Please consider not allowing anti-mask threads here at MR

[ericgtr12]

This is not a topic that should be up for debate and while I get it has turned political and there are differing opinions. The spread of misinformation can cost lives, please consider adding this to your rules.

 

[Apple_Robert]

I think that would take censorship too far. I think there should always be ability to discuss differing viewpoints. Not everyone is going to agree on the topic regardless of what some doctors may say. I don’t think it is MacRumors responsibility to police all readers of the forums. It is up to each individual to educate him or herself on the subject at hand, and come to a personal choice of action. Forcing moderation to an an extreme is not going to change what individuals do in their personal lives off the forum.

 

[The Hammer]

This is not a topic that should be up for debate and while I get it has turned political and there are differing opinions. The spread of misinformation can cost lives, please consider adding this to your rules.

Anti-Maskers, Anti-Vaxers where do you draw the line? Debate here at least allows for the possibility however remote that some of these conspiracy theorists can be convinced by a reasoned argument.

 

[MPclk2006]

YES!! Lets censor any opinions we do not agree with even if they are not hateful, violent, or violating any laws, or rules in the forum!! CENSOR IT ALL!!!

I agree people should wear masks, but I also agree people have a right to state their opinion in the matter. If we censor this, what else? Where does it stop? Stop when it's something you hold as truth but we don't?

 

[QCassidy352]

I believe in wearing masks, but this is going too far. You could make similar arguments about condoms, guns, seatbelts, vaccines, etc. "The spread of misinformation could cost lives so let's cut off debate" is a super slippery slope.

 

[ericgtr12]

It's one thing to have a conspiracy about JFK, or Obama's birth certificate, all good fun. But when misinformation costs lives during a pandemic on a scale that we've never seen, it should be taken seriously. I'm not saying we shouldn't be allowed to discuss, I'm asking that we consider threads that are blatantly anti-mask be considered for moderation.

 

[jerwin]

YES!! Lets censor any opinions we do not agree with even if they are not hateful, violent, or violating any laws, or rules in the forum!! CENSOR IT ALL!!!

In my experience, the moderation team doesn't like arguments to be phrased in the form of a reductio ad absurdum. Picture an opaque entity saying No!

 

[The Hammer]

As someone is alleged to have said Voltare ?"I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It"

 

[S.B.G]

Bad idea.

 

[ericgtr12]

As someone is alleged to have said Voltare ?"I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It"

Yes, we agree on that.

“Just before the patient died, they looked at their nurse and said ‘I think I made a mistake, I thought this was a hoax, but it’s not,’” Jane Appleby, the chief medical officer at Methodist hospital in San Antonio, told a local news outlet.

It's no different than running into a theater and screaming "fire".

 

[AngerDanger]

This would ensure people with dangerous ideas remain throughly convinced of them.

 

[ericgtr12]

Bad idea.

Here is a projection through November 1st, and you have people on your forum advocating not wearing masks. I would say letting that continue is a far worse idea.

 

[S.B.G]

Here is a projection through November 1st, and you have people on your forum advocating not wearing masks. I would say letting that continue is a far worse idea.

View attachment 935765

Not my forum.

Those projections would likely remain exactly as they are regardless of what MacRumors does or doesn’t do.

 

[ruka.snow]

Definitely not a topic that should be up for debate. Free speech is all well and good until it hurts people, often deliberately so.

 

[Tech198]

Reducing that because it may be up for debate, is like censoring the internet at large. Keep it free... but if it gets out of hand then remove.

Politicial, is political, you can't rule one over others.. i.e.How much or how little.

Definitely not a topic that should be up for debate. Free speech is all well and good until it hurts people, often deliberately so.

ya, but that's the internet.

 

[nick9191]

One other important point though is that Macrumors is not a democracy, it's a private business and if Arn or whoever does decide to close down this discussion on Macrumors then that's his decision and it's not an attack on our freedom of speech. We are free to accept that decision or not.

 

[jerwin]

It's no different than running into a theater and screaming "fire".

The legal logic behind Schenk v United States.

