What's Going on at 911Blogger?
A lot of people are upset with the change to moderated comments at 911Blogger. While it wasn't my decision, I fully support it.
Here's why.
DZ and the other moderators long considered switching the comments off altogether. One of the reasons is that some people are causing disruption and infighting instead of actually contributing anything (such as information, activist ideas, etc.)
Another reason is that the moderators have felt that there is a real danger that hate speech by posters might be attributed to the site, which could end up shutting down the site (see Reprehensor's comment below).
So, while DZ ran the site, he periodically considered discontinuing comments. And when DZ retired from the site, we again considered yanking the comments altogether (FWIW: I've always argued for keeping comments). However, we are trying a less draconian measure: moderating comments.
Please give it a month to see how it works. In the meantime, instead of complaining about the new system, please put more of your energy into writing hard-hitting blogs, sharing news tips, and organizing activist activities. Those activities "push the ball down field". Those activities are keeping our "eyes on the prize".
In a month, we'll see if moderated comments are working or not...
- Login to post comments
moderate this!
Yes, unless we find something our they want to moderate off this blog. Maybe we should call it the 911 moderated truth movement. Maybe we should call ourselves truth seekers, only if the guys who run this blog like the truth we're seeking. Somehow, I'll bet just writing this will get my disappeared. I mean, come on... it's a "truth movement." What could be more revolting than censoring this place, you know? The whole point was to start a site where you could discuss what they wouldn't discuss anywhere else because we live in a ridiculous corporate run, globalist controlled, moderated world. We come here because when you see through it all, you want to talk about it and... not get moderated. I guess I can start my own site instead of bitching.
well enjoy your site then
because you will be virtually alone, comments and exchanging ideas & information is what the Internet is all about.
Posting something that may or may not appear in an hour or 24 hours depending on what one person thinks is utter bullshit and is completely unacceptable.
You will get your wish though as your bandwidth requirements will be minimal very shortly.
I second that notion
I second that notion
I don't like the changes to this site at the moment
Good words as usual GW. I know that the mods have a difficult job here, and have to put up with a lot of frustrating "activity". I am patient and wish the best for this site. After the initial shock and frustration over the new changes to the site, I'm going to take a wait and see approach. If it doesn't work, fix it. I don't particularly like it at the moment.
"we saw some people causing disruption and infighting instead of actually contributing anything (such as information, activist ideas."
Yes, I saw it too, it is pretty blatant and obvious. The issue of COINTELPRO is a serious and real concern. There is deliberate disruption happening. We have to be aware of the tactics and mentality of these people. They are going to play dirty and do anything and everything to divide/distract/discredit the movement.
I find it strange there are so few comments being posted however. Just how many comments are being passed over? I don't really know what is going on, but it looks like a ghost town in here. In the end... I'm not going to stop supporting this site simply because comments are being blocked.
Edit:
What is with the voting? Do you object to the fact I don't like the new changes? I guess I'm supposed to be violently opposed to it to get positive votes.... ?
“We're an empire now, and when we act we create our own reality."
GHOST TOWN
I agree with Arabesque "it looks like a ghost town in here". I hope this will change soon- this is no time to deflate the 9/11 balloon.
....Well
If the whole issue is cost and bandwidth... Simply start up a Freeboards web Forum.. which is free..
And link the comments section to the blog post...
While I do enjoy many of the posts tremendously... the follow up information and video links contained in the comments is what ties up the entire site in my book.
Then keep- modding the comments, as you are
but give us the virtual community we need by setting up a 911blogger BBS/Forum Board. They're not hard to set up, or moderate, and there's people you could select to do that.
Without a collaborate ideas space, the community that's formed here dies. It's as simple as that.
So keep us, and allow us to recruit more of us, by giving us a realm or a domain for our "mastermind alliance".
Once you create what amounts to a virtual community, you can't just pull the plug on it!
____________________________
On the 11th day, of every month.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q9nRs8cu5Y&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftruthaction...
I find the change in comment
I find the change in comment policy paternalistic, unnecessary and unbefitting of a 911truth site. It establishes a hierarchy that is subject to corruption and restricts the free exchange of ideas.
The site will become more and more about the individuals at the top of the hierarchy and how they interpret information rather than the information itself. Additionally, undergoing a constant screening process and having to wait forever for comments to appear will discourage people from commenting at all. The end result will be a user base full of passive “consumers” of information rather than active members of a thriving community.
In short, it’s a massive step backwards.
The problems you cite were being dealt with just fine with the group-moderating scheme. If you’re worried about “hate speech” simply delete those posts after the fact. This would be far less time consuming than screening every single post beforehand. Like I said, the latter tactic will slow commentary to a virtual stand-still and result in a much less vibrant, much less interactive website.
