Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Please remove my access to the PRSI section permanently

chown33 said:
You can use the Contact Us form, and ask the admins to block your account from posting in PRSI.
forums.macrumors.com

Contact us

forums.macrumors.com forums.macrumors.com

I realize this has no effect on whether Ignore Forum is working or not in Tapatalk, but it will prevent you from replying in PRSI should you accidentally attempt it.
Click to expand...

This worked for me. 😬🤣😂
 
weckart said:
Given the behemoth that Apple has become and the fact that its CEO converses with state leaders, how on earth do you expect Apple products and technology to be neatly divorced from politics?

Privacy settings on iPhones - politics
Expansion into India - politics
Manufacture of Apple phones and computers - politics

If you want a purely technical forum, there is always iFixit.
Click to expand...

The site __could__ provide a Political section to account for the above, where there's a clear overlap between tech and politics, but not allow for user originated topics.

I don't care either way, this is sort of a "devil's advocate" sort of position, just saying that you could have a "managed" political area for specific articles (and responses) but remove the open, non-tech related political discourse (I use the latter word very loosely in terms of what occurs in PRSI ... :D).

Again, before someone busts in with a =but= ... could do this ... Devil's' Advocate ... yes, I get it ... ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: jbachandouris
C DM said:
As compared to visiting a section in an online forum?
Click to expand...
They could all be considered problems of self control, which does indeed include visiting a section in an online forum. I’m still not sure why anyone is arguing against the option to block the forum for themselves. Maybe you guys are getting me confused with OP who wanted to remove it for everyone.
 
Strelok said:
They could all be considered problems of self control, which does indeed include visiting a section in an online forum. I’m still not sure why anyone is arguing against the option to block the forum for themselves. Maybe you guys are getting me confused with OP who wanted to remove it for everyone.
Click to expand...
Not sure any argument in relation to an option was made on my part.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
weckart said:
Given the behemoth that Apple has become and the fact that its CEO converses with state leaders, how on earth do you expect Apple products and technology to be neatly divorced from politics?

Privacy settings on iPhones - politics
Expansion into India - politics
Manufacture of Apple phones and computers - politics

If you want a purely technical forum, there is always iFixit.
Click to expand...
Whenever those topics come up, if they're worth a main page post about it, MR can write an article. There doesn't need to be a discussion forum which is 80% filled with political arguments that have nothing to do with tech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tobefirst ⚽️
  • Like
Reactions: jbachandouris and turbineseaplane
  • Like
Reactions: Ploki and Peter K.
LizKat said:
Yeah like bringing potato chips home but putting them in the cupboard just to look at, right?

If I were wise I'd ask to be locked out of PRSI too, based on my experience with the taters.
Click to expand...
Ok I get it now. There is a different forum where I tried to get the admins to block me from one particular sub forum. Because I kept getting myself in hot water in there. Unfortunately their software didn't have that capability.
 
Howard2k said:
I'm not even a regular participant in the PRIS (or whatever) forum, but I've read plenty of interesting and thought provoking posts from many posters. Some I see eye to eye with, some I don't. Sometimes I find I am only partially aligned with another poster, and it varies by issue.

I haven't requested that any single poster (or even any single post), be edited, redacted, restricted, censored, or banned. It's not because nothing offends me, but it's because I feel that me being offended by something doesn't overrule someone else's right to say something. And sure, we can say "within reason", but that's obviously another rat hole.

What you're suggesting, subtly at first, but then aggressively trying to push your crusade, is that you're offended by a portion (or perhaps all) of the content in that particular forum, and so nobody should be able to discuss these issues. You. Nobody. That's what you're suggesting.

You're perfectly entitled to not feel there is any value, and you can also feel offended. But to try to stomp your feet on other people's (largely civil) discussion is absurd. And dressing it up as as a request to personally be banned... Why not just come out and frame it correctly the first time? You could avoid the forum. Right? I don''t look at the Apple Collector's forum, but I'm not asking for it to be banned. How crazy would that be? Right?

