Can AccountingWeb explain why the comments on this article have been closed?
https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/tax/hmrc-policy/hmrcs-giles-mccallum-on-...
Is it because the responses were largely anti-MTD, as they have been regularly in these forums? Because if AWeb is clamping down on anti-MTD feeling here these forums are going to get awfully quiet.
Replies (50)
Please login or register to join the discussion.
It's not the only one. There are (were) two trending articles today - and both have now been preserved in aspic (after some judicious pruning) ... the other being https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/practice/people/accounting-for-diversity...
The latter may have been prompted by my rebuttal of the final post that is still shown via a (no-longer shown) post that was considerably less offensive than the remaining one.
My comments were removed from this post before they stopped allowing any further comments. I've been micro-cancelled XD
I've retained copies of both your cancelled posts (and the one from Rammstein1 in between them) - as both text and screenshots - so if you want I can send them to you.
Unfortunately I suspect that simply re-printing them here would be seen by the mods as "pulling the tiger's tail" ... but there isn't a single word that can be seen as a personal attack or IMHO as offensive.
The other one got shut as well
Only Rebecca's left live about Expo
Aweb just does not like critical comment
MTD is Aweb's funding lifeline
Amazed that the Xero critical thread still works
To be fair some of the comments were personal attacks and are quite correct to have been pulled, but very disappointing from AWeb to close the comments in total.
I thought you like the vitriol as it means traffic for the site!
Are HMRC getting a bit worried about the fact their turdpolishing is not going to work?
HMRC's arguments for MTD have been completely demolished, and I think all we are left with is "its happening suck it up" and fingers in ears and saying 'la la la'.
When HMRC forget is that they rely on agents to make the tax system work, we dont play ball and they don't have a chance in hell.
Trouble is we always 'play ball' as we're simply too conscientious to let our clients down but maybe we should all stop being so accommodating and see what happens?
Wow, I hadn’t even had the time to read it, so it’s more annoying now that I am not being allowed to comment.
But we all know that certain factions within aweb are strongly against free speech.
Not a single poster supported his position as far as I could see in my quick read just now. But HMRC will carry on regardless, those who should be supporting Accountants will sit on their big behinds and allow it.
The problem is that GILES had no capability, authority or option of doing anything other than being HMRC mouthpiece.
He should have declined the invitation as he has no understanding of the way small business and landlords work and record activity: the trader would know what they want and need
Completely unable to disentangle from the years of HMRC propaganda despite having the oportunity to look at the MTD threads and his own special article
Not worked in accounts or tax, just IT
Even worse was the lets get money quarterly announcement they day before.
HMRC set him up as a patsy
The daft comments that the low bar is about inclusivity really showed he was out of his depth
Still he remains completely undamaged
Accountants and their clients are the people damaged by the monster he wants to let loose on the non taxpayer
I have thought of something uncontroversial to say now -
"I can assure you that a Hurricane is not on its way"
Bad news (after searching Tornado vs Hurricane) ...
"The difference is that a tropical storm has wind speed up to 73mph, once it exceeds this then it become a hurricane. ... Tornados are usually very short and can last up to an hour, but a hurricane can last up to three weeks."
However, skipping over the uncalled for calibration of your stamina levels, I like the allusion to the misguided Michael Fish - the new HMRC poster-boy?
"Tornados ................ can last up to an hour"
That is probably a slight under-estimate but not too bad in the absence of firm evidence.
"Michael Fish - the new HMRC poster-boy"
Not a million miles away as Michael Fish was a Front Man as well.
There is a scurrilous rumour that it was converted to a digital record ... and has never been the same since!
Thank you for your comments. The main reason we were forced to close comments on the two articles mentioned in these threads is because of the high volumes of activity and the nature of some of the comments being posted. Some were consistently breaking community rules and included personal attacks so had to be taken down. At this moment we do not have the resource to adequately resource the level of moderation needed.
I'm sorry, but (with a belated welcome to the wonderful world of Forums), that reasoning doesn't fully compute.
Whilst us contributors are obviously not in a position to comment on 'volumes of activity' or 'resource to adequately resource the level of moderation needed' ... the pruning exercise was not related to any discernible 'breaking of community rules' or 'personal attacks' (except in the case of the "Accounting for diversity" thread where you've retained the final post although it directly attacks other responders)!