"Surely there are some limits on freedom of speech that everyone can agree on. Therefore, the government can criminalize a pamphlet protesting the draft."

 

[Bandaman]

Well ... talking about not wanting to wear a mask is just fine ... as that falls under speech ... and I support free speech 100%. But actually not wanting to wear a mask in real life just means you're a moron.

 

[ericgtr12]

Not my forum.

Those projections would likely remain exactly as they are regardless of what MacRumors does or doesn’t do.

One could argue that saying the F word or posting a meme without typing in text isn't going to change anything either, yet you have rules against it and sensor it either by board software or reported moderation.

It really comes down to what rules the staff feel strongly enough about here, this is a simple request to consider adding verbiage around not wearing masks to be considered as well.

 

[2984839]

MR should ban threads demanding to ban threads.

 

[tn-xyz]

As someone is alleged to have said Voltare ?"I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It"

indeed.

for some parts of the world, it’s difficult to come to terms with the fact that wearing a mask is helpful (note how austria has spiked up in cases after they had eased face mask measures), because they are not accustomed to it, unlike asia, for example, where they do it all the time, even when they just have a cold. it’s a symbol of respect for one another.

however, censorship doesn’t solve anything and will not bring skeptics to wear a mask. i’d rather have an educated conversation with them.

 

[S.B.G]

One could argue that saying the F word or posting a meme without typing in text isn't going to change anything either, yet you have rules against it and sensor it either by board software or reported moderation.

It really comes down to what rules the staff feel strongly enough about here, this is a simple request to consider adding verbiage around not wearing masks to be considered as well.

Not my rules, not my forum. I’m not even on staff anymore, been retired for a few years now.

Prohibiting the discussion and pretending mask deniers (!) claims don’t exist doesn’t help solve the pandemic.

Reason and rational fact based discussion is the better route. People are going to do what they want regardless when they leave their homes.

Laws and executive orders, for some people, are useless as they don’t care about them. Creating a rule on an Internet forum will not change anything about this topic. What it will do is cause more uproar about free speech being restricted which is already a problem in some members opinion.

The staff have made it clear that they allow members to express their ideas, thoughts and opinions as long as they’re doing so within the framework of the established rules.

To cut off mask discussions would be similar to cutting off discussion about (insert religion of choice) and allowing only (insert opposing religion of choice). That’s just bad decision making all around.

 

[I7guy]

One could argue that saying the F word or posting a meme without typing in text isn't going to change anything either, yet you have rules against it and sensor it either by board software or reported moderation.

It really comes down to what rules the staff feel strongly enough about here, this is a simple request to consider adding verbiage around not wearing masks to be considered as well.

While I understand (I believe) where this might be coming from, imo, it’s a slippery slope of denying threads on a multitude of topics.

The efficacy of masks is anything but 100% sure, ranging from potentially ineffective to somewhat effective. That discussion should be allowed.

As @Bandaman said above, paraphrasing “talk is cheap”.

 

[ericgtr12]

Not my rules, not my forum. I’m not even on staff anymore, been retired for a few years now.

Prohibiting the discussion and pretending mask deniers (!) claims don’t exist doesn’t help solve the pandemic.

Reason and rational fact based discussion is the better route. People are going to do what they want regardless when they leave their homes.

Laws and executive orders, for some people, are useless as they don’t care about them. Creating a rule on an Internet forum will not change anything about this topic. What it will do is cause more uproar about free speech being restricted which is already a problem in some members opinion.

The staff have made it clear that they allow members to express their ideas, thoughts and opinions as long as they’re doing so within the framework of the established rules.

To cut off mask discussions would be similar to cutting off discussion about (insert religion of choice) and allowing only (insert opposing religion of choice). That’s just bad decision making all around.

So if one were to start a thread promoting their local chapter of the KKK for a local cross burning that would be acceptable?

 

[AustinIllini]

Anti-Maskers, Anti-Vaxers where do you draw the line? Debate here at least allows for the possibility however remote that some of these conspiracy theorists can be convinced by a reasoned argument.

Both of those should be out.

My wife is an ER physician. Anti-masking is actively endangering her.

If anything, we should ban PRSI and be done with it.