Welcome back!
On 4/10/07, Josh Wolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hey everyone, this is my first post after being released! It feels good
> to return to the land of message groups...
>
> I just read Tim O'Reilly's proposed draft (I haven't examined its
> current state on wikia yet), and I'm quite displeased with this code.
> For one thing, it's focal point seems to be on comments and not original
> content. It seems a bit puzzling to me that I can't sign onto this code
> *and* allow anonymous comments. Is this about creating a set of
> principles that the blogger adheres to, or is this about creating a set
> of principles for the commenter in order to establish a "safe" place for
> them to engage in an open dialogue.
>
> From my vantage point this code seems less about the blogger and more
> about the commenters and I feel that merging the two of these together
> in this way is deceptive and tactically unsound.
>
> Josh
>
>
> Steve Watkins wrote:
> >
> > The thing is that most of the draconian elements to their proposals,
> > is already technically covered by law in many parts of the world. Its
> > just a question of there being any resources to follow up every
> > potential violation. Imagine how many libelous comments have been made
> > on the net, compared to how many every go anywhere near a court.
> >
> > As for the rest of it, I presume that most states rely on society,
> > peer pressure, accepted norms, to provide some control over how civil
> > people are to eachother. Its not going to be regulated against very
> > often. Where the law does apply it often drags way behind the society
> > the law serves, eg the stand up comedians & rock stars who had to
> > endure lewd conduct type charges in decades past. But a culture thats
> > learnt to emulate such behaviour, teenagers who cant get enough of it,
> > and cant get enough of the internet, along with similar stuff from
> > many adults out there, makes it hard to see how the sheer volume of
> > this stuff could be policed by the state or volunteers on the net.
> >
> > All I know is that this code isnt going to intimidate any
> > intimidators. Intimidation is a powerful tool that gets people to
> > shutup far more effectively than this code will, and that is a tragedy
> > but a human reality. There are many ironies in this field, such as the
> > potential intimidation w would face if lots of people in the
> > blogosphere attempted to deeply explore intimidation and coercion and
> > how humans use them, and how the internet is merely a new light shon
> > onto this sick underbelly of human 'civilisation', rather than a new
> > and shocking thing.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > Steve Elbows
> >
> > --- In videoblogging@yahoogroups.com
> > <mailto:videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, "Charles Iliya Krempeaux"
>
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> > > I have a really bad feeling about all this.
> > >
> > > I know people have good intentions with all this. But alot of things
> > > start out that way.
> > >
> > > Hopefully this "code" stay voluntary. (And people aren't forced to
> > obey it.)
> > >
> > >
> > > See ya
> > >
> > > On 4/10/07, WWWhatsup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/04/draft_bloggers_1.html
> > <http://radar.oreilly.com/archives/2007/04/draft_bloggers_1.html>
> > > >
> > > > 04.08.07
> > > > Tim O'Reilly
> > > >
> > > > Tim O'Reilly
> > > > Draft Blogger's Code of Conduct
> > > >
> > > > When I wrote my Call for a Blogging Code of Conduct last week, I
> > suggested some
> > > > ideas of what such a code might contain, but didn't actually put
> > forth a draft that
> > > > people could subscribe to. We're not quite there yet, but we have
> > a plan.
> > > >
> > > > We've drafted a code of conduct that will eventually be posted on
> > bloggingcode.org,
> > > > and created a badge that sites can display if they want to link to
> > that code of conduct.
> > > > Civility Enforced Badge
> > > >
> > > > But because we want a period of review, we don't want to finalize
> > that code yet. I've
> > > > put a draft below (and you'll see it's based closely on the
> > BlogHer Community
> > > > Guidelines that I linked to last week.) But we're also working
> > with wikia to put the
> > > > draft through a wiki-based review process on blogging.wikia.com.
> > (There's an easy
> > > > to remember shortcut link at http://blogging.wikia.com/wiki/BCC
> > <http://blogging.wikia.com/wiki/BCC>)
> > Please feel free to
> > > > join in and edit the wiki as well as encouraging others to do so.