I find it disturbing that long-time posters were not consulted in this (major) decision but merely informed of it. When said posters did voice their opinions they were overwhelmingly opposed to the idea. Surely you should take this into consideration. I understand that you’re paying the bills but I was under the impression this was a community, not a corporation.
I respect all of the individuals involved in the creation and moderation of this site but I think you should reconsider this decision – now. I’m willing to stick around for a month but many quality posters may not.
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
Word. What he said.
Word. What he said.
I find the "hate speech" issue rather comical. If there is to be a "hate speech" determination about this site, it will be on the grounds that it is opposing the feds' lies about 9/11, not because of disagreements over the why's, who's, and wherefore's. The ethnic biases and schoolmarmish political correctness that occasionally presented themselves here annoyed me, but one finds that anywhere and it can be intellectually screened out. The infighting and disinfo in this movement is, unfortunately, here to stay, orchestrated from the very beginning and cresting with new ploys every now and again. There is no way to have an info war without acknowledging that they will be with us; the best we can hope is that with continued dialogue and analysis, which the comment section provided in spades, reasonable people can make their own determinations. (Unreasonable people need not apply for this subject anyway.)
It is also notable that this decision has been taken after some banning had already happened, and when the number of outright trolls who instigated flame-fests has actually dropped. So now all of a sudden this is a huge problem requiring drastic measures, like treating a minor headache with a sledgehammer? It seems that a phony problem-reaction-solution has been implemented here, and that disturbs me more than anything else.
I also think it will lead to more subtle forms of disinfo and misdirection. Frankly, my dears, I prefer our agents and assholes as overt as possible.
O/T. Lefty blogs.
Recent events appear to have made Daily Kos readers a little more willing to listen to 9/11 and anthrax attack related info.
The diary currently on top of the Rec'd List is called, "Anthrax Attack on Congress may have been launched by Government Agency?"
Check it out and maybe send a little more information their way.
Thats good...
As I erased the bookmark for Kos and stopped visiting it when they came up with no 911 truth comment policy...
Perhaps I can visit again.
you know damn well that
you know damn well that blogger was made by the comments not the posts..
i would like to let eveyone know that most of the good people that post here are now showing up here: http://www.wtcdemolition.com/blog/
Isn't it obvious that shills & trolls were deliberately posting
garbage to spread disinfo & to disrupt + inflame the comments section??? Can't you deal with this some other way besides severely delaying & censoring everyone's comments???
Your arguement if applied to
Your arguement if applied to the US Government legitimizes their actions... If you don't see the hypocritical position then please show me where censorship has been a good thing for free expression of ideas?
A fascinating experiment -- like returning to paper ballots
Yes, one could make an analogy to voting: the main element in fighting electoral fraud is to return to PAPER BALLOTS at all levels. This will slow up the reporting of results, but it will fight fraud.
This is a fascinating experiment. It is helping to separate the sheep from the goats, the wheat from the chaff, and the disinfonazis from the patriots.
You should have made this a comment...
...here:
http://www.911blogger.com/node/9789
Why do you feel that your opinion on this deserves to be another blog post rather than a part of the community discussion at the node above? Are you trying to divert attention away from Reprehensor's blog that has garnered such overwhelmingly negative feedback and condemnation by creating a separate blog entry that begs more for sympathy than reason? Why were these points that you now present here and claim to be part of the debate on the switching off of comments altogether not included in Reprehensor's original post? Sir, are you manufacturing a history in a desparate attempt to support a flawed decision that has proved very embarassing?
Just how real is this danger of a site shutdown by the haters of hate speech of which you speak? Generally, you supply many links to support assertions that you make and positions that you take on a variety of topics, both here and on your own blog. Yet, to justify your claimed fear of some Blogland Security shutdown raid, you provide none. Are these scary "stories of similar things happening" that you are hearing open source, verifiable events or are you just picking up paranoid back channel chatter on private mod squad frequencies to which we ewesers are not privy?
Users judged by the mod squad to have instigated "hate speech" (a wonderfully controversial term that I love to hate), and/or disruption, and/or an unwillingness to substantively contribute to the site have always been vunerable to banishment by your automagic permaban button. Surely, the "some people" of whom you speak cannot be so many as to be unmanagable. Would it not be a better and more efficient use of your time to handle these scarce cases individually rather than employ yourselves as human eschelons and carnivores?
Are we supposed to now rejoice (or bleet contentedly) that you chose "less draconian" measures? At least someone in this administration is willing to admit that mod squad filtering of comments is indeed still draconian, not to mention reprehensible. And, now you plead for us to "stay the course", at least for a month or so? In addition to what we have all already been doing, "writing hard-hitting blogs, sharing news tips, and organizing activist activities", should we also go shopping, Patrone?
