48 people like this
@terryfrd @mithuna_khon @SteveInCM
Having problems posting to Twitter so hope you don't get too many posts.
Thanks for taking the time to look into this and reply. Please don't take my further comments personally as I always appreciate your input.
If the "Original piece contained language referring to 'protecting the monarchy' 'lese majesty'" Then why do not all pieces containing language referring to 'protecting the monarchy' 'lese majesty' have their comments taken down or why was the original piece given so much weight on the website if it was known that it would have a backlash. In fact before the comments were removed on the original piece there were none to my recollection that even hinted at LM or the Royal family.
They were all negative to be sure but they were all directed at the Army Chief and the action he took that appeared to be trying to sway the election with veiled threats and a hint of intimidation to the Media.
The follow up stories were one sided. Not allowing comments by readers did not allow for balance.
As you know I moderate on a small forum. I agree that at times it's a thankless job but in all honesty if you allow comments at all you can't pick and chose the articles that you allow comments on and you have to be neutral in your moderation allowing all sides to have their say.
If I have one real problem with the Post comment section it's that the moderation is varied from day to day and hour to hour. There obviously is more than one moderator and their views on moderation and politics also vary greatly. Most of the commenter know what time of the day or night to post comments to get the best chance of being posted.
As Anyways, thanks again Terry
Having problems posting to Twitter so hope you don't get too many posts.
Thanks for taking the time to look into this and reply. Please don't take my further comments personally as I always appreciate your input.
If the "Original piece contained language referring to 'protecting the monarchy' 'lese majesty'" Then why do not all pieces containing language referring to 'protecting the monarchy' 'lese majesty' have their comments taken down or why was the original piece given so much weight on the website if it was known that it would have a backlash. In fact before the comments were removed on the original piece there were none to my recollection that even hinted at LM or the Royal family.
They were all negative to be sure but they were all directed at the Army Chief and the action he took that appeared to be trying to sway the election with veiled threats and a hint of intimidation to the Media.
The follow up stories were one sided. Not allowing comments by readers did not allow for balance.
As you know I moderate on a small forum. I agree that at times it's a thankless job but in all honesty if you allow comments at all you can't pick and chose the articles that you allow comments on and you have to be neutral in your moderation allowing all sides to have their say.
If I have one real problem with the Post comment section it's that the moderation is varied from day to day and hour to hour. There obviously is more than one moderator and their views on moderation and politics also vary greatly. Most of the commenter know what time of the day or night to post comments to get the best chance of being posted.
As Anyways, thanks again Terry