> > We'll post the final
> > > > version on bloggingcode.org, along with the html to display the
> > badge and link to the
> > > > code.
> > > >
> > > > (While wikis are great for developing the code, we don't want it
> > to be a moving target
> > > > once people have signed up for it.)
> > > >
> > > > Here's the first draft:
> > > >
> > > > We celebrate the blogosphere because it embraces frank and open
> > conversation. But frankness does not have to mean lack of civility. We
> > present this Blogger Code of Conduct in hopes that it helps create a
> > culture that encourages both personal expression and constructive
> > conversation.
> > > >
> > > > 1. We take responsibility for our own words and for the comments
> > we allow on our blog.
> > > >
> > > > We are committed to the "Civility Enforced" standard: we will not
> > post unacceptable content, and we'll delete comments that contain it.
> > > >
> > > > We define unacceptable content as anything included or linked to
> > that:
> > > > - is being used to abuse, harass, stalk, or threaten others
> > > > - is libelous, knowingly false, ad-hominem, or misrepresents
> > another person,
> > > > - infringes upon a copyright or trademark
> > > > - violates an obligation of confidentiality
> > > > - violates the privacy of others
> > > >
> > > > We define and determine what is "unacceptable content" on a
> > case-by-case basis, and our definitions are not limited to this list.
> > If we delete a comment or link, we will say so and explain why. [We
> > reserve the right to change these standards at any time with no notice.]
> > > >
> > > > 2. We won't say anything online that we wouldn't say in person.
> > > >
> > > > 3. We connect privately before we respond publicly.
> > > >
> > > > When we encounter conflicts and misrepresentation in the
> > blogosphere, we make every
> > > > effort to talk privately and directly to the person(s)
> > involved--or find an intermediary who
> > > > can do so--before we publish any posts or comments about the issue.
> > > >
> > > > 4. When we believe someone is unfairly attacking another, we take
> > action.
> > > >
> > > > When someone who is publishing comments or blog postings that are
> > offensive, we'll
> > > > tell them so (privately, if possible--see above) and ask them to
> > publicly make amends.
> > > > If those published comments could be construed as a threat,
> > and the perpetrator
> > > > doesn't withdraw them and apologize, we will cooperate with law
> > enforcement to protect
> > > > the target of the threat.
> > > >
> > > > 5. We do not allow anonymous comments.
> > > >
> > > > We require commenters to supply a valid email address before they
> > can post, though
> > > > we allow commenters to identify themselves with an alias, rather
> > than their real name.
> > > >
> > > > 6. We ignore the trolls.
> > > >
> > > > We prefer not to respond to nasty comments about us or our blog,
> > as long as they
> > > > don't veer into abuse or libel. We believe that feeding the trolls
> > only encourages
> > > > them--"Never wrestle with a pig. You both get dirty, but the pig
> > likes it." Ignoring public
> > > > attacks is often the best way to contain them.
> > > >
> > > > anythinggoes2.jpg We also decided we needed an "anything goes"
> > badge for sites that
> > > > want to warn possible commenters that they are entering a
> > free-for-all zone. The text to
> > > > accompany that badge might go something like this:
> > > >
> > > > This is an open, uncensored forum. We are not responsible for the
> > comments of any
> > > > poster, and when discussions get heated, crude language, insults
> > and other "off color"
> > > > comments may be encountered. Participate in this site at your own
> > risk.
> > > >
> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > > WWWhatsup NYC
> > > > http://pinstand.com <http://pinstand.com> - http://punkcast.com
> > <http://punkcast.com>
> > > > ----------------------------------------------------------
--
Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.
charles @ reptile.ca
supercanadian @ gmail.com
developer weblog: http://ChangeLog.ca/
___________________________________________________________________________
Make Television http://maketelevision.com/
___________________________________________________________________________
Cars, Motorcycles, Trucks, and Racing... http://tirebiterz.com/
