thelinuxlink.net

The reason both boards have a lack of comments is that both moderate their posters. If something is said that goes against the hosts it gets deleted.

So if the negative gets deleted, why should anyone bother posting good or bad if we don't know that the post will be there in the morning?

It's a conspiracy!

I don't know why people expect others to basically pay—in bandwidth and resources—for others to vent about them. It's their forum, they choose to run it how they see fit. Nothing stops you from starting your own forum and using a more laissez-faire approach.

Chuck you've made your opinion abundantly clear; and while I agree with your sentiment sometimes mistakes are made and if you look deeper you may find that you could forgive us for a simple err on judgement Maybe you could search, your heart, and discover that we are trying to rebuild our trust with each member of our community, even you.

And here I thought this was a pretty good little community. I'm still on last weeks show (fantastic by the way, thought about halfway through he was basically interviewing you guys) so I don't know what Chuck is referring to, TBH. This is actually the only podcast listener community forum I post on at all, though.

I think it's a nice community as well. I post regularly to two forums, one with my high school friends and this one. It's active, helpful, and lively. Same goes for the IRC. I do believe forums are best when they're moderated. We know according to Godwin's Law that it's best to stop some threads before they carry on too long, unless you just happen to like Nazi analogies and people becoming uncivil.

dann wrote:Chuck you've made your opinion abundantly clear; and while I agree with your sentiment sometimes mistakes are made and if you look deeper you may find that you could forgive us for a simple err on judgement Maybe you could search, your heart, and discover that we are trying to rebuild our trust with each member of our community, even you.

The thing is, you brought up the subject on your show. I provided one possible reason that you're not getting the feedback that you want. I'm sorry that you don't like that reason, but it is what it is.

As far as forgiveness goes, it does not matter at the end of the day if I give it or not. These are your forums. My contention is that we as listeners and contributors need to know what the choices are. From what I have seen I have to assume that if it's an opinion that goes against the hosts, it has a chance of being deleted.

Knowing that, I'm less inclined to contribute as I really don't want to waste my time. You saying that you're trying to rebuild the trust is the first I've heard of this. This situation is one that will take time to rectify. Material was deleted. If we don't see the original post and it gets deleted, how can we know what happened? I know what happened previously because I was in the discussion.

Vogateer wrote:I don't know why people expect others to basically pay—in bandwidth and resources—for others to vent about them. It's their forum, they choose to run it how they see fit. Nothing stops you from starting your own forum and using a more laissez-faire approach.

They do a show. They provide a forum for discussing that show. If the policy is to delete messages they don't agree with, I'd at least like that stated up front so I don't waste my and everyone else's time.

Vogateer wrote:We know according to Godwin's Law that it's best to stop some threads before they carry on too long, unless you just happen to like Nazi analogies and people becoming uncivil.

Not having seen the end of the previous debate before it was deleted, I don't know if someone else brought in Nazi's or not. There is a difference in stopping a thread by locking it and deleting the discussion as if it never took place.

It seems an unfair characterization to say that they simply delete messages "they don't agree with." There have been numerous discussions where both sides of either argument have had plenty to say, and I've only seen one discussion deleted, and that was not simply because the hosts "didn't agree with" what was being said, but because—to the best of my knowledge—the thread had more to do with personal comments than anything else, and was not serving any useful purpose to the show or linux community.

Everyone has been very free here to discuss their personal views on the GPL, the FSF, Stallman, Linux, VIM vs. Emacs, KDE vs. Gnome, and a whole host of other topics that normally ignite flames and vehement attacks on other boards and lists, but tend to not get out of hand here. You don't have to look hard to find these threads, either. If you really feel like you're wasting your time here because one thread was deleted—and it was not a thread of any great idealogical or technical importance I will add—then I think you're taking that one thread and its deletion far too seriously. You're free to disagree with their actions, but I believe it an injustice to the tech show and its moderators to somehow suggest their motives were unpure or malicious in any way by labeling it as censorship and that they're merely "deleting messages they don't agree with" rather than what it really was, which was a moderation choice to delete a thread that was far more emotional than helpful.

Vogateer wrote:It seems an unfair characterization to say that they simply delete messages "they don't agree with." There have been numerous discussions where both sides of either argument have had plenty to say, and I've only seen one discussion deleted.....

Couldn't of said better myself. I totally agree with your sentiments. People are free to say anything they want. If the thread starts going in circles with no end in sight we might simply close it down. End of story,

"If the thread starts going in circles with no end in sight we might simply close it down. End of story,"


IMO this is a repeat of a previous thread. Shut it down just kidding

Vogateer wrote:It seems an unfair characterization to say that they simply delete messages "they don't agree with." There have been numerous discussions where both sides of either argument have had plenty to say, and I've only seen one discussion deleted, and that was not simply because the hosts "didn't agree with" what was being said, but because—to the best of my knowledge—the thread had more to do with personal comments than anything else, and was not serving any useful purpose to the show or linux community.