So maybe just chill out, avoid the forum, and stick to the parts you like. Or hey, just be open about your crusade.
Click to expand...
Great post. The way I see it is that the OP is driving down the road, doesn’t like how some people are driving or that they have the windows down and he doesn’t like the loud music and his solution is to close his eyes so he doesn’t have to see them... probably not the best way to drive, I mean navigate life.

However, the real irony at MRF is that we have the PRSI forums for topics like what Tim Cook is stirring up or how a political mandate may affect the internet, or even cracking iPhones used by mass murderers, etc. to discuss the tech and specifically Apple tech stories that are political in nature and as someone pointed out the additional threads that make PRSI the cesspool that it has been labeled could be shutdown to allow only discussion of the PRSI related articles and no more, if that is truly possible.

But I suspect part of the reason PRSI does exist and additional threads are allowed is under the banner of free speech and promoting discourse, so long as both those items adhere to the always evolving PRSI /general forum rules and guidelines for behavior.

And therein lies part of the problem. Because of PRSI and it’s required moderation, under the banner of civility comes a “necessary” level of censorship. So MRF is then left attempting to balance free speech and censorship which are diametrically opposed. You can argue all day long that the censorship is both necessary, and fair, and evenly applied without prejudice. But I’ve been at MRF long enough to know that there is an ideology or rather aspects of various ideologies that linger within that censorship and that anyone arguing otherwise is either trying to hide that or truly fool themselves. The best thing you could do would be to either eliminate PRSI or to simply remove all moderation from that forum and warn all entrants that the nature of discussion in those threads is tread at your own risk. But when you mandate that people can discuss those topics and also mandate the rules for doing so you immediately create a fake environment.
 
Last edited:
roland.g said:
So MRF is then left attempting to balance free speech and censorship which are diametrically opposed.
[…]
But when you mandate that people can discuss those topics and also mandate the rules for doing so you immediately create a fake environment.
Click to expand...

It's not MacRumors' moral duty, legal duty, or practical duty to balance free speech with anything. It's a private entity, and they can encourage whatever rules and censorship they want. Free speech has not much to do with them. If they decide that from now on all posts in PRSI will contain no vowels, they can morally do it and practically enforce it on their own forums.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PrincePoppycock, chengengaun, JayMysterio and 3 others
yaxomoxay said:
It's not MacRumors' moral duty, legal duty, or practical duty to balance free speech with anything. It's a private entity, and they can encourage whatever rules and censorship they want. Free speech has not much to do with them. If they decide that from now on all posts in PRSI will contain no vowels, they can morally do it and practically enforce it on their own forums.
Click to expand...
Oh my. It seems you completely understood what I said and yet responded with something so obvious yet nonsensical that I don’t know where to start in tearing it down. Please let me know if you would like me to.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Peter K.
You are absolutely correct. MR is a entity with no actual duty. To say that is to state the obvious. To make a remark such as the vowels thing which I do realize you did for hyperbole but nonetheless is inane. If MR were to create rules that did not make sense such as that OR if MR were to encourage blatant censorship and provide for a specific political ideology or religion, would be foolish for them to do as an entity as it would undoubtedly alienate a large segment of their potential users. As a private entity, attempting to maximize profits, they do so by traffic and traffic comes by making the site appealing. Of course you know all this and just decided to omit it in the way your characterized your post.

So while it is a private entity and can provide rules and censorship as it wishes, unless it wants to lose credibility, tarnish its reputation, and ultimately lose traffic and the income that comes with that, then MR must maintain at least the sense of a fair and open environment for discussion. That discussion is primarily dedicated to the tech industry and specifically to Apple and their products, but as we have discussed PRSI bleeds into that. However, while that does not mean free speech per se as a protected right, MR does understand if the effort is promote dialogue, you have to be very careful in how you apply censorship. I was simply pointing out that open dialogue and censorship is the fine line that MR is dealing with. But thank you for pointing out the obvious, ignoring the rest and not advancing the discussion other than to make some remark about being a private entity.