The only point raised thus far with even a whiff of legitimacy is the concern for increased expense of bandwidth. But, rather than openly and honestly ask for more financial support from the comminity in order to support continued open comments, you choose to curtail discussion by closing the valve and save expense, which in turn effectively stifles lively and timely debate. I find this rather bizarre, to say the least. Kinda, sorta, just like my last relationship.
I respectfully request that the 911blogger mod squad immediately issue a self-imposed injunction against moderation of blog comments until a new front page blog post is created. This blog must contain a prioritized list of ALL of the issues included in discussions concerning adoption and implementation of a policy to moderate and/or totally eliminate user comments to blog posts. While you're at it, indicate who took what stance on each point, too.
In addition, I request that said blog include links to this blog and Reprehensor's original blog as reference for current and new members of the community. Furthermore, I also request, no demand that the 911blogger mod squad agree to not institute any moderation policies or eliminate comments altogether without providing justification to the community with 30 days advanced notice and comment period of intended action(s).
It is my humble opinion that the 911blogger community deserves nothing less this day after Independence Day.
--
"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)
Dear Reprehensor,
Is this all you have to say?
I think you should reply to a few more comments here. At least Danse, Lemonhoko and Alvin R deserves some well argumented answers.
Another option is of course to swallow your pride and admit that you made a poor decision. We would forgive you. After all we're all human, desiring truth and a better world doesn't make any of us perfect. I for one would not hold this decision against you, if you take it back.
backwards
GW, no disrespect meant, but I find dicktater's request "to not institute any moderation policies or eliminate comments altogether without providing justification to the community with 30 days advanced notice and comment period of intended action(s)" eminently more fair and reasonable than your "Please give it a month to see how it works.... In a month, we'll see if moderated comments are working or not..."
Wouldn't it have been better to ask for comments BEFORE making the change? It's called due process.
Just trying to save you guys the "I told you so" in 29 days :-)
Well...
...that certainly sucks!
I recommend at least to let comments appear at first, and delete them afterwards (after moderator has had chance to check them out and found inappropriate). It will really suck if there will be a day or so delay before the posts appear.
How can we have activism without organization?
This site is a big deal to the truth movement. It's where people post topics, meet, discuss and organize.
Maybe we should all become part owners of this site...
Read the reactions posted
in the comments following the original announcement.
Many of those unhappy with the announcement will just stop visiting here after a while.
"Many of those unhappy with
"Many of those unhappy with the announcement will just stop visiting here after a while."
They apparently don't seem to care very much.
It is a matter of trust
It is not that they don't care. It is now a case of they don't trust anymore. How do we know that this site has not been finally co-opted by intelligence agencies that want to divide and conquer us. The spectre of censorship and lame-o excuses about server space for text content and "hate speech" are looking very shady indeed, and it is also interesting when one of the near constant "disruptive influences" and possible "provocateurs" seems to be part of the management team here, and you know who I am talking about. My spidey sense tells me something is very wrong here. PLEASE CANCEL MY ACCOUNT HERE IMMEDIATELY, and I would appreciate it if you would not forward my email address to your government handlers. Thanks, and good luck containing the 9/11 Truth Movement, kids....
Heres my problem with this....
1) "One of the reasons is that comments tend to overload traffic to the site, and -- because more bandwidth is required when there's higher traffic -- comments make hosting the site more expensive."
Traffic? I thought thats what this game was all about? Lets go the other extreme. So you have a snazy blog site but no traffic comes to it. Nicely written blogs, but does no good if people dont come to the site and thats exactly what moderation will do.
2) "Another reason is that the moderators have felt that there is a real danger that hate speech by posters might be attributed to the site, which could end up shutting down the site (there are stories of similar things happening to other 9/11 sites)."
This actually seems like a cop out. We had a voting system and the mature attitudes that contributed, outweighed the others on this site and 80%+ of these comments were voted down and fast.
3) "In a month, we'll see if moderated comments are working or not..."
If you dont roll it back to the way it was, most of us wont be here in a month. Im sure someone will start another 911 blogger with the successful format that this site once had.
Personally this site was my homepage..Im shopping for another as we speak. Im sure it wont take long before I find a place I feel more comfortable at. Moderation and consorship is exactly what most of this movement dispises. Im surprised you new folks at 911 blogger dont realise this...or perhaps you do and the intent of killing this site was the goal.
As a community of "conspirators", would you expect anything less from our community?
Im sorry GW, but those points listed in your blog just isnt adequate for me. This will probably be my last post, not sure..its so hard to leave this community..but then again, perhaps it was meant to be.
The Eleventh Day of Every Month
Here's what I think should happen
1) Clearly define the rules of the site in a "Rules" or "FAQ" link above the comments section.
2) Add a "Report this post" link above each comment.
3) Use a 3-strikes policy to ban repeat offenders.
