#Sysop Forum Censorship?
14 messages in this thread
<continuation>
that 1.3 is shipping. Well we currently have a thread going sayi:
"1.3….Never?" but nobody has seen fit to change that so that people don't get
the impression that 1.3 will never ship. We also have messages saying that 1.3
KS is shipping with some 500s. So why pcik on my message?
Ok now for my second flame…..I also want to complain about the
replacement subject header that was used. Obviously I felt (and explained in
the message) that I wanted the message to be widely read. No whether or not
the Sysop who changed the message was right in doing so, if he did decide to
change the message he should have been sensitive enough to pick a substitute
which would have endeavoured to make the message compelling enough to
read……something like "Important Info!". The substitute header that was
used …."No Way" …..is a smart aleck response to my original header and is
totally meaningless to anyone who didn't see the original subject plus it does
nothing to reinforce my wish to have the message read and responded to.
Having read the above what do the rest of the Forum members
think…..should my message header have been changed?
I really would like an explanation of why this was done. If you are in
agreement with my position, an apology wouldn't hurt either (grin) as well as
changing my header back to the original, if that is possible.
<continued>
What you did was a lie, and did not require special consideration or an
apology. I regularly disagree with many people, but I endeavor to be as
honest and objective as I can be. I have been an Amiga owner since October
1985, and an Amigaforum member since about December 1985, and want this
forum to be the best it can be – straight, informative, helpfull and
honest.
It is unfortunate that we all have to use this system now knowing that
censorship may be practiced again based upon one individual's judgement.
There was no use of profanity or any personal attack in the message.
Whether or not it was misleading does not constitute a basis for censoring
it. I would rather see misleading or false information identified in this
open forum rather than on a sysop's screen. I certainly hope that CIS does
not support the aforementioned actions of the sysop.
Paul specifically, is was
The message was not censored. The subject header was changed.
That is a form of censorship. You objected to what somebody else said and
prevented others from seeing it.
…Steve
Ya know, I find it fascinating. A message is left with a bait and switch
header. I change it. I used an inappropriate replacement. I requested the
message be left again with a more truthful subject header, by lack of
action, that request/suggestion was declined. Who complains? 3 members of
the user group who's pet project was being pitched with deception.
Now, I go in and kill off 200+ messages in the Cops and Credit Card
Protection threads (not selectively, every message) and I get kudos. Now
THAT's censorship. Go figure.
Well, I don't think the Cops and Credit Card thread had any business in the
"Amiga" forum myself. I don't mind deviating from computers for a while, but
when I log on, pick up 80 new messages, and they're all about murders in the
desert, cops and credit cards, and whatever else… I start blocking out large
numbers of sections.
…Steve
Paul,
think again. The message was not changed in any way. How can something be
censored it it is unchanged?
Paul,
There was NO censorship. The message was left 100% intact, every word
_in_ the message was the word the author used and NO additional words were
added. What was done, was the message header was changed (the subject line
labeled 'Sb:') that is all.
Censorship is changing the text, or eliminating the text of a message,
and I assure you that was NOT done.
Don
The message was left up, not removed as in censorship. The header was
changed because it was blatantly untrue. People expect honest, if perhaps
biased, replies on cis. You may note that half the members of this forum
are on my case right now, but it is a reasonable difference of opinion,
with no 'censorsip' along the way.
Ed,
1. I believe that it is the SYSOP's right and responsibility to make the
determination, no matter what my personal opinion is.
2. Since you asked, my personal opinion was that he was right to change your
message header. What he changed it into is a matter between Steve and yourself,
but, if the header had been proper in the first place, you would not have had
the problem. Sorry, but I'm with Steve on this one.
David
Ed,
I see other's have answered. I'll only add that you message is still
visible to the forum members…so this certainly wasn't a case of 'censorship'
or even of editing. It was only the changing of a 'headline'.
Don
Ed,
One more thing that I forgot to mention in my first reply –
I saw your message with the original title and specifically did NOT mark it
for reading because I'm getting tired of all the hype and mis-information
on 1.3 that has been going around. After Steve relabeled it, I did read it.
In this case the "censorship" got you at least one additional reader.
I think it should have been written properly in the first place Ed.
Barring that, I think Steve took the right step. It is not up to him to
pick the message header for your message.