Home – New Forums Other discussions Public Disputes Policy – My disappointment

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 85 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #1091705
    Neddy
    Member
    • Total posts: 392
    Up
    0
    ::
    WAHE, post: 107700 wrote:
    The FS admins should also include in their guidelines that any personal grievances or disagreements about FS policies and guidelines should be entirely dealt with through their PM facility.

    I’ve had a few posts deleted and edited along the way, and it really peed me off. ;) Particularly as I believe myself to be a constructive member of this forum – plus I run my own forum and understand why guidelines and rules are important.

    In every instance I have challenged the Admins by PM (respectfully) and argued my case – and on a few occasions they have accepted my POV and reinstated my posts.

    So to my mind, as long as the Admins are prepared to listen to reasoned argument and reassess initial positions taken, then all is good with the world. :)

    Cheers, Ned

    #1091529
    Neddy
    Member
    • Total posts: 392
    Up
    0
    ::
    WAHE, post: 107700 wrote:
    The FS admins should also include in their guidelines that any personal grievances or disagreements about FS policies and guidelines should be entirely dealt with through their PM facility.

    I’ve had a few posts deleted and edited along the way, and it really peed me off. ;) Particularly as I believe myself to be a constructive member of this forum – plus I run my own forum and understand why guidelines and rules are important.

    In every instance I have challenged the Admins by PM (respectfully) and argued my case – and on a few occasions they have accepted my POV and reinstated my posts.

    So to my mind, as long as the Admins are prepared to listen to reasoned argument and reassess initial positions taken, then all is good with the world. :)

    Cheers, Ned

    #1091707
    Cesar
    Member
    • Total posts: 591
    Up
    0
    ::
    Neddy, post: 107702 wrote:
    In every instance I have challenged the Admins by PM (respectfully) and argued my case – and on a few occasions they have accepted my POV and reinstated my posts.

    Respectfully, that is the magic word…

    #1091531
    Cesar
    Member
    • Total posts: 591
    Up
    0
    ::
    Neddy, post: 107702 wrote:
    In every instance I have challenged the Admins by PM (respectfully) and argued my case – and on a few occasions they have accepted my POV and reinstated my posts.

    Respectfully, that is the magic word…

    #1091709
    NathanB
    Participant
    • Total posts: 775
    Up
    0
    ::
    Neddy, post: 107698 wrote:
    Absolutely agree with this. I run a forum for Aussie domainers, and as a publisher I have to be so careful.

    It doesn’t matter what “disclaimers” you put on a site – ultimately as a publisher you can be dragged into a defamation action.

    Just look what happened with Marieke Hardy and her blog.

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/google-and-ilk-cant-shirk-responsibility-for-ranters-20111229-1pe93.html

    And apparently the guy is now having a smack at Twitter (good luck with that!).

    Cheers, Ned

    This is where I would like to jump in with a serious post.

    I loath this! (Not King or Neddy – They seem alright)

    What I do loath is despite my previous comments regarding a lack of explicit free speech law in Australia – Creating accountability for a forum for the posts of a contributor is ludicrous.

    This threat shouldn’t even be a consideration of this website other than, if they were to be pursued for such reason they would fight tooth and nail for vindication.

    Imagine if FB could be sued because of post or comment! Twitter because of a tweet! Mircosoft Outlook or Google Gmail because of a nasty email was sent?

    I whole heartily support FS rules and guidelines. They exist not to “censor” anyone but rather serve to make this forum the business that it is. The policy about grievances has nothing to do with morality, law, what’s right or wrong. It has to do specially with the the FS business plan and the product they have designed this site/forum/network to be.

    I am curios now though and must ask the FS admin team, If push came to shove regarding a thread or contributor of this website over accusations of unlawful activity (such as defamation or piracy) would you stand by your right to the free exchange of information until the accusations were proven by evidence or would action the said case immediately, with out resistance, with out evidence or proof and solely on the accusation?

    #1091533
    NathanB
    Participant
    • Total posts: 775
    Up
    0
    ::
    Neddy, post: 107698 wrote:
    Absolutely agree with this. I run a forum for Aussie domainers, and as a publisher I have to be so careful.

    It doesn’t matter what “disclaimers” you put on a site – ultimately as a publisher you can be dragged into a defamation action.

    Just look what happened with Marieke Hardy and her blog.

    http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/google-and-ilk-cant-shirk-responsibility-for-ranters-20111229-1pe93.html

    And apparently the guy is now having a smack at Twitter (good luck with that!).

    Cheers, Ned

    This is where I would like to jump in with a serious post.

    I loath this! (Not King or Neddy – They seem alright)

    What I do loath is despite my previous comments regarding a lack of explicit free speech law in Australia – Creating accountability for a forum for the posts of a contributor is ludicrous.

    This threat shouldn’t even be a consideration of this website other than, if they were to be pursued for such reason they would fight tooth and nail for vindication.

    Imagine if FB could be sued because of post or comment! Twitter because of a tweet! Mircosoft Outlook or Google Gmail because of a nasty email was sent?

