Wasn’t the “policy” stated multiple times in the past? I can’t find the posts but didn’t arn say MR policy is not to be the fact police? I thought that was the policy, but maybe it changed since then.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Can you please disable commenting on any pandemic related news?
- Thread starter james2538
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
The vaccine doesn’t stop you getting Covid or getting ill though does it? Without going too far off topic, this is a good example of how information is misinterpreted and spread, causing confusion. Opinions are great until every detail is believed and passed on.
It definitely doesn't keep you from getting it. I can only imagine how sick she would have been had she not taken it. I hope this whole thing ends sooner than later so we can get back to arguing about tax law instead.
Hoax rule is not being enforced
I think that's a reasonable summary. MacRumors community is a reflection of the world at large, and unfortunately, the world at large is filled with misinformation and a large percentage of the population seems to believe in much of it. Twitter and Apple drew a line recently, and that line was...
forums.macrumors.com
100% agree.
Where we might differ... @Jack Neill 's post is neither opinion nor misinformation, it is simply a data point, he knows people who have had breakthrough cases, one that became very ill. I cannot speak for him but I did not get the impression from his post (especially after his followup post #28) that he was against vaccination and posting his experience in an attempt to dissuade others from getting vaccinated. I would see no reason to censor his posts in this thread.
I am completely unopposed to vaccinations. I took the Janssen myself. I feel it is a personal choice you should make for yourself.
EDIT: To elaborate on the OP post I quoted, I feel like we are always preached to about how masks and vaccines are magic shields from COVID and while I feel like the juice is probably pretty effective, theres definitely a lot of the breakthrough cases out there. To have the mentality that we can't question something or that the "science is settled" is just anti intellectual. Furthermore to censor people because they disagree with you is just childish. I also highly doubt that anyone is taking medical advice from an Apple community forum, nor should they for that matter.
I think that if someone is worried about COVID, take the juice and/or wear a mask otherwise just leave everyone else to do the same and make their own choices about their life and we will have far less incendiary dialogue.
Last edited:
That's exactly how you do NOT beat something like COVID
It also is exceptionally selfish and really a slap in the face to those with no choice but to interact with many people simply to survive (front line workers in healthcare, service industries, travel, etc)
Glad you find it funny Jack
As someone with several family members on the front lines of this (healthcare and firefighters), I do not.
I also have a family member fighting a serious disease right now (form of Cancer) and various appointments and needed therapies are delayed due to our healthcare system being clogged by anti-vaxxers (Idaho, USA). It's infuriating.
Some Americans are showing themselves to be horrendously selfish little children.
As someone with several family members on the front lines of this (healthcare and firefighters), I do not.
I also have a family member fighting a serious disease right now (form of Cancer) and various appointments and needed therapies are delayed due to our healthcare system being clogged by anti-vaxxers (Idaho, USA). It's infuriating.
Some Americans are showing themselves to be horrendously selfish little children.
Hoax rule is not being enforced
I think that's a reasonable summary. MacRumors community is a reflection of the world at large, and unfortunately, the world at large is filled with misinformation and a large percentage of the population seems to believe in much of it. Twitter and Apple drew a line recently, and that line was...
The vaccine is not a "hoax" (and we won't go down the road of what they're allowing and how subjectively they treat this "rule"). Here are the facts (from the CDC):
They don't need to police this, they simply need to stop allowing false information around it. This is what led to the fall of PRSI, MR has always chosen to turn a blind eye to real world issues this way.
I see you running right up against the rules. Since we know alt-right thinking is protected, your post seems disingenuous.
As the staff has said multiple times, the hoax rule really applies to Apple tech. Where is it being said the pandemic is a hoax. What I see debated in some of the posts are illogical conclusions (imo) derived from anecdotal or factual information. That isn't the same as declaring the pandemic a hoax.
The staff has said multiple times (and they are certainly entitled to change the rules for appropriate debate, they are not the fact police. You don't know what led to the "fail of PRSI" and the exact rational behind it...unless you have been privvy to the decision making process.
MR hasn't chosen to turn a blind eye. They have chosen not to review every sentence for 100% facts and opinions that seem to have a popular liking.
Some of those opinions that you may want to be censored, may in fact, have some merit...which means they should be debated and not censored.
With a guiding principle that nebulous, one could argue for basically never moderating any content.
Everybody has the First Amendment right to express their own opinions, but not offer them as fact that may harm someone or a group of people. When an opinion or conspiracy theory contradicts proven science or fact, then a disclaimer should be added to the post by the moderators that states that.
I thought the particular discussion point was related to pandemic and vaccines. My comment was in relationship to that. Not generalized content on MR. We know that content gets moderated for a variety of reasons and I'm not arguing for no moderation, I'm stating discussion rather than censorship as proposed in this thread is something I would rather see. Also considering some of the science and fact finding behind the information related to the pandemic has been changing since the start. MR is not a scientific authority, it's an internet discussion board of mostly things Apple.
I don't find the situation funny. I find the take of anti personal choice funny. I hope your family member gets the care they need. Blaming people for not taking the vaccine isn't productive and I find you screenshotting my post also funny.
Personal choice ends when it meets up and then interferes with other people
(particularly ones who functionally have no choice as they need to work/make money/eat/exist)
That's the thing "freedom to do whatever I want" folks don't seem to get about "society"
(btw, I'm not saying that's you - I'm making a general statement and observation)
That is an interesting take on my posts in this thread. I started by stating I am not anti-vacc and that I am vaccinated, I simply expressed a desire for MR to not engage in censorship of member content via disabling comments or deleting member postson this topic. Like others who have posted here I believe that through meaningful discourse those that have an odd or misplaced view might learn something or at least be forced to consider another view.