Everyone has been very free here to discuss their personal views on the GPL, the FSF, Stallman, Linux, VIM vs. Emacs, KDE vs. Gnome, and a whole host of other topics that normally ignite flames and vehement attacks on other boards and lists, but tend to not get out of hand here. You don't have to look hard to find these threads, either. If you really feel like you're wasting your time here because one thread was deleted—and it was not a thread of any great idealogical or technical importance I will add—then I think you're taking that one thread and its deletion far too seriously. You're free to disagree with their actions, but I believe it an injustice to the tech show and its moderators to somehow suggest their motives were unpure or malicious in any way by labeling it as censorship and that they're merely "deleting messages they don't agree with" rather than what it really was, which was a moderation choice to delete a thread that was far more emotional than helpful.

Yeah, you really don't have to dig deep! You just need to do a search on my postings alone and you'll find several threads that spells "FLAMEWAR"

shopRatt wrote:"If the thread starts going in circles with no end in sight we might simply close it down. End of story,"


IMO this is a repeat of a previous thread. Shut it down just kidding

OK, I think you've had just enough cheese for tonight your royal cheesyness!

Snarkout wrote: This is actually the only podcast listener community forum I post on at all, though.

Me too. Then again, the only real passion I have (computerwise that is) is Linux. Macs are nice and all, but Linux is more and better in most cases.

As for the hubbub, I am clueless. I havent listened to a podcast for about 2 months now. I am behind on all 30 some of my casts, and its gonna be a few more weeks before I start catching up Why? New position I am getting trained in at my regular job. With a trainer right there, now 8hrs a day, 40hrs a week of casts disappear practically.

Vogateer wrote:There have been numerous discussions where both sides of either argument have had plenty to say, and I've only seen one discussion deleted, and that was not simply because the hosts "didn't agree with" what was being said, but because—to the best of my knowledge—the thread had more to do with personal comments than anything else, and was not serving any useful purpose to the show or linux community.

If you really feel like you're wasting your time here because one thread was deleted—and it was not a thread of any great idealogical or technical importance I will add—then I think you're taking that one thread and its deletion far too seriously. You're free to disagree with their actions, but I believe it an injustice to the tech show and its moderators to somehow suggest their motives were unpure or malicious in any way by labeling it as censorship and that they're merely "deleting messages they don't agree with" rather than what it really was, which was a moderation choice to delete a thread that was far more emotional than helpful.

Yet if I could link to the thread I could point out to you that, on my part, I was taking issue with Linc. To open that thread he started out on a rant about listeners emailing comments to him. Then in the second paragraph he said something to the effect of 'by the way, I maintain the right to publish anything sent to me privatly'. Then the very next line was someone's name and email address followed by that person's email message. Then a closing paragraph from Linc berating that person for taking issue with him.

So I posted that I thought it was wrong of Linc to post the name, email, and message of a private email. And at the very least the name and email address should be removed. Linc then started into me. We were going back and forth on the decency and appropriateness of what had happened. Linc's perspective then became that since it was his show no one had the right to comment on his opinions. He also suggested that the emailer may have been contacted and given permission for the publishing of his info. Others got involved. For my part I feel I stayed on topic and polite about what was going on, even if Linc didn't agree with that view.

Well the next morning I got a response from the person saying that he was unaware of the thread and his info being published. He gave me permission to publish the entire email thead they had passed back and forth that day with the caveat that I remove both his and Linc's address as he was unaware if it was published or not. So I came back here the next morning to say that I had been in contact with the person and his views, omiting the emails for both of their benefits, but could not find the thread.

So from my perspective, Linc arbitrarily deciding to post private information about a listener is an important idealogical point to call the host of the show out on. Perhaps you feel differently, and if it was your personal info posted on the boards you'd be okay with that, and it's fine.

However I've yet to see any statements by the hosts as to what the policy is now on handling private information. Do the hosts maintain the statement that emails sent to them are subject to publishing in a public manner at their whim? If we disagree with what the hosts say on the show or post here, are we allowed to discuss those issues without worry about it being deleted? What about the rest of any private information that is provided to the hosts?

chuck wrote:Yet if I could link to the thread I could point out to you that, on my part, I was taking issue with Linc. To open that thread he started out on a rant about listeners emailing comments to him. Then in the second paragraph he said something to the effect of 'by the way, I maintain the right to publish anything sent to me privatly'. Then the very next line was someone's name and email address followed by that person's email message. Then a closing paragraph from Linc berating that person for taking issue with him.

You mean this thread?:
https://www.thelinuxlink.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1881

It was moved back quite some time ago. No one else seemed to notice.