    I whole heartily support FS rules and guidelines. They exist not to “censor” anyone but rather serve to make this forum the business that it is. The policy about grievances has nothing to do with morality, law, what’s right or wrong. It has to do specially with the the FS business plan and the product they have designed this site/forum/network to be.

    I am curios now though and must ask the FS admin team, If push came to shove regarding a thread or contributor of this website over accusations of unlawful activity (such as defamation or piracy) would you stand by your right to the free exchange of information until the accusations were proven by evidence or would action the said case immediately, with out resistance, with out evidence or proof and solely on the accusation?

    #1091711
    NathanB
    Participant
    • Total posts: 775
    Up
    0
    ::

    I made myself SOOOO Angry thinking about a blog site being sued for a blog post! it’s like me suing Bic, Reflex or Australia Post cause some one sent me a nasty hand written letter in the Mail! GRRRR! 😡

    Should Aus Post open and read every letter before sending to insure they are not facilitating anything illegal?

    Iangry_dome.jpg

    #1091535
    NathanB
    Participant
    • Total posts: 775
    Up
    0
    ::

    I made myself SOOOO Angry thinking about a blog site being sued for a blog post! it’s like me suing Bic, Reflex or Australia Post cause some one sent me a nasty hand written letter in the Mail! GRRRR! 😡

    Should Aus Post open and read every letter before sending to insure they are not facilitating anything illegal?

    Iangry_dome.jpg

    #1091713
    victorng
    Member
    • Total posts: 626
    Up
    0
    ::

    Nathan – read this and you’ll want to stay in that angry dome a bit longer: http://www.macedonrangesweekly.com.au/news/local/news/general/last-post-for-online-forums/1541086.aspx

    Interestingly, there was a recent Hong Kong decision that held that the defence of innocent dissemination was available to a forum operator. Our defamation laws also include the defence of innocent dissemination but it hasn’t been examined in the context of internet forums.

    #1091537
    victorng
    Member
    • Total posts: 626
    Up
    0
    ::

    Nathan – read this and you’ll want to stay in that angry dome a bit longer: http://www.macedonrangesweekly.com.au/news/local/news/general/last-post-for-online-forums/1541086.aspx

    Interestingly, there was a recent Hong Kong decision that held that the defence of innocent dissemination was available to a forum operator. Our defamation laws also include the defence of innocent dissemination but it hasn’t been examined in the context of internet forums.

    #1091715
    Peter – FS Administrator
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,889
    Up
    0
    ::
    NathanB, post: 107710 wrote:
    This is where I would like to jump in with a serious post.

    I loath this! (Not King or Neddy – They seem alright)

    What I do loath is despite my previous comments regarding a lack of explicit free speech law in Australia – Creating accountability for a forum for the posts of a contributor is ludicrous.

    This threat shouldn’t even be a consideration of this website other than, if they were to be pursued for such reason they would fight tooth and nail for vindication.

    Imagine if FB could be sued because of post or comment! Twitter because of a tweet! Mircosoft Outlook or Google Gmail because of a nasty email was sent?

    I whole heartily support FS rules and guidelines. They exist not to “censor” anyone but rather serve to make this forum the business that it is. The policy about grievances has nothing to do with morality, law, what’s right or wrong. It has to do specially with the the FS business plan and the product they have designed this site/forum/network to be.

    I am curios now though and must ask the FS admin team, If push came to shove regarding a thread or contributor of this website over accusations of unlawful activity (such as defamation or piracy) would you stand by your right to the free exchange of information until the accusations were proven by evidence or would action the said case immediately, with out resistance, with out evidence or proof and solely on the accusation?

    Hi Nathan,
    Thanks for adding your thoughts here to what is undoubtedly an evolving and murky issue. As it has done with lots of industries, I think technology is moving faster than the laws can possibly keep up which leaves a vacuum in the middle where there are big challenges without precedents.

    I’m not 100% clear on your question, but broadly the approach we’ve taken in our guidelines is to try and steer clear of such situations by avoiding the hosting of defamatory material in the first place – acknowledging that there is no fool-proof way to do this! If something did arise then, like all publishers, we could be dragged into a case, but ideally with open communication/negotiation a resolution could be found that didn’t involve the courts.

    It’s an issue we’re watching with much interest, but touch wood we can continue to focus mainly on building the community :)

    Cheers,
    Peter

    #1091539
    Peter – FS Administrator
    Member
    • Total posts: 1,889
    Up
    0
    ::
    NathanB, post: 107710 wrote:
    This is where I would like to jump in with a serious post.

    I loath this! (Not King or Neddy – They seem alright)

    What I do loath is despite my previous comments regarding a lack of explicit free speech law in Australia – Creating accountability for a forum for the posts of a contributor is ludicrous.

    This threat shouldn’t even be a consideration of this website other than, if they were to be pursued for such reason they would fight tooth and nail for vindication.

    Imagine if FB could be sued because of post or comment! Twitter because of a tweet! Mircosoft Outlook or Google Gmail because of a nasty email was sent?

