 at 9:33 AM
Agree with mods.
June 27, 2012 at 9:41 AM
OP, the internet is no place for sensitive little bitches like you. Get thicker skin of GTFO.
June 27, 2012 at 10:11 AM
12: Isn't the ability to post anonymously a cornerstone of this site?
June 27, 2012 at 10:44 AM
OK fuck #2 #16 and #18 and fuck anybody that says 'OMG there's no free speech because I can't be given an online soapbox to spew my sexist racist bullshit!'Next you will be telling me it's censorship to prevent someone from looking at child porn or calling somebody the n-word....
It's natural people will want to talk about social anxieties, dating woes, etc. etc. etc on this site. But there is a line between that and people saying 'Fucking hate all these whores why won't these sluts sleep with me'
And when you talk about something being challenged and rejected, don't you realize there is an element of control in DECIDING AS MODS whether something is worth being challenged to begin with? Can you not comprehend the idea of a question being so stupid that you don't even want to dignify it by replying?
June 27, 2012 at 11:37 AM
For reasons evident here, I love the mods for this site. I presume the only reason for their existence is to make sure this doesn't just degrade to craigslist/advertising, and I think that literally every post that isn't an advertisement of some sort should be posted.
I like this site for the same reason I like 4chan. There's sort of a triad of sites I go on, each with 2 of 3 good qualities. 4chan is fast and honest, /r/uwaterloo is fast and UW-related, and OMGUW is honest and UW-related. Take away anonymity or add censorship, and OMGUW just becomes a slow version of reddit. If anyone finds a site that has all 3 of these qualities, let me know
June 27, 2012 at 11:52 AM
@20: I'll answer paragraph by paragraph
Calling someone a nigger is simply an insult, it's calling them black with a negative connotation, it's equivalent to calling a girl a bitch. Racially charged, sure, but the idea of making a word, then saying it shouldn't be used in any context makes no sense. Words represent ideas, and to ban a word is to say it's unacceptable to communicate an idea. As for child porn, saying it's wrong to watch child porn is to say that someone else is wrong because they're different from you. Viewing child porn isn't illegal because we find it disgusting, it's illegal because it being legal would cause more of it to be produced.
No, there's a gradient, not a line. If someone hasn't had a significant connection with a girl, it's reasonable that they'd draw extreme conclusions. If you don't want them to discuss them, they'll simply continue to hold these beliefs.
"Disproving things I don't agree with is too hard, we should just stop people from just saying these things in the first place". I hope you realize that it's people like you that have snuffed out scientific advancement at every turn in history, and it's fortunate that civilization has finally advanced to the point where your kind isn't able to snuff out all contrary beliefs by turning debate into a personal issue and lynching non-conformers.
To conclude, you likely fear logic and contradiction because you've blindly clung to illogical ideas, resist change, and believe that a man picking up a girl at a bar is rape.
June 27, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Hey thanks for proving my point. Do I really want to bother refuting the arguments of a person who says
"saying it's wrong to watch child porn is to say that someone else is wrong because they're different from you"
But it's great to know that you are so sympathetic to pedos that you feel the need to stand up for them on the internet but don't see a problem with racism or misogyny.
You have proved yourself to be great at constructing strawman arguments though:
"Disproving things I don't agree with is too hard, we should just stop people from just saying these things in the first place".
"believe that a man picking up a girl at a bar is rape."
"I hope you realize that it's people like you that have snuffed out scientific advancement at every turn in history"
funny though, I didn't say ANY OF THOSE THINGS. But yeah the imaginary commenter you're replying to sure sounds reaalllyy stupid. You sure showed him.
And yes "Words represent ideas, and to ban a word is to say it's unacceptable to communicate an idea"
Let's look at the n-word and slut/whore
If somebody says the n-word in a derogatory way they are communicating that they are a racist piece of shit.
If someone uses slut/whore to put down a woman they are showing that they believe women should be ashamed of their sexuality or that a certain amount of casual sex is 'unacceptable!' for a woman to have.
And I'm the one who must think picking up girls at a bar is rape?
To conclude, you are a self-important pseudo-intellectual asshole.
June 27, 2012 at 12:53 PM
No censorship.
Keep it up mods.
June 27, 2012 at 1:26 PM
Fuck these liberal hippy fascists. Keep it free mods. If they don't like it they can be "liberal" and accept that people have other views. Ignorant hypocrites.
June 27, 2012 at 1:45 PM
LOL @23. No idea who you're talking to, just skimming through the comments.
I always laugh when I see people that discriminate against racists. Really who are you to judge? How does that reflect on you to assume all racists are pieces of shit? Stereotype a stereotype? Yes, discriminate a person who discriminates, that's perfectly logical... but using such logic would that make you a piece of shit as well using your thinking? Oh well whatever man, keep up the self-righteous attitude.
June 27, 2012 at 2:22 PM
lol liberal hippy fascists, me thinks to need to learn a few things.
June 27, 2012 at 3:01 PM
*you
June 27, 2012 at 3:42 PM
@20 i can call people niggers if I want to. Literally every other word is acceptable as an insult, many just as racist as the work nigger (omg i said it again) so please stop bitching about it.