In that particular thread, the first 3 posts have been deleted - despite making no personal attacks or saying anything that wouldn't strike me as well-reasoned and polite observations (and garnering 18 'thanks' which suggests that others felt the same). They *were* consistently critical of the article's tenor, but that should not be a 'crime' on a public forum for professionals where dissent is allowed.
If there is an editorial decision to promote only certain views, then that should be made transparent (it's your site and we can choose to stay or go). But we all need consistency to be seen to be applied if the site is to retain value.
My first surviving post now looks stupid
But at the time of that posting there were only 3 posts showing out of 4 posted
Those three were by 2 persons
Nothing offensive or even remotely derogatory
Agree the last posting was the only one making unjustified generic allegations, clearly looking to categorise all Aweb members.
Noted poster has only made 6 contributions and 6 comments so perhaps them could be forgiven
A bit misleading
There were only 10 comments on the other thread (after removing my soundbite video comment even before any other comment)
The other three did not show any sign of personal attack, only 2 people involved But one did use the word WOKE. Shame on they
If Giles did not have a broadback then really should have kept his head down.
Did he really believe he could convince us all that it is inclusive to chuck MTD at people who do not pay tax
I am making a complaint about this sort of editing that is misleading as adverts for MTD are displayed - many people can be tricked into buying software under false editing. I am very worried about this advertising and alteration to a thread. The matter appears a conspiracy at AWEB.
That's nonsense and you know it. This article https://www.accountingweb.co.uk/practice/people/accounting-for-diversity... had 9 comments (I believe 2 were deleted before my 2 comments deleted). It only had high traffic because it was new and the comments did not breach your terms, just your narrative.
You should really consider how your members which are your source of income will react to these kinds of decisions. It wouldn't be hard to make a new and better AW which is fair and better run/managed
News alert.
Aweb didnt expect high levels of activity on a piece about MTD.
Wow.
Im not going to even comment on the 'moderation' except to say that time if found when they really want to and perhaps the article should have been posted after the Expo.
Hugo - consistency has never been a 'thing' re the moderation here.
Noted also the separate MTD section on front page replaced by a completely poinless section on the "budget" that never was
MTD section, did it manage a week?
The non event budget is looking likely to last 2 months
Accounting web are frightened advertising will be pulled . Hmrc will be annoyed or China are the new owners !
Don't push too far
Your Dreams are china in your hand
Don't wish too hard
Because they may come true
And you can't help them
You don't know what you might
Have set upon yourself
China in your hand
Come from greed
Never born of the seed
Little know fact. That song is about the story of Frankenstein (not the content of the story, but the story itself).
I'm sure MTD will be grand.
Several respected members on here have assured me so. Just dump all your no hoper clients.
I'm not too bothered by the closure of the MTD discussion. You only have to read the match report itself to realise how ridiculous the statements by HMRC are. The comments that haven't been deleted presumably fairly represent the overall response.
I am though genuinely troubled by the moderation of the white-men-in-grey-suits thread. There is no justification at all for deleting the first response and leaving what is now the final response. It is not woke* to attack a group based on colour and/or gender, but Aweb moderation has, in effect, done exactly that.
To adapt one of my previous comments, a woke bigot is a bigot every bit as much as a backwoods bigot.
* IANAL but I'd venture it's not legal either.
Quod scripsi, scripsi. Except the mods reserve the right to edit, censor, delete... and cancel me, not for breaking the site rules, but merely for saying something they disagree with.
Did you see Michael Buerk's piece expressing similar concerns about the BBC? We're sleepwalking towards a very dangerous place. (Though the fact that this thread and others haven't been taken down is reassuring. So long as that remains the case.)
I have now and agree
Offence is a decision chosen by the person claiming to be offended
Usually now taken on behalf of someone else who really does not care
Not a decision that should be taken lightly
On Aweb the offended person tends to be the newbie non contributer
You mean I shouldn't have said I was genuinely troubled - that gets me no mulled wine - I should have said I was offended? But if Sift cannot see that the final comment (not deleted) is offensive and the first comment (deleted) wasn't then they are not fit to be policing offence on behalf of others. (Warm up the soup and get the kettle on, I'm joining you in the gulag.)