I've changed my opinion entirely since my last post when the change was made. After seeing my post take several hours to appear, the whole time being convinced it wasn't going to make it through, I want none of this. New blog posts sit for hours without any comments, which in turn makes people less likely to post. I wouldn't even be reading 9/11 blogger today if I didn't have hope that we can fix this before it is too late. The community has spoken, and every day that goes by that they hate it and you do nothing about it only makes the distrust deepen. A community site without a community has nothing.
As far as traffic, 911podcasts uses several orders of magnitude more bandwidth for videos than for comments. Post all the videos to YouTube/Google and drop that if need be. Or request more donations. Or run more ads. Or enable page caching for anonymous users. It's not a problem that can't be solved through technical means.
As far as hate speech, you lost me. Digg, Myspace, YouTube, and several thousands of other major sites wouldn't exist if what you fear were true. It's not. And again, whatever you fear can be solved with a "Report this post" link for posts that violate the established rules of the site.
I Agree
Right now the policy seems very open ended. If the Rules of the blogger were defined and accessible on the site, then it might cut down on some of the criticism. There are some other issues that need to be clarified such as the time for approving comments and such, but this will be a good place to start. Great thinking benthere!
PJ
Ann Arbor Truth and Freedom
http://www.annarbor911truth.com
*My Views Do Not Necessarily Reflect The Views of The Group I Am A Part Of
here what's going on
like some else already said, limiting the number of comments per using to, let's say, 4 will solve all the big problem.
-bandwidth usage will be reduce
-infighting will mostly stop because people will be limited to only 4 comments.
You are acting like the msm.
If peoples can't tell the difference between a disinfo and an honest guy, then the 911 revolution (if any happen) will last only mabye 10 years, and then someone will start manipulating the poeple again and we will slowly fall in the same evil shit we are in right now. We need to be able to see what's good by ourself, think by ourself. Some guys telling the others what's good and what's not good for them will lead you nowhere.
It's not just a revolution against the criminals in place, it must be a revolution for our mind too. It is imperative. So it is a good thing to be exposed to some shill, so we will reconize them in the futur.
Making the comments appear in real time and then censoring the bads one would already be better. But when you censore a comment, i would suggest to simply edit it and write the reason why you censored it, insteed of just deleting it. Something like: YOUR COMMENT HAD BEEN EDITED BY AN ADMIN BECAUSE IT ONLY CONTAIN VERBAL ABUSE. It would be way less frustrating for everyone.
This site is dead now, there is barely any comments. At least you had what you wanted.
I don't even know if this comment will make it trought. Do you see why it is frustrating for everyone?
________________________________________________________________________________
Governement:"I know nobody support my politics, but this is for the good of the country. I am right and they are wrong."
911blogger:"I know nobody support the new moderation system, but i think this will be better for the community. People are all wrong"
less draconian? not by much.
less draconian? not by much. RIP 911blogger, i'll miss you all.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
I think...
There's a simple solution to this. For those that decide they would rather bash individuals, or the information they promote because it doesn't coincide with whatever "pet theory" they have rather than contribute something to the site, and to the cause, then ban them. There's nothing wrong with banning people.
Comments should be used to post supporting information (for whatever blog you're posting in), and the exchanging of ideas for activism.
Donate To 9/11 First Responders
Geoge Carlin relates to 911 blogger
Sorry GW but there is no excuse for shutting down comments because of hate speech or any thing else , if you do your oppenent wins you lose.
Hate speech is made up by the destoyer of our constitution the ADL
Our constitution says that free speech is neccesary for a free state I guess this isnt a free blog
Vote up vote down rocks!!!!!!!
"Hate Speech"?
Classic code for all things politically incorrect.
Let me guess: you're targeting "anti-'semitism'"; oh, wait, how about anti-Israel "defamatory" speech? What about--heaven forbid!--anti-Americanism?
Thank the one true great lord of lords that all that godless obloquy will be kept off this good clean site forever!
rep likely wont allow this comment
lets see, we have numerous excuses. well GW supports it and DZ thought about doing it too so i guess Rep isnt the overly controlling micromanager we thought he was, hes just a part of the team and was willing to go out in front on this censorship thing. then we have "hate speech" right? does that mean mentioning Israel and/or Mossad? is that "hate speech"? can you be more clear about that one GW? then we have the money excuse, and i confess i dont know much about computers so this could very well be a valid one. and of course we have the dreaded "disruption". i dont know, i guess i give people more credit than the mods here, who seem to think that the comments are enough to drive people to suicide or something. it really isnt that hard to just scroll on by the arguments and off topic comments etc. all i see here is people creating a problem where there really was none in the first place. im going to miss the real time commenting and the obscure links and great discussion/debate i would find from the wide range of personalities here. this place was truly great and unique while it lasted. RIP911blogger.com. yes, you've killed it.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
hey CK, thanks for the
hey CK, thanks for the compliment, your one of the many people that im going to miss from here. i would respond to you about why i think this is a horrible decision and why i think im NOT jumping to conclusions but im not sure if my post would show up anyway so i'll just leave it at this.
