I have a suggestion. Maybe it’s already in place, and I just can’t find it. I’ve had a few posts removed in the past several months. I get an automated message that says I have the opportunity to “fix” it. I’ve replied a couple of times saying “I don’t know what to fix” because my posts don’t violate TMF posting policy. Apparently, I just annoyed someone and they reported my post. Annoying someone isn’t against policy, to the best of my knowledge. There should be some recourse to have an actual human review it to verify I haven’t violated policy. A vague “you have the opportunity to fix it’ isn’t helpful.
In fact, I don’t know why you even have that message. Your system is extremely aggressive in filtering content prior to posting, occasionally forcing me to change the way I phrase something even though the word used was perfectly legitimate and not “dirty”. There are no bad words allowed, and even some not-really-bad words won’t get through.
A bug that annoys me is that when a Fool’s profile is private you cannot mute them. I don’t want to see their profile I just want not to hear from them.
In the last few months, you’ve had 5 posts reported by 4 different people so it’s not one person flagging your content. Reviewing them again, they were pulled for partisan politics, which as I re-read them today was obvious in most of them. Each was reviewed by one of the moderators and deemed to violate policy.
Message sent when posts are hidden contain the following to help prompt you for what to look for: “This could include profanity (including masked profanity), politics, copyright violations or insulting other members.”
Then it’s pretty selective. There is politics all over the finance boards. Which makes sense. “The economy” is inseparably intertwined with politics. Simple example: the ending of EV tax credits affects automakers, and especially companies like Tesla. That was a political decision. The auto industry is not trivial. There are lots more examples.
I do appreciate you responding, and knowing that an actual human does review things. I disagree that I was talking politics any more than any other poster. I try very hard not to talk about it unless it’s really relevant.
It’s your sandbox, of course. I’m not going to lose sleep over this. But I still appreciate the reply. I have a feeling I was singled out because of a name I use for POTUS. It’s an factually accurate name, not a “bad word”, but some people probably don’t like it. When I use “the administration” in similar posts, no one flags the post.
It wouldn’t surprise me if that were the issue. One can talk about EV tax credits, even note that it was a political decision without using colorful names. Recognizing the politics, even discussing the different positions, without resorting to using colorful names.
Not that I have understood why every one of my pulled posts was over the line …
That’s what I was trying to get some clarity about.
And it’s not really a colorful name. It’s just calling him what he is: a convicted (34 counts) felon. A completely accurate label that doesn’t imply anything else. Is that “colorful”? “The current administration” also is accurate, but takes longer to type.