More seriously, it's an important, difficult and challenging topic and I salute Aweb for inviting discussion about it. It's actually quite 'brave' to do so (itself a depressing reflection of where we have got to as a society). It's a sad irony that, having started what I presume was supposed to be an honest, open discussion about these thorny issues, they have chosen, not only to close down the discussion, but also to censor the thread in such a skewed, unrepresentative, misleading and actually offensive way. Turns out the bravery was that of Sir Robin. (The Monty Python one.) Or the intention wasn't what they claimed it was. They should have deleted all comments or none... except possibly those, if any, that were actually directly insulting.
Is there an accounting forum out there we can debunk to that's happy to allow real debate?
"Is there an accounting forum out there we can debunk to that's happy to allow real debate?"
Well I get a wider range of opinions in discussions with strangers at my local bus-stop (or my new favourite Uber drivers) ... and with absolutely no brake applied to potential sensitivities. On the other hand, whilst the topics are free-flowing and far-flung - there has (so far) been nothing on the Taxation front!
Well it was your slip, even if I borrowed it for a re-quote.
But you say debunk, I say débarque, they say depart .. let's call the whole thing off.
Actually they're probably all due to become non-words as the prefix denotes a negative (except for 'denotes' obviously), which is no longer an allowed attitude.
Perhaps someone should explain that (in Physics anyway) you simply can't have a positive without a negative. It's called equilibrium!
I've taken a deep dive into the new woke culture and it's very troubling. It's littered with hypocrisy and they know it, which is why they have to cancel and de-platform anyone who disagrees with their narrative.
At it's core it's a Marxist like power play to displace groups deemed to have the power; white, male, Jewish etc. That's why 'reverse racism' is acceptable and you find so much anti-Semitism on the 'far left'. It is of course a spectrum, so some on the front line of this cult believe they are doing good in society.
It seems like the reduction in religion and the rise in social media has allowed it to flourish and the scary part is that this is now in most of our institutions and getting stronger, and we're letting it happen.
Free speech, debate and an equitable society are all at steak here.
Might have been a clever gibe at another threatened tribe (meat-eaters)? :-)
[Believe it or not that's the least offensive of the not-so-clever humour that sprang into my fetid brain].
We obviously need a sense of perspective here. It's only freaky Aweb... except the fact that they feel the need to yield to the pressure to conform speaks volumes about the state of... well it's not necessarily society itself, is it, it's the media.
The great irony of diversity is that you have to conform. (Another wonderful bit of Monty Python... "yes, we are all different" "I'm not")
Thanks. I quite enjoyed writing it.
Don't misunderstand me though. Diversity should be endemic. And all of us would be better people if we were open to having our preconceptions challenged and our prejudices called out.
(And, back on topic, challenging preconception and calling out prejudice means talking about these things. More talk means less censorship. History surely teaches us that censorship is very rarely a solution to anything... so, to answer my own question (somewhere on one of these threads)... yes, it would make me a hypocrite. What I should instead be calling for is that the deleted posts be reinstated.)
Careful with those eggshells on which you're walking.
As per my reply to creamdelacream above, I've retained copies of all the cancelled posts ... and the only 'offensive' item (in the sense of something by which someone can claim to be offended however implausible that seems) was a plea:
"I really hope AW doesn't go down this woke route, it's one of the shrinking places online where you can get away from political ideologies."
Oh, and my personal contribution (as a response to the now final post) which included:
".. shame that the .. assumptions couldn't have either been more correct .. or simply not made at all in such a cheap judgemental demonstration of narrow-minded bigotry."
Strong, yes, but factually-based and an accurate portrayal of my opinions and right to be offended!
" my right to be offended"
If only that were true
I get offended on this site only by the site operators
Others are rude and offensive, but cannot delete what I say
Site operators knowingly choose to interpret in a single direction
The new disappearing post style is a step back
I thought the site operators love of MTD indicated a desire to preserve the records for ever. How wrong I am
The story of MTD will, i would suggest, be a mirrored by the story of AWEB when it underwent the change......promised a world of benefits, delivered a world of nonsense.