BAFFLED

I was relieved when the Fodors censored finally removed the thread asking about how to buy drugs in Germany, and several threads viciously attacking individual posters. But it seems that today some prissy censor has been busy today unnecessarily removing harmless (though not particularly substantive) threads such as the defense of "good trolls" and some others that I can't quite name but I know they disappeared. I'm surprised they let the toothpaste thread stand. (Maybe they are too dense to realize it was a joke.)

xxx

If there has been censorship in the past day or two, there seems to have been some inconsistent treatment of certain "learning systems". Do a search on multimedia. It's not hard to find the threads to which this refers. <BR>

Triple O

Maybe the point was that even though they were jokes they were off the point of this forum, which is travel.

xyz

No, there really was no "point" it seems, just strange inconsistent, careless decisions by people of apparently limited ability. Some of the deleted posts were on the point of travel, but whimsical, or were about "how to" ask questions, or just not especially substantive. Pompous Ass Club thread remains. Many nonravel threads, personal attack posts, and ad/promo posts remain. Very weird censorship decisions!

Rescuer

Here, for example, is a post that was deleted (but I found it duplicated on another Feb. thread). <BR> I LIKE trolls, or at least some of them. An imaginatively conceived troll can be entertaining; a well designed one that poses a question of genuine interest can serve the same purpose as a really good hypothetical question on an essay exam. A troll, in the context of this forum, I guess is a questioner who lures answerers, fishes for responses with bait. Depending on the quality of the bait, the wholesomeness of intentions, the nature of the subject, etc., that's not such a bad thing. <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR> <BR>

Rex

I submit that "the point of this forum" includes: <BR> <BR>humor, likely to be appreciated by those who travel to Europe <BR> <BR>efficient ways to use this forum, correct and incorrect uses of this forum and related explanation about how and why certain internet lingo plays a part in the posts here. <BR> <BR>In this context, it is entirely appropriate to discuss "what a troll is" and to delve into why some "contributors" act as trolls, and how best to repond to them. <BR> <BR>

topper

Topping because I strongly object to the very aggressive and unnecessary censorship that took place in the past two days.

xxx

Rex's comment is a good one.

xxx

The woman who advocated censorship last week on this forum...did she get the job? <BR>I think it is a rare occasion that censorship should be used.

a woman but not that one

What makes you think it was a woman? It sounded like a man to me. anyway i think it's still here, named "administration" or something like that.

Howard

There is no one more pro-First Amendment and anti-censorship than I am. However, I must remind everyone that Fodor's can do as it damned well pleases! We may not agree with its decision. But, sorry, this is not a free speech issue!

xxx

Complete the thought. It is not a "free speech" issue BECAUSE this is not a "public" forum or there's no governmental censorship? We can still call it a "free speech" issue, even though it's not a LEGAL issue. <BR> <BR>Anyway, we are also free to make our own economic decisions. I do not like the censorship that goes beyond deleting defamatory, cruel, or very very obscene postings or ones sharing plans for criminal activity. If I really dislike the censorship enough, I'll still use the forum for my own entertainment or research purposes, but will decline to spend money on any Fodors products. So if Fodors believes it is building a customer base by offering this free message service, it may find that it defeats its purpose if it antagonizes enough of us by deleting harmless whimsical or intellectual debates about merits or lack of merit of "trolls" and other harmless things related to travel or to the process of using this forum.

xxx

Maybe some sleeping anonymous dictator felt threatened by your application and decided to become an active censorship zealot.

searching

What happened to the thread about horror stories with travel companions? It was here this morning but seems to be gone. Is it another victim or the zealous censor's delete button?

Rex

Hmmm... and look what other thread is gone... <BR> <BR>

babble

Hey, searching, you didn't search hard enough. The thread on travel companion horror stories is here. <BR>And, Rex, what the hell are you talking about? What's the matter, aren't there enough postings with you name on them to satisfy you yet?

Art

Hay babble, at least Rex and some others have the courage to use their names. You cowards disgust me (and judging for other peoples response I'm not the only one.) I can understand when someone has received a lot of spam that they might not want to use their real e-mail addresses (although they still could use their real names) but its the cowardly attackers that I'm referring to.

purposely unknown

Come on people. I have read many messages over the planning of my trips about unknown people and unknown email addresses. I'd like you to know that for some people there are actually reasons to do this and maybe you should try to respect that. I personally don't like receiving unwanted mail. Emails that are sent with virus attachments are not unusual and if you haven't received one in the past, consider yourself lucky. <BR>Either way, please just respect other's desire to be anonymous. <BR>Thanks.

xxx

To "purposely unknown" <BR> <BR>I suspect that you have never launched a vicious attack on another person. There is nothing wrong with posting anonymous. It's the vile poison stream of going after one person, and doing that behind a cloak of anonymity, that is true gutless cowardice. <BR>

Rex

The thread that I thought was gone is not, and I am ebarrassed that I suggested that a censor removed it. <BR> <BR>It was deeper than I thought, and the search engine failed to locate it. I should have known better than to jump to conclusions. <BR>