Tht ws grt, rlly. Ddn't knw tht.
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Peter K.
roland.g said:
You are absolutely correct. MR is a entity with no actual duty. To say that is to state the obvious.
Click to expand...

Ok, I stated the obvious. So?

To make a remark such as the vowels thing which I do realize you did for hyperbole but nonetheless is inane. If MR were to create rules that did not make sense such as that OR if MR were to encourage blatant censorship and provide for a specific political ideology or religion, would be foolish for them to do as an entity as it would undoubtedly alienate a large segment of their potential users.
Click to expand...

Foolishness has nothing to do with freedom of speech. You can say foolish stuff, and you can censor foolish stuff.

As a private entity, attempting to maximize profits, they do so by traffic and traffic comes by making the site appealing. Of course you know all this and just decided to omit it in the way your characterized your post.

So while it is a private entity and can provide rules and censorship as it wishes, unless it wants to lose credibility, tarnish its reputation, and ultimately lose traffic and the income that comes with that, then MR must maintain at least the sense of a fair and open environment for discussion. That discussion is primarily dedicated to the tech industry and specifically to Apple and their products, but as we have discussed PRSI bleeds into that. However, while that does not mean free speech per se as a protected right, MR does understand if the effort is promote dialogue, you have to be very careful in how you apply censorship. I was simply pointing out that open dialogue and censorship is the fine line that MR is dealing with. But thank you for pointing out the obvious, ignoring the rest and not advancing the discussion other than to make some remark about being a private entity.
Click to expand...

Your position here is unacceptable. You talk about reputation, you talk about free speech, but what is your proposal? This:

roland.g said:
The best thing you could do would be to either eliminate PRSI or to simply remove all moderation from that forum and warn all entrants that the nature of discussion in those threads is tread at your own risk.
Click to expand...

So, in your opinion the way to get the best reputation is a binary choice between anarchy or total censorship? I don't know if you are convinced about that, or if you're just provoking, but I hope you see the silliness of the idea behind your thoughts. You know what increases reputation? An orderly conversation. We might discuss for centuries about what is proper and what is not - the system can certainly be "broken" going either way - but reputation doesn't grow out of total censorship or total anarchy; this is true even in real life. I'd rather go to a planned meeting, with a nice agenda, with topics and rules of order rather than a free for all "who yells better" type of meeting, for example.

Let me address the "eliminate PRSI" option you propose. You are asking to remove something you're not forced to join because you don't like the rules. Honestly, I don't see the point of this request in the context you're making (free speech). What you are saying is like saying that soccer should be eliminated because you don't like to play without the ability of using your hands when you're not the goalie. Now, while I might agree that PRSI and its moderation are far from perfect, and as someone that has banned from there once already, asking for its elimination or total mayhem is foolish at best.

Tht ws grt, rlly. Ddn't knw tht.
Click to expand...

Nice, I see you're working with the new rules already.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: PrincePoppycock, JayMysterio, Peter K. and 2 others
yaxomoxay said:
Nice, I see you're working with the new rules already.
Click to expand...
And I can see by your response that hyperbole and absolutism is your language. Black. White. Got it. Binary choices. I cannot help you fathom depth nor can I translate for you. You have to make a conscious choice to comprehend and join the conversation. If you can.
 
roland.g said:
And I can see by your response that hyperbole and absolutism is your language.
Click to expand...

I mean... really?

roland.g said:
The best thing you could do would be to either eliminate PRSI or to simply remove all moderation from that forum
Click to expand...

Let me also point out one thing that you're truly missing: moderation (which you call censorship) is true for ALL forums on MacRumors. All of them.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: Plutonius, PrincePoppycock, calderone and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back