June 27, 2012 at 3:53 PM
Amazing response by MODS. OP is a fascist who needs to get over themselves.
June 28, 2012 at 3:32 AM
MODS, I appreciate what you do for this site. But here's the point that a lot of people aren't getting - i.e, HERE IS THE PROBLEM:
A lot of people see that when they post stuff, the MODS don't accept it. And then we see that the MODS post other stuff that is simply derogatory. So the question arises, do the MODS pick and choose? Do the MODS censor? The answer is yes. If that is the case, then why are derogatory posts allowed, but others are not?
The MODS claim that those other posts got marked as spam. Possibly, since the MODS probably get so many submissions and must read them as fast as they can and choose spam or not spam, and likely make mistakes. If that is the case, then sure, no problem. If this is the case, then THERE IS a problem.
June 28, 2012 at 3:33 AM
^If this is NOT the case
June 28, 2012 at 4:34 AM
^Why do you take this shit so seriously?
June 28, 2012 at 4:34 AM
^Why do you take this shit so seriously?
June 28, 2012 at 7:47 AM
^ cuz dis iz da INTERNET, where all shit are serious.
Freedom of speech and whatever is nice and all...maybe OMGUW should have a disclaimer somewhere reminding readers that anyone, even if not from UW, can post here and posts here represent anonymous individuals' opinions. A single person can spam her/himself with replies to pretend to have a popular opinion.
June 28, 2012 at 10:02 AM
Why the fuck does it matter if it's DA INTERNET? The Internet is still part of the real world. If there is going to be rules or codes of conduct, they should be applied online too - not just be arbitrary and inconsistent. Fucking dumb asses.
June 28, 2012 at 5:52 PM
Lots of butthurt in this thread. :popcorn:
July 3, 2012 at 12:56 PM
Listen, some censorship is okay, and some is not. I will like to put forward 2 examples.
First is this post from May: http://www.omguwask.blogspot.ca/2012/06/1694.html#comments
This post asks if there is anyone who wants to have sex with their friend, and provides an email address to facilitate this.
I thought this should be censored. Why? Well, I don't want this website to become craigslist/UW and I'm willing to postulate that the majority consensus of the readers of OMGUW would agree with me. I don't come here to hook up with randoms, that's why I have GRNDr.
The second is this post from today: http://www.omguw.com/2012/07/13234.html#comments
This post directly conflicts with the first rule of OMGUW, "...no names of people..." The person the post names is not a celebrity, nor a well known figure of the university and so this post should have been censored.
So, this makes me wonder how well the MODs actually censor content and whether or not they even follow their own rules and guidelines consistently.
So, what's the deal with this? Why were these posts approved?
July 3, 2012 at 1:03 PM
I find it odd, the posts that do and do not get approved.
I have submitted a few things that have not been approved and wondered why. So has #7. So have many people, I would imagine. Anonymous rejection is easy to shrug off, so I don't think there has been much outrage about it.
I also find it odd that there are almost no posts about Canadian politics. The federal government is one election away from a complete overhaul and the Ontario government is a few unhappy NDP MPs away from going back to the polls. Not to mention that the region of Waterloo will have a bi-election shortly.
There is so much to talk about when it comes to federal and provincial politics, particularly in this region, so I find it hard to imagine that absolutely no one is posting about these topics.
Why is that?
I have to imagine that the MODs are censoring posts about Canadian politics. I don't know the exact reason why; but I will admit that political posts of previous years have tended to quickly degrade into flame wars.
July 3, 2012 at 1:17 PM
The MODs censor the posts with some particular reason, but that does not mean the reason is the same between them all.
Let's assume that it is; that there is some set of guidelines they all use to ensure a QA/QC for posts on this site (I know, it's a stretch).
What would the purpose of this be? Well, if they have a unified strategy for approving posts, that strategy could be used to provide a particular experience.
What is that experience? I don't know. But the types of posts that get approved will attract and retain the type of people they want to market the site too. It will also shed the users which they don't want coming to the site.
Do they want intellectual debate? Do they want flame wars? Do they want sex appeal? Do they want a sausage fest? Do they want a feminist agenda? Do they want... whatever.
The experience the users of the site get is a result of the posts the MODs approve. They may, in fact, be approving posts in such a way so as to provide a certain experience.
Is this a conspiracy? Probably not. But I think it's reasonable to say that the posts which get approved some how tickled the fancy of the MOD that approved them. Be that the original post, or the allure of the comments to follow.
However, the posts come from the users. So this results in a feedback-loop.
1) Posts get approved which provide a particular experience
2) Users who enjoy these types of posts continue to visit the site
3) Users of the site generate posts which they find somehow relevant to them
4) Go to 1)
That's not to say there is no variability. But I think it's reasonable to say that if misogynistic posts get approved and users identify with misogyny, then more misogynistic posts will be created, which means that more misogynistic posts will be approved.
So, you know. If the MODs stopped being misogynistic then they risk losing their user base, and there is no guarantee that other users will fill that void.
You can replace misogyny in those paragraphs with other topics too. You know... the size of RLs penis, posts about how to get guys to like girls, posts about men being assholes, posts about FEDs being useless, etc.
July 4, 2012 at 11:14 AM
Completely agree with the mods.