"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Former Director, CIA
What Roger said...
What Roger said...
I only registered recently, because i noticed that this site was going through the same stuff that I've seen in too many places by now.
After 6 years of researching, trying for myself, to figure out life, and how "the system" works, in all aspects. It helped me to answer tons of questions,
questions that i had when i had evolved in life and how certain emotions guided most of my actions, although i never stopped back then, to think about it.
If in any case, it was at bedtime, when i layed myself down, untill i fell asleep... The times i cried out "why", and "wtf is the purpose of all this shit im going through"...
Anyway, since the new policy is topic here, i'm just giving my opinion. A moderated forum works best, though moderators must be able to control
their ego and be fair. This way of "pre-approval" just brings insecurity to the posters' mind, which i find a negative input.
But in any case, I hope the owners of this site and the news posters can keep it up as long as it needs...
peace
Moderation...
...is a euphemism for censorship. The contentious comments that went back and forth appeared to mostly be between NPT and anti-NPT people. What's the big? And traffic is the mark of success on a blog.
I hate waiting for responses - it kills the convo.
If bandwidth is the real issue...
...then how does moderating comments help? Just shut off the comments altogether then and be done with it. That makes no sense to me really, and all it does is add more work for the mods, slow the comments to a crawl, and ultimately drives users away from this site. If that is the intention then good plan and cheers.
If hate speech is the issue then you could make use of the comment vote data you were already storing. You could keep a running sum or average of each users comments vote values, those with 0 or a positive value can post freely (unmoderated), those with less than 0 are moderated. You could check this value each time they attempt to add a new comment, and send that comment to the appropriate area (ie to mod review or straight to the comments). The status any user has at any time, as it relates to commenting, would be based on the voting of the Community, not a single mod's interpretation.
or, as others have suggested, start a free forum comments site as a leg of Blogger, and let all the commenting happen there. I like that idea the best.
I think this whole moderated comment business is a big mistake, but thats just my opinion. I never did like the Nodal comments system on this site and prefer a forum based approach only because after a while of endless nodal inserts you lose track of the overall flow of the topic, and stuff is hard to find again, whereas in a serial comments thread everything remains ordered by date and time and its easy to follow who posted what when, and why. But then again thats a bit off topic. As a forum moderator myself (for 4 years) I understand some of the dilemma's you guys are facing, but so far the reasons given and the proposed solutions dont fit with each other.
I fear the current decision, to moderate all comments, will relegate 911Blogger itself to the dustbin of history. Ironic.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Physics/Science/Mathematics do not lie, only people do.
9/11 was an INSIDE JOB
This can be...
interpreted as a defeat. The moderators of this site are capitulating to the efforts of the trolls and disinfo artists by doing this. Cointelpro is NO DOUBT looking at this as a major victory for their side.
Good job GeorgeWashington and Rep! I always get disgusted when an elite body agree with eachother over the consensus of the majority.
And no Washington, we're not "upset" about this situation as you patronizingly stated above. We *disagree* fully and strongly. You're ruining this site and many of us are ANGRY. Not upset.
Rimuhosting - Linux (Root)
deleted - Another reason why I hate this "system" is you have to submit your post twice if you happen to think you made a typo (more than syntactical) in a post. You have to wait for it to appear (hours???) then edit - to resubmit - duplicating the effort.
This system has ALL the downsides across the board and the proclaimed reasoning for the action in the first place seems to be easily remedied by other means. So far we have TWO different "stories" as to why this is happening. NORAD would be proud.
Not to mention if you "moderate" posts, you then as administrators, assume responsibility for the posts. You open yourself up to liable suits. This choice makes absolutely no sense what so ever. I can just see Fetzer and crew just waiting for this to continue - 911blogger would be forced to close down from lawsuits from those disinfo clowns because someone hurt their feelings.
See: http://www.eff.org/bloggers/lg/faq-230.php
QUOTE
Your readers' comments, entries written by guest bloggers, tips sent by email, and information provided to you through an RSS feed would all likely be considered information provided by another content provider. This would mean that you would not be held liable for defamatory statements contained in it. However, if you selected the third-party information yourself, no court has ruled whether this information would be considered "provided" to you. One court has limited Section 230 immunity to situations in which the originator "furnished it to the provider or user under circumstances in which a reasonable person...would conclude that the information was provided for publication on the Internet...."
