Member Concerns Addressed to the Administrators

[trepstrep]

Originally Posted by karelito

I'm disapointed to see how authoritative this forum is...
I find legitimate that we are interested in what's happening between the Princess and Ernst lately.
Most of the people on this forum have been following their life for many years,I don't see why they should stop talking freely about it.
I perfectly understand that you have to respect certain rules but there was nothing wrong with the last posts you deleted...
The problems in the Princess mariage is not pure speculation, and the papers who wrote about it based their articles on a simple fact : they've not spent time together this past 3 months except for two day in Corsica for Alexandra's birthday.
There is nothing wrong with observing this situation.
Since the've been together they never spent the whole summer separated, that's why everyone is wondering if they have problems in their couple.
Now if you have to wait for the Palace's authorisation to talk about a subject, i think either you're working for them, or you are very naive.
The press offices are rarely telling the truth, they only feed the medias with the story they've made up as they're told to. this why you have journalists and newspapers...
Whatever, it is your forum, but I though it was a great forum where we could talk freely about the Royals we admire, and I'm very disapointed because I was wrong...

I agree with everything you say.
I understad how the mods may try to keep a certain "good ambience" here, and how insults and trashing are not welcome. But deleting posts (a.k.a. censorship) because people are talking about an issue the newspapers all over the world are talking about, goes quite beyond the line.
One of the most important things in a democracy is freedom of speech (which is not the same than insulting or defame, but nobody was insulting or defaming here). Speculation is compatible with freedom of speech and is allowed in every democratic regime on earth)

Of course, Monaco is not a democratic country, so maybe that's why we suffer the same kind of censorship than monaco's citizens...

[Mandy]

Please remember this isn't a discussion thread for members (as in I agree or I don't agree with...) as per the rules in the opening post.

An admin will get back to you in due course.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by trepstrep

But deleting posts (a.k.a. censorship) because people are talking about an issue the newspapers all over the world are talking about, goes quite beyond the line.

It's worth noting that the sole source of the "Caroline and Ernst August to divorce" claim was a story - appearing without a byline - published in the French Point de Vue weekly magazine. The story was then picked up by other media who all used PdeV as their source.

Some members will be aware that Princess Caroline and Point de Vue have an acrimonious and combatative relationship as over the years the Princess has, on a number of occasions, received monetary damages after successfully suing PdeV for invasion of privacy.

Whether there is a connection between Caroline's legal victories and PdeV's anonymous "divorce" report adds another twist to the story.

In any case, the Palais Princier has formally denied the divorce claim and none of us are privy to the details of the private life of the Prince and Princess of Hanover.
The Moderators and Administrators have discussed this issue at length and have determined there is no useful purpose that can be achieved by continued speculation in the Forums.

Warren
TRF Administrator

[olga101]

Re "Closed for Review"

Need I say all of us have different and various reasons for membership on this forum. I've been sad for two years about Jazmin's thread but at least it ended with a very noble post and a respectful closing by Mandy.

Now the other child (Alexandre) Question: What does "Review" mean? These threads are archival and are history and representational.

1. The edited final exchanges in the closed NC/Alex thread had nothing really to do with my initial opposition. To me it came across as presenting some kind of petty sensationalism.

2. The subject posters did not respond to my opposition.

3. In the responding one there was no logic or reasoning. In the race exchange my thoughts and actual comments were bushwacked, twisted and pulled and victimized. Pure drama. I h ave never posted as a fool-maybe disagreed with but serious. The God thing bestowed on me was pure nongenuine and disrespectful of my person.

4. Whereas, it is probably impossible to staff, there was almost never "repetetive and negative" monitoring.

5. Whatever happened to running moderator decision deletions for xcertain posts? I h ave had plenty and the thread went on successfully.

6. PA has accepted those children. It is so sad we can't follow their lives.

And thank you for h earing me.

[Warren]

Hello olga101

The thread was "closed for moderator review" for the reasons you mention, ie the introduction of an ambiguous or open to interpretion racial reference and subsequent discussion. Unfortunately last week's Mod/Admin retirements led to the closed thread being overlooked. Thanks for bringing it to our attention, the Monaco moderators will be attending to it shortly.

