Ridge is correct in that, Stuff Black People Like would have NEVER been created if it weren't for the other list. My feeling at the time was, nice...another list on white people. To another Ridge point, people were rating, and race never entered any minds, until 1 guy "made a call". Similar to a ref calling a penalty before an infraction occurs. Other than some disagreements, I've never had a problem with Automatt, but his last action jumped out at me, as it did with others, I wasn't about to simply dismiss that.

Some of you may remember an old list of mine. It was a monster list (thanks to many contributors) of Great, Yet Unheralded Character Actors. When someone submitted an entry, I took the time to research the actor, to see if they had earned a place on the list. One reviewer (who I can't remember) submitted a name and I checked it out. Seems that the actor had made around 10 films and a couple of TV appearances. I rejected the submission and messaged to the reviewer that the person hadn't yet earn a place on the list. We messaged back and forth about this and I rejected the entry more than once. Finally, the reviewer closed the deal by saying that it wasn't up to me...that I should accept and post the entry and let every one else decide with their reviews and comments. (He, obviously, was impressed with the actor.) So, I did...and I kept an eye on the entry...and aside from the original review, not a single other reviewer touched it. The People had spoken.

I'm trying to look at WiseGuy's list of Stuff that Black People Like in the same light. I'll have to admit that I had not read through the entire list until yesterday. I'm not easily offended by words and I was not offended by any of the items in this list. This morning, I read through the reviews and comments that this list produced and found that it evoked the same reaction as the White Peoples list...around 90% humo(u)r. There is one "reviewer" (I add the quotation marks because the reviewer was mute) who rated "killing and crack". One. Not a single review on these two items made it to the Recent Review page.

Not. A. Single. One.

There was not a single visitor to this site that even had a chance to be offended by these items. The People had spoken. If anything, I think that if anyone was offended by either of these two lists, it was by what the names of these two lists could have implied. I'll have to admit that my head tilted to one side when I first saw the White Man's list. Guy's list I saw as a counter point, to create some balance. But, it got targeted by the administration as offensive. Okay.

Let's shift from race to sexuality. While the administration, here, finds race to be too fragile to address, it gives Christofino a free and wide path to post 56 straight (no pun intended) reviews on gay and bi-sexual sex. Talk about family night. The administration, here, found absolutely nothing offensive about a guy promoting gay, unprotected, public, anonymous sex. Ahhh, the pleasures of meeting strangers and allowing them to slide their raw, unprotected male members up his ass and into his mouth. Getting jerked-off in public. Personally, I would have a much easier time explaining the killing and crack items to younger children. But, once again, the People have spoken, as, at best, a little humo(u)r was produced and no one condoned any of this.

This tells me a couple of things. One is that the administration most definitely holds a bias against WiseGuy, in spite of what Mr. Colburn says about Guy being a long-term reviewer here. (I was surprised that you admit that Guy's list had just come to your attention. Perhaps you are also unaware of how rude and smarmy Matt has been to your clients. For those who dont know, AutoMatt is an employee of RIA). Lets face it, theres no love between the two. In my opinion, Guy was, in your absence, singled-out here. No one paid attention to crack and killing...except Matt. The People spoke by not paying attention to it.

Censorship is not a prevalent part of this site, but it does exist, here. And it is not consistent, as calling for the death of politicians, direct, personal attacks on other reviewers and sexual perversion have been left untouched. I realize that this is a private business and not a democracy, but it is a public forum and, in spite of this being the Internet, it is reality. It's a real test of maturity to trust...and if you don't get the response that you expect, then you have to learn to accept the fact that not everyone feels the same way that you do. Censorship sucks.

Yeah, but consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds....

I reserve my commentary on this issue.

In order for any site to be "moderated consistantly", you'd need people on it like 24/7.  That's kind of asking a lot.  Unless RIA headquarters has one hell of a coffee machine, I'd expect a few things to slip through once in a while.