my two penneth
all the work that the guys who run this site is much appreciated - it is the site I check every day to find out how things are going - when the glorious day comes, this guy dz deserves a medal for setting this site up and I fully understand that he has had to step back - hopefully for a short time
here we go - I think that it is a mistake to preview the posts before letting them appear and that you should go down the route of removing argumentative/hate posts after they have been posted and only if the post adds nothing to the thread - crikey, remember the fuss with Digg when some people were burying stories (ie censorship) - there have been a number of threads here that have resulted in the movement moving forwards that might not have happened were the comments not in real time - also I am interested in hearing everyone's point of view even the 'crazies' because I think that whatever you believe the truth to be there will be a lot of people out there who think that you are crazy at this moment in time - maybe it would be better to realise that the movement moves forward more quickly when we all show each other respect - maybe just ask people to be more respectful when they post here and see what happens
NY Dedicated Server from
NT Dedicated Server from Rimuhosting - linux based servers
http://rimuhosting.com/order/startorder1.jsp?type=65
129$/month with 2000GB Transfer allowance per month (yes that 2 Tera bytes)
+ paypal donate button to offset monthly costs (with a running total for the next month)
Distribute the cost to US the users and this "problem" goes away...
If you cannot handle reading
If you cannot handle reading some negative comments regarding your posts, then I don't know what to tell you , other than you need to grow some thicker skin. Who cares if people post controversial statements....no one needs to cry about it. Ignore it for christ's sake. You are an adult, aren't you? This whole thing is plainly and simply censorship. I hardly ever post on this board (in fact i just recently registered to chime in on a heated debate), but I have been reading the comment section forever and have enjoyed reading the 'heated, lively" debates. And I'm sure that is what people who visit blogger on daily basis enjoy about this site as well. I just don't think you need to be a big crybaby about it. If you are indeed an adult, you should be able to move on with your life and ignore the negatives. Or perhaps you are so full of yourself, this is not a option for you???
For those of you that enjoy the freedom to speak your mind without being censored, I highly recommended the following site:
http://www.wtcdemolition.com/blog
well, if the problem is with shills...
... why not canceling their account every time they post "disinfo" here? Combined with an activation period of a few days this will make them go away. Come on people.... use the gray cells, there's gotta be a better way to get rid of this problem. Comments area are the best people for the users of this site to have real-time interaction with each other. Don't expect everyone to be professional bloggers and write a new blog entry every time they have got new ideas!
Keep up the good fight truthers! we don't need censorship, even if it means more freedom to our enemies.
My opinion...
I just wanted to add my two cents to the situation. I think this is unfortunate that this is what it has come to. By delaying comments, no one is going to post anymore. You are letting the disinfo agents win! This is unacceptable for the 911 Truth Movement. As you can see, everyone is against this new format. I just hope you take that into consideration.
I had responsibility for a
I had responsibility for a web site once, and it was difficult--probably more difficult than people who have never done it realize. Nasty comments get to you much more than if you are just a regular user, and then there are all the emails about "why are you letting so-and-so post those kinds of comments? That's hate speech, etc." It does get to you because who wants to feel like they are promoting hate?
That having been said, as far as I can tell 9/11B did not have a serious problem with "hate speech," whatever that is. Rough speech, heated debate, a bit of "snarkiness" did not seem to be a problem either; rather, it was a sign of a vibrant community trenchantly engaged in new ideas and willing to express them passionately.
I hope that GW, dz, Rep, and whoever else will realize that:
1) 9/11B is a new kind of medium. You are NOT legally or ethically responsible for what users post here. Hot debate is good. That's when we learn the most, both about the ideas in question and about ourselves. It was a crime in Athens to "shrink from debate" because once we do shrink from it, pretty soon there no longer is ANY debate; it all becomes a sort of vanilla goo, like the stuff promoted by the MSM.
2) As for "hate speech": the best rule by far is "meet speech with speech" or simply ignore it. If a POST is a flagrant ethnic or gender slur, just delete the POST (and say why openly). If a user keeps posting stuff like that, first SUSPEND their account (and say why), then, if they keep at it, banning them is appropriate because they are wasting too much time. This should only be done, though, for flagrant ethnic or gender slurs, not an occasional name-calling or pissy reply. Rules against "hate speech" should be clearly defined and posted for all to see. This will help the community understand the limits AND it will help the web masters themselves understand precisely what they mean, while giving them clear guidelines for deletions, suspensions, or banning. If the guidelines are not crystal clear, you will very likely be tempted to delete posts that YOU do not like (it's only human), and in so doing you will be yourselves engaged in a sort of "hate silence," to invent a term. If deletions are not explained to the community, WE will feel the shadow of an unknown hand hovering over everything. WE will not know why something disappears or does not appear. WE will be subject to the worst form of "shrinking from debate" there is--institutional closure.
