" You can post anything in here "

[RayL]

THis is just a comment about the closing of my little 'moral standpoint' thread. Note that although the thread contained the words 'criminal behaviour' in the title (since this has been agreed by all involved, including Rupert Murdoch himself), it was not actually about criminal behaviour - it was about the moral standpoint of people who choose to use the services provided by the Murdoch empire.

This forum contains a useful cross-section of educated, intelligent people living almost exclusively in 'first world' countries. I find it interesting that so many are prepared to 'hold their nose' and pay when making a choice about who provides their entertainment.

It worries me that the thread was locked. That seems to me over-cautious. This is, after all a section which proclaims "You can post anything in here". I am broadly against censorship and feel that too often people have (or pretend to have) a very thin skin (especially if they think they can make money out of their hurt feelings).

However, as a member of this forum I am bound by the Moderator's verdict. What do others think?

Ray

[Iain Purdon]

I may well have been over-cautious, Ray, and others may agree.

On the one hand it's fine to talk discuss moral standpoints, on the other it is dangerous to express opinions on the behaviour of named individuals or on matters that may end up in the courts. I work in an area of publishing where libel and contempt of court issues are always borne in mind and legal advice is always taken before publication whenever there could be a risk. This forum is a form of publishing and is subject to the same law as newspapers and broadcasters. However, we do not have access to legal advice nor do we have full-time editors, so site admin is always at risk of getting it in the legal neck for what members post.

Therefore, while "you can post anything in here", I would be a lot happier if we could steer away from material that could land us unintentionally in hot water.

Now over to you...

Iain

[dave robinson]

THis is just a comment about the closing of my little 'moral standpoint' thread. Note that although the thread contained the words 'criminal behaviour' in the title (since this has been agreed by all involved, including Rupert Murdoch himself), it was not actually about criminal behaviour - it was about the moral standpoint of people who choose to use the services provided by the Murdoch empire.

This forum contains a useful cross-section of educated, intelligent people living almost exclusively in 'first world' countries. I find it interesting that so many are prepared to 'hold their nose' and pay when making a choice about who provides their entertainment.

It worries me that the thread was locked. That seems to me over-cautious. This is, after all a section which proclaims "You can post anything in here". I am broadly against censorship and feel that too often people have (or pretend to have) a very thin skin (especially if they think they can make money out of their hurt feelings).

However, as a member of this forum I am bound by the Moderator's verdict. What do others think?

Ray

Personally I don't wish to read about news items here that are in your face 24/7 on every TV channel you can shake a stick at and I don't think it's in the interest of the site.
I would liked to have discussed the Ched Evans rape case, but once again this isn't the place. The skill is in understanding the meaning of 'You can post anything here' .

[RayL]

Interesting replies.

To Iain

If I have your argument correct, you are suggesting that topics should not be started that might (not will, just might) cause replies that "risk of getting it in the legal neck for what members post". That is an interesting line to take - it is like trying to define what is a swearword and what isn't (which leads into the Scunthorpe dilemma). In asking my question on this forum I judged that the replies would address the moral question that I posed, which they did. However, as I said earlier, I am bound by your verdict as Moderator.

To Dave

Looking over a few back pages of 'The Lounge' illustrates the wide range of topics that people write about. Many are related to current news items - tax, immigration, the Olympics, etc. There is no obligation to read every thread. I certainly don't. I look at the title and decide - which is why I gave my thread a title which I hoped was a clear indication of the topic. TV programmes from B Sky B are frequently mentioned in threads so a lot of people obviously use the service and I was curious as to whether the current police investigations and criminal cases have changed anyone's mind.

Ray

[d jones]

Hi Ray

I too was a little surprised by the locking of the said post. It just goes to show that there is no such thing as freedom of speech anymore!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I posted quite a lot in the past and i, am not aware that i offended anyone, i now prefer to just read now and keep my opinions to myself. Better safe than sorry.

All the best!
Dave

[Tab]

Hi Ray,

My views on censorship are well known on this site. I'm very much against - it stifles freedom of expresssion.

The comment above is not atypical. There are many people who visit here who no longer comment freely (I'm one of them) for fear of being censored, locked out, deleted or just slapped down.

As a result the site is becoming sterile. Just my opinion, of course.

[Admin]

ShadowMusic is not a private forum for members who know each other. It can be read by anyone in the world who has access to the internet and is, therefore, governed by the same laws that apply to the media. Whether or not anyone likes, condones, dislikes or believes this is wrong is irrelevant, that is the situation and we're stuck with it.

Things have, regrettably, changed over the years and are constantly changing. The UK is no longer a free country. You can be arrested for making certain comments in public even if it is in confidence to friends. A public forum like this is far worse. If someone were to write an 'illegal' letter to a newspaper which is then published not only would the writer be in trouble but also the editor and possibly other journalists involved.

In the case of 'ShadowMusic' I am legally responsible for its contents and could, therefore, find myself charged for publishing 'illegal' material should someone decide that is the case, so I can only approve of the caution being exercised by the moderators when deciding whether it is safe to allow a given discussion to continue.

While I would never allow some of the discussions previous incarnations of ShadowMusic has suffered from in the past, it is against the policy of ShadowMusic to censor any posting unless it is in danger of breaking the law or obviously causing offence. This seems to have worked so far and I am happy with the way the moderators have maintained a 'hands off' approach except where necessary.

Bob.

[Mike Honey]

whilst understanding the rules on 'illegal publication' and the responsibility of site owners to guard against anything that may be seen as 'illegal'? I would like to know how so many copyrighted tunes, songs, melodies etc are published quite freely on here? Do not the same dangers of prosecution exist?

mike

[d jones]

Just a quick question! how do you un-register and remove personal details, in case anybody decided to stop visiting the site ? I know it's simple enough to not visit but that still does not resolve the matter of personal details still been on there/out there so to speak.

Dave

[Iain Purdon]

whilst understanding the rules on 'illegal publication' and the responsibility of site owners to guard against anything that may be seen as 'illegal'? I would like to know how so many copyrighted tunes, songs, melodies etc are published quite freely on here? Do not the same dangers of prosecution exist?

mike

I am not a lawyer so I can only offer you a thought on this. Sometimes you will go to YouTube and discover that a posting there has been removed because the copyright holder has so demanded. There is still a host of material on YT that probably ought not to be there. But it is, and until "they" find a way to deal with that big fish, I suspect that we are minnows by comparison. If a copyright holder objected to material on here, I guess we would be asked to take it down or agree a fee to keep it there (?)

As long as we avoid potential defamation of individuals, prejudicial comment on matters that are or may become active in court, and general offensive or hurtful behaviour, I reckon we can continue to post anything we like.

If we keep it to the overall theme of the site, so much the better. Other stuff is probably better aired on Facebook, Twitter and the like.

I'll shut up now!

Iain