[Lalla Meriem]

I'm posting this here because I have become increasingly annoyed with moderator inconsistency on the subject of what is "reasonably available" to the readers of the forum. This very vague definition needs to be clarified and all the mods need to apply this under the same standard and to every publication. I see this mentioned frequently but I've read the FAQ and rules and it is not mentioned in them - at all.

As some of you may be aware there are pitifully few sources of information about Luxembourg when compared to other families. Promi is a magazine published in Luxembourg by Luxembourgers in the German langauge. It frequently has articles on the GDF. Some moderators feel the need to post that this publication is not "reasonably available" to the readers any time it is mentioned. This publication is no more or less available (or even more or less "garbage") than other magazines. I am certain that every poster in the Luxembourg forum is aware of it's existence. This is not an obscure news paper or magazine being published on the back side of the amazon rain forest nor is it the National Enquirer. If I want to know what is happening in my town I don't read the London Times.

I wouldn't consider it a purely garbage magazine. There are several rather more down market tabloids even in Luxembourg where you can find the "garbage." Just last month Promi carried an interview with Sebastien and his teammates which I hardly think can be considered garbage. I'm not saying that everything Promi publishes is gospel, but it is a sweeping and inaccurate generalization to state that it is all garbage. I've read articles on grand ducal cars, pets, Felix going off to school, Guillaume graduating, the Grand Duchess' surgery, and many other things that aren't garbage or even gossipy (many of which are very well documented as fact by main line news sources).

I would also like to point out that I don't know what standards are being used to define "sources everyone can consult (within the reasonable)" but they are not being consistently exercised with other forums here or even within the Luxembourg forum. If mods here are finding that people are having trouble grasping this it is because the mods do not even exercise consistency on the matter and we are left to ponder exactly whose definition of "reasonably available" we are to go by. IMHO, the fact that every single poster can go here and purchase any and every issue of Promi to be delivered within 2 days to their e-mail in electronic format makes it quite reasonably available. There is not even a delivery charge.

If the fact that this magazine is purchasable by everyone who can read this forum makes it not reasonably available then I cannot understand how Hello, Hola, Point de Vue, Semanas, Se og Hor, Vorsten, Royalty, Majesty, and any other magazine that doesn't offer full articles for free online can be considered reasonably available. If it isn't reasonable then I don't think your definition of reasonable is very reasonable or realistically accurate. Just because it is not available at a moderators local book store in their native language does not mean it is not available to them or to other posters here.

I'm very much aware of international copyright law. Posters may have noticed that I generally only link to articles or photographs. Although, I must add that I do this also out of consideration for the fact that someone (other than me) is paying real money for the bandwidth used on this site and on the sites where images are articles are posted from. I have a healthy respect for that and go out of my way to preserve bandwidth. I really don't want to be accused of copyright violation anytime I post 2 sentence summary of a 5 page article from any source.

I really don't want my PM box to fill up with messages from Lux moderators, btw. I am addressing this in the public member concern to admin area because I see it as public issue that other members who read/post in Luxembourg forum are concerned with.

[ortino]

I have not posted in a long time, or even spent alot of time really here. Lately I have been, and have noticed a many posters that were banned, some whose posts I quite enjoyed :-(
I tried to find in the FAQs section besides the common sense ones (slander, name calling etc) what gets one banned from posting here but no luck. Is there a section I am missing?
Best,

[Warren]

Lalla Meriem, your concerns will be discussed by the Luxembourg moderators.

. . . . . . . . . .

ortino, there is a thread in the Forum Support & Feedback area discussing banning: Questions about the banning of members.

Some members are banned for what is posted, others are banned for what takes place outside of the public threads.
I can assure you that no member is banned lightly or without good reason.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by Lalla Meriem

I'm posting this here because I have become increasingly annoyed with moderator inconsistency on the subject of what is "reasonably available" to the readers of the forum...

There are a few separate issues raised here. Firstly, the FAQ cannot cover every conceivable situation or provide a strict definition of every term. It's not a legal document but a guide to members in response to the most-asked questions received by the moderators and administrators.

Promi is a magazine published in Luxembourg in the local language and it has a website where some content is displayed. As TRF is an English-language discussion forum most of our members are at an immediate disadvantage. While an electronic subscription may be available to anyone who chooses to pay, the fact that it is not in English makes availability somewhat beside the point. However, availability as such is not the issue. As with all links to or extracts from foreign-language magazines or websites we expect that a short summary/translation will be posted, and attribution given. Attribution in this case would be the name of the publication or site, issue number and date, and if available, a link to the original source. We have had instances where members will repeat information they claim to have come across in a magazine or found online but decline to provide the source when requested. If such a "trust me - I know it's true" statement is made the post will most likely be removed by the moderators as unsourced gossip.