3) Controversial ideas are GOOD. They are what fuels the passion and energy for 9/11 Truth. "Old" ideas or mistakes are also GOOD. It really does not matter how often someone posts the same discredited idea (NPT, say) because all we have to do is answer them or ignore them. THEY too are part of the community, and what kind of community prohibits its members from speaking? Also, new people get exposed to those arguments and learn how to deal with them. You say "9/11B is an activist site," OK, but ALL activism is also in a large part EDUCATION. Let the ideas flow, let people say what they want, and let the community answer or not as they see fit on that particular day. THAT is a powerful form of activism.
4) If the comments are a bandwidth problem and thus a money problem, ASK for some money from the people who use this site so that more bandwidth can be purchased. If people are too cheap to pay, then do whatever you want because this community does not deserve this forum. I am almost certain, though, that you will get the money, and pronto.
5) Empower 20-50 registered users to do all of the voting. Provide clear guidelines and post them for all to see. Allow a good deal of leeway in how votes are cast. If a comment gets a predetermined number of negative votes for "hate," delete it (and say why). This will save you time and be much fairer to everyone. (Comments should not be deleted simply for being wrong or stupid, or poorly expressed. Hiding that type is enough.) Is it possible to set-up voting categories for this, e.g. for, say, "content," "hate," "clarity," and "relevance"?
6) Thanks for all you guys have done. Please listen to your community, understand it, and support IT. Whether you wanted to or not, you have created something very wonderful. To destroy it now due to the reasons so far given would be a real tragedy. And doing that would surely do irreparable harm to the 9/11 Truth movement. If you are truly motivated by the ethical concern of moderating bad speech, please consider as a balancing (and much larger) factor, the ethics of harming 9/11B as it has come to be. Free speech, controversy, lively and open debate--these are fundamental American principles and the hallmarks of great civilizations throughout history. No exceptions. 9/11 Truth needs activism and struggle precisely because the MSM and American society of this day have largely abandoned these all important virtues. Please, do not throw yet another wet blanket on us.
________________
JFK on secrecy and the press
People outside America exist!
1. If the site needs financial help, I'm sure people won't mind donating.
2. You are writing a blog entry about this, yet asking everyone else to stop talking about this and do other things! Should we not fight for what we think is right?
3. Surely deleting a few "bad" comments is easier than checking every single comment first to see if it's bad or not? Who defines "bad" anyway?
For us outside America, the very fact that we have to wait until you moderators wake up to add any comments is reason enough to go to other - uncensored - sites.
"because more bandwidth is
"because more bandwidth is required when there's higher traffic -- comments make hosting the site more expensive."
GW, I'm sorry man but this is garbage and nonsensical. The community will chip in an PAY with donations for the site to be upgraded and financed, also there needs to be a business approach to running this site so that the place will pay for itself without the need for donations from the community (who are all very passionate about keeping this beacon and key outpost for 9/11 Truth alive and growing!).
I don't mean to sound patronizing or obtuse in anyway here but you guys need to get your act together on this, you need to be courting the mainstream market also not so much the "niche conspiracy theory" type ads or alarmist "buy this or you won't survive" type stuff. Somebody here needs to have a good business head and get to work because not only will a good income from mainstream advertising help to finance the site, it will also be intrinsically linked to it's growth which should begin to spike as soon as the ad revenue really kicks off. As you'll be able to afford further and bigger ads for the site, which will encourage more people to check it out which will in turn increase the attractiveness of the site to advertises and so on in a perpetual spiral of growth.
You need to work out where other ads can go on the site without damaging its aesthetics in anyway, also you might want to speak to guys like the Louder Than Words crew and see if they would like to invest in the site and help to build it. These are the things that you really need to be thinking about and acting on, not the moderation of comments.
Hey my last comment never appeared.
I posted it hours ago. It said moderation is a euphemism for censorship. Is that already too much for 911Blogger?
Must we wait while you sleep?
Me too Jersey Jay.
The comment I made was not posted either and it has been hours.
Is that because the censor is asleep or was my comment censored? Who knows?
The 911 truth movement is a global movement.
Do you want the rest of the world to stop while you sleep?
Think about it. The turn around is already at a halt.
.
Also, I said
He should have confidence in conspirarcy theorists to make up their own minds about what they read.
After being hit with the grave news...
...yesterday and after doing a bit thinking, I propose following measures with dealing with the percieved evils of totally unmoderated postings (which may echo other posters here):
1. To improve the democratic means of moderation by majority. The voting system seems to work fine. If that is not enough, perhaps it's possible to enhance it in some way, such as removing the posts with certain level of negative votes. Or, allowing voting on posters, in addition to messages, whereas a poster with certain level of negative votes would be blocked from posting. Or, use a cumulative level of negative votes over a number of postings per user as a criteria for blocking a given user, etc... These are just some ideas. The main idea is -- to keep the democratic means of moderation by majority. It is definitely much better than moderation by one (or just a few) persons.