Your posts in this thread lean towards meaningless and insulting, your injecting "alt-right" into this conversation is a passive aggressive way to try and insult me and devalue my opinions by applying a negative political label, besides laughing emojis is that all you got?
Yes, lack of censorship means we will need to tolerate some ridiculous posts but in the end we as a community are able to address them and offer counterpoints. I did not read through the entire thread that sparked this one but historically when I see serious tin foil hat posts the community here tends to jump on them and provide countering views and data which in the end usually results in that member ghosting or labeling themselves as a troll to be ignored. On rare occasions the lightbulb goes off and a member acknowledges that they now have something new to consider.
I simply fail to see how any opinion expressed on MR, especially regarding healthcare issues, is going to drive anyone to a definitive conclusion and if it does nothing any of us can do will help that individual.
This is my go to example as a reason for allowing posts that challenge "fact":
How the Sugar Industry Shifted Blame to Fat (Published 2016)
Newly discovered documents show that the sugar industry paid scientists in the 1960s to shape the debate around heart disease, sugar and fat.
For many years dietary fat was blamed for the increase in heart disease and many other medical issues including obesity. What we know now is that the sugar industry paid to influence the "scientific fact" of the day. Any attempt in the 70s, 80s and 90s to challenge this line of thinking was labeled as dangerous and life threatening. As an example think of the negative reactions to the Adkins or other low carb diets. Today we know that these were all lies and fake funded studies that shaped bad nutritional advice for half a century costing countless lives. One only needs to follow processed sugars around the globe to see the devistating effects. Low carb or sugar elimination diets or eating philosophies are now thought of as the standard for more healthy living.
Who is to say that in an effort to get a global pandemic under control that we (as a planet) didn't make a mistake with one or all of the vaccines? However unlikely only time will tell, we have a good track record with other vaccines but no one can argue that this one was rushed. This could be viewed as a marvel of modern medicine or a well intentioned roll of the dice.
So again, I am not anti-vacc and have been jabbed BUT, what is thought of as scientific fact today could very well be overturned tomorrow. My primary care physician was in favor of getting vaccinated even though I had already had Covid, my cardiologist told me it was not necessary because I had already had Covid (to be clear he was not anti-vacc he simply felt it was unnecessary for those that had already contracted Covid). Two highly educated professionals in their field with differing opinions, who does one believe?
Ug, while I thank your for the respectful conversation it is this very viewpoint that makes it difficult to challenge the staus-quo. I absolutely acknowledge that there are silly and stupid posts on the topic of vaccinations that might not be missed if they were censored but my point is that some perfectly reasonable thoughts or challenges can, and do, get swept up with the trash which is what makes censorship so dangerous. IMHO it is far better to allow some stupidity to exist and challenge it versus just blanket censorship of dissenting opinions which just drives them underground where they fester in echo chambers.
Like my sugar vs fat example, many lives might have been saved if it were not so difficult to challenge what is regarded as scientific fact. I can only guess at the number of researchers over those 50 years that might have attempted to challenged the sugar industry studies but they were told they didn't deserve equal weight or consideration because their theories were considered dangerous. I don't know your age but how many times have you heard the way to better health and nutrition is low-fat? Never mind that many low-fat products are loaded with processed sugars, move along, nothing to see here.
No one thought these were dangerous either:
Seven Dangerous Drugs You Won't Believe Were Actually Approved By The FDA
The death toll from these supposedly safe medications is truly shocking.
allthatsinteresting.com
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/fda’s-biggest-blunders/ar-AAcwjs
And this gem from CNN when it was politically prudent for them to take this side:
Past vaccine disasters show why rushing a coronavirus vaccine now would be 'colossally stupid' | CNN
Vaccine experts are warning the federal government against rushing out a coronavirus vaccine before testing has shown it's both safe and effective. Decades of history show why they're right.
I wonder if CNN still feels that vaccines shouldn't be rushed! LOL!
I do not disagree with your general position regarding free speech. Nevertheless, it is not wise to make assumptions. These people, most of whom do not hold a PhD or MD, are not stupid. They are exposed to the very same misinformation and political propaganda as the rest of us. And, they are confused -- same as many other people who do not work in a healthcare setting. I think the answer lies in effective leadership and in clear and concise messaging -- neither of which is in abundance these days.
In The Fight Against COVID, Health Workers Aren't Immune To Vaccine Misinformation
About a quarter of U.S. health care workers have refused the COVID-19 vaccine as of July. They share demographic traits with other unvaccinated people and are putting hospitals in a tough spot.
www.npr.org
arn has already explained that the moderators are not to make judgements about the truth of claims. The hoax rule applies to purposely made falsehoods intended to cause harm, such as suggesting that others use a certain Terminal command that will in fact harm files on their disk, or posting a link to a malicious website. By policy, the hoax rule is not applied to opinions that some people genuinely believe, even if others claim they are provably false.
It's understandable that some forum members would like to see all potentially harmful claims promptly removed, but since that's not the case, we suggest that forum members continue to challenge such claims in the forums and provide the evidence to back it up.
It's understandable that some forum members would like to see all potentially harmful claims promptly removed, but since that's not the case, we suggest that forum members continue to challenge such claims in the forums and provide the evidence to back it up.
- Status