    I whole heartily support FS rules and guidelines. They exist not to “censor” anyone but rather serve to make this forum the business that it is. The policy about grievances has nothing to do with morality, law, what’s right or wrong. It has to do specially with the the FS business plan and the product they have designed this site/forum/network to be.

    I am curios now though and must ask the FS admin team, If push came to shove regarding a thread or contributor of this website over accusations of unlawful activity (such as defamation or piracy) would you stand by your right to the free exchange of information until the accusations were proven by evidence or would action the said case immediately, with out resistance, with out evidence or proof and solely on the accusation?

    Hi Nathan,
    Thanks for adding your thoughts here to what is undoubtedly an evolving and murky issue. As it has done with lots of industries, I think technology is moving faster than the laws can possibly keep up which leaves a vacuum in the middle where there are big challenges without precedents.

    I’m not 100% clear on your question, but broadly the approach we’ve taken in our guidelines is to try and steer clear of such situations by avoiding the hosting of defamatory material in the first place – acknowledging that there is no fool-proof way to do this! If something did arise then, like all publishers, we could be dragged into a case, but ideally with open communication/negotiation a resolution could be found that didn’t involve the courts.

    It’s an issue we’re watching with much interest, but touch wood we can continue to focus mainly on building the community :)

    Cheers,
    Peter

    #1091717
    NathanB
    Participant
    • Total posts: 775
    Up
    0
    ::

    Thanks Peter

    I’d love to discuss this more with you are interested, in this thread too so others can be a part of it – i am not looking to debate, more just discuss and understand your views as forum administrator. I have a thought up a quick scenario which If presented to you I wonder what your response would be…

    For my scenario, I have decided to pick on Khalid Adam – He IMHO is great contributed to FS and I enjoy reading his posts. He is well educated and has invested immensely in self development and greatly shares his learnings and recommendations with the FS community.

    Now, Imagine one author of one of the many self development courses Khalid has participated in was to stubble on the the FS solo and see Khalid despencing wisdom on such subjects as Marketing/Finance that had a very close resemblance to work they had published and then claim copyright infringement or piracy against Khalid or this website directly?

    Would you agree that Khalid has breeched copy right by sharing what some else has created, that he has learned? Or agree that Khalid has the right to share such information?

    Would you remove Khalid or his posts at the weight of threat or would you conduct your own investigation into the merit of the claim before acting (or even seek independent advice?)

    Sorry for directing this thread in another direction to the OP but all base are belong to us.

    #1091541
    NathanB
    Participant
    • Total posts: 775
    Up
    0
    ::

    Thanks Peter

    I’d love to discuss this more with you are interested, in this thread too so others can be a part of it – i am not looking to debate, more just discuss and understand your views as forum administrator. I have a thought up a quick scenario which If presented to you I wonder what your response would be…

    For my scenario, I have decided to pick on Khalid Adam – He IMHO is great contributed to FS and I enjoy reading his posts. He is well educated and has invested immensely in self development and greatly shares his learnings and recommendations with the FS community.

    Now, Imagine one author of one of the many self development courses Khalid has participated in was to stubble on the the FS solo and see Khalid despencing wisdom on such subjects as Marketing/Finance that had a very close resemblance to work they had published and then claim copyright infringement or piracy against Khalid or this website directly?

    Would you agree that Khalid has breeched copy right by sharing what some else has created, that he has learned? Or agree that Khalid has the right to share such information?

    Would you remove Khalid or his posts at the weight of threat or would you conduct your own investigation into the merit of the claim before acting (or even seek independent advice?)

    Sorry for directing this thread in another direction to the OP but all base are belong to us.

    #1091543
    Shaukat Adam Khalid
    Participant
    • Total posts: 1,528
    Up
    0
    ::

    If you looked up the word “unoriginal” in any dictionary, you’d find “khalid adam” as one of the definitions (in invisible ink).

    ;)

    NathanB, post: 107748 wrote:
    Thanks Peter

    I’d love to discuss this more with you are interested, in this thread too so others can be a part of it – i am not looking to debate, more just discuss and understand your views as forum administrator. I have a thought up a quick scenario which If presented to you I wonder what your response would be…

    For my scenario, I have decided to pick on Khalid Adam – He IMHO is great contributed to FS and I enjoy reading his posts. He is well educated and has invested immensely in self development and greatly shares his learnings and recommendations with the FS community.

    Now, Imagine one author of one of the many self development courses Khalid has participated in was to stubble on the the FS solo and see Khalid despencing wisdom on such subjects as Marketing/Finance that had a very close resemblance to work they had published and then claim copyright infringement or piracy against Khalid or this website directly?

    Would you agree that Khalid has breeched copy right by sharing what some else has created, that he has learned? Or agree that Khalid has the right to share such information?

    Would you remove Khalid or his posts at the weight of threat or would you conduct your own investigation into the merit of the claim before acting (or even seek independent advice?)

    Sorry for directing this thread in another direction to the OP but all base are belong to us.

Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 85 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.