2. If the owners of the site still opt for moderation, then it would make sense to use it discriminately against the "sinners" (also determined democratically by voting), not on everybody. It would both save the workload for moderators and allow most posts appear in real time. As many have already said and I have to agree -- the unmoderated nature of the comments WAS one of the best qualities of this site.
so what will be good to think and what will be bad to think ?
are some of the less media heard positions startin you a squirming?
do we need to take loyalty oaths soon , what dark times these
is criticism of some entities good and some taboo?
this is why i left chomsky after reading 14 books
and quoteing him widely , for almost 30 years, ......... he started getting moderated
Why was no mention made
About how much the bandwidth costs and how much you require to run the site properly.
In the "old days" we'd hash it out in the comments section and come up with some solutions, since for every problem there is a solution.
And a BBS/Forum is a great idea, and they can be protected against being shut down..
What's wrong with you people.
There was a COMMUNITY here, and you're killing it, if you haven't already killed it!
____________________________
On the 11th day, of every month.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Q9nRs8cu5Y&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Ftruthaction...
I'm against the new policy
hii.
I haven't checked 9/11 blogger in a week or two and found out about this new policy by checking out myspace, there was a posting there by a disgruntled member of our community who is telling everyone he can to ban this site till this policy is abandoned. I have been really grateful to this site, and have really appreaciated all the organization and bringing people together that it has.
that said, I think this new policy of modding comments is wrong. there are better ways to solve the problems than moderation.
I liked the one suggestion where people can flag folks who they think are being disruptive. the problem is that disruptive people will be flagging righteous members for calling them out ??
anyway, I'm into radical honesty, when possible and the free sharing of ideas, not moderated communication. that's it.
http://newmexico.indymedia.org/news/2007/02/5835.php
Its just censorship, no 2 ways about it
Either turn the comments off altogether or let people post what they will.
If you insist on moderating, then communicate clearly what language / remarks will be deleted.
I just found this site
I just found this site recently and have learned so much. I used to look forward to reading every night but the past few days have been awful! There are hardly any comments and they were key to learning and finding out more! I'm disappointed. I don't understand why this has happened. I am now going to other sites to learn more but this had been my favorite. I even get google alerts on 9/11 and there were multiple from here but no more. So sad. This was a stimulating, mind expanding place to read. Now it is just simple news I can read anywhere, really.
Oh well............................
"They owe us nothing"
I wouldn't quite say that...
They owe us respect for helping their community to thrive the way it has and all they've done here is spit on our community's face. They gave us no warning...they provided no counter-active recourse for us to appeal their decision, and now they are largely invisible to any real debate. Other than a couple half-hearted attempts by Reprehensor, they've not even had the courtesy to reply to our concerns.
On top of all that, they've provided several mutually exclusive reasons (read: excuses) for their surprise decision to censor the website. This is completely unacceptable and their silence is deafening.
This sounds vaguely familiar.
Oh yeah. I thought I had heard something like this before:
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.
- (from) The Declaration of Independence
--
"But truthfully, I don't really know. We've had trouble getting a handle on Building No. 7."
~~ Dr. Shyam Sunder - Acting Director Building and Fire Research Laboratory (NIST)
Agree with the antis- this is a bad move
This is not a good thing at all. One of the strengths of 9/11 Blogger over other sites was that people could just comment, it made for a very lively and dynamic community that demonstrated people's sincerity and passion about the issue.
I can't honestly say that my reading of any article here has ever been disrupted by trolls, infighting or 'hate speech', that was what the comments moderation was for I thought, i,e like slashdot, those posts get modded down but not deleted if people want to continue with them.
To be honest it sounds like there could be a little bit of a disconnect between the owners of 911blogger and what the site means to the activist community.
Just my 2c.
911 'don't bother blogging'
911 'don't bother blogging' blogger is what it now should be.
I was thinking 911Censor.com
I was thinking 911Censor.com
What A Disappointment!
Wow. I never thought I would read such ridiculous posts from GW or Rep. You two work so hard and have contributed some of the greatest posts on the site!
It begs the question: Is someone holding a gun to your heads as you type, or what? It's hard for me to believe that such intelligent guys could honestly expect us to take these completely inadequate arguments for censorship seriously. You guys seem(ed) smarter than this.
Please just admit the mistake and give us back the website we love. No hard feelings!
Sounds like the site has been sold.
I think the best thing poeple could do is not visit the site, in protest, and wait for the e-mail that tells you they decided to change it back. If no e-mail comes then we'll know they wanted to run it into the ground.
To those who believe this is censorship
Did you read the whole thing through? It says this test is to be done for a month, then it will be evaluated. If it is deemed not working and serving as a detriment to truthspeak, then it will not have served it's purpose. Just give it a chance, see what happens.
The master class has always declared the wars; the subject class has always fought the battles.