Even when the source of a story is provided some posts may be removed because the content is no more than speculation or gossip or even pure fabrication. All three cases are quite common when it comes to the content of populist magazines, whether they be published in Europe, the United States or Australia. While there may be some members who would be quite happy to read every available piece of gossip and speculation relating to the Grand Ducal Family (and every other Royal Family or favourite prince or princess for that matter), TRF is not a gossip site. One of the duties of the moderators is to ensure as far as possible that post content can be sourced, falls within the standards of what is acceptable, and is largely consistent with the factual basis of the Forums that we would like to uphold and maintain.

Getting back to Promi and your posting stories from it, the following is fair and reasonable: posts quoting or repeating stories should have proper attribution and should be chosen carefully. Substantive news items and stories are welcome, but fanciful gossip is likely to be removed. For example, a post sourced from Promi concerning the sporting activities of one of the princes would be welcome, while a post repeating a story claiming something like "Marital troubles erupt in the Grand Ducal Household!" would not.

I trust this clarifies the situation. If you would like to discuss this further, please do so by PM.

[Wisteria]

7 months is a long time, isn´t it time for a reshuffle? It sounds like a good idea to me, as I have to agree with the poster before me who was deleted, it does seem to get the feeling of bias, even if it isn´t true, if the same people are always moderating then surely their personal feelings start to show through. One such bias is the defiinition of the word "snide".
Of course the forum is yours and the rules are in place. No one should be able to insult anyone else or cause a problem for the forum, such as the risk of being sued, but
over the last few months I have noticed, since I joined, that this has increasingly become a forum where a huge amount of trivia is discussed, socks, shoes, hats etc etc. as they are "safe" subjects and are never designated as "snide".
I read the advice to another member to start a more interesting thread, but that is always a risk, no one enjoys being deleted, suspended or whatever.

[Warren]

snide: sneering, slyly derogatory, insinuating - The Concise Oxford Dictionary

There is quite a difference between robust and intelligent discussion and cheap shots, personal obsessions, and, dare I say, the enjoyment some appear to take in posting snide remarks. Most members understand the difference and if not, it is spelt out here.

TRF is an umbrella forum and is large enough to accommodate a wide variety of subject matter, whether it be the character of Sheikh Rashid of Dubai, the remaining perogatives of Elizabeth II, or the colour of a Crown Princess's latest pair of shoes. Members will choose which threads interest them and which don't. Not everyone is interested in discussing the reserve powers of the British Crown and nor is everyone interested in discussing fashion accessories.

I'm aware some members look forward to activity in the "Member Concerns Addressed to the Administrators" thread. This being the case, matters would be helped if the level of hyperbole and overstatement were reduced. No member is suspended "or whatever" for "starting an interesting thread" as you have suggested, nor is there any "risk" involved.

[Warren]

A quick note on posting in this thread...

The first point of the opening posts states:

1. This thread is for members who have concerns and complaints about forum issues, particularly regarding moderation standards and implementation of the community rules, to try to resolve them in conversation with the admins. It is for concerns about general issues only. Complaints about specific moderators and specific moderator decisions should be directed to the admins via PM; we will not discuss them here.

Those who choose to use it instead as an opportunity to grandstand or to play games are advised to desist.

Warren
TRF Admin

[Warren]

In accordance with the protocols listed in the opening post of this thread, various posts raising the availability of Promi magazine, "moderator turnover" and "bored minor princesses and their fashions" have been removed.

To keep things simple and easily understood, the postition with Promi is the same as it applies to all other online and published magazines and news sources, namely:

• posts quoting or repeating stories should have proper attribution and should be chosen carefully. Substantive news items and stories are welcome, but fanciful gossip is likely to be removed.

In regard to the British Forums, complaints about "one poster constantly making snide remarks" should be addressed by PM to the moderators or administrators.
If any member feels a post is inappropriate or offensive it can be reported by clicking the "report this post" button.

As an aside, the composition of the British Forums moderating team has been unchanged for seven months.

Warren
TRF Admin