I realize that sites tend to attract their own certain type of reader. However it makes me sick when a site owner purports to have an open community, but behind the scenes curtails comments that do not agree with their own agenda and opinions.
Conflicted and doubtful would describe how I feel about the following idea (and I think I've seen something similar before): It might be a useful public benefit if there were a service respectable sites could subscribe to that categorizes and logs moderation of comments.
Considering all the commenting that goes on, this would require a massive store that would also have to be open for public review (adults only for the comment content section, obviously).
Actually a site full of moderated comments might very well be an entertainment draw for some people (you know the type... yeah me too sometimes).
Obviously there would be concerns about slander/etc. and information on the site would have to be tagged as "most likely complete bullshit" if it could even avoid being sued out of existence in its first few minutes of existence.
There has been a massive amount of work (and plenty of Rhodes Scholar brains) done on context> search matching by the major search engines for some time. With some more direction, this type of logic could be applied even to political discourse (topic context negative, topic context positive, agree/disagree etc.) In theory, a lot of the moderated comments could be automatically categorized.
With a service like this in place, people could get a picture of a sites community moderation, e.g.: "Suspected Bias - ".
I don't know. Probably not worth it at all... but crap like this article and comments on Mediabistro makes me worry for the easily convinced.
The day after ACTA is forced down our throats, please check Amazon for a great deal on my second-hand Blu-Ray, DVD and console titles. The torrents will be available after midnight. (Lord of the Rings theatrical will be first -- yes I AM a fool and a sucker.)
The Pirate Party's charter is the future of the entertainment industry, and they have no one to blame but themselves.
I think these types of stories (as Mike points out indirectly, the story itself being the only real threat to public health/safety) are just testbeds used and directed by politicos to determine what the next "talking point" will be in the televised political "conversation".
Makes me wonder what the real (invisible in the mass media) political conversation is about to be..,
Every untold story of consequence has its O.J. Simpson counterpart.
Let the market decide if the FDA label is necessary on all products
Agreed. I seriously doubt whether the remedies we (the regular people) have for malfeasance by drug manufacturers would even be affected one bit. Whether the drug is FDA approved or not is irrelevant when someone is actually injured or killed by negligent drug design or manufacturing.
People make the argument that you *need testing and validation of drugs, and I tend to agree. Where I tend to disagree is when it is asserted that it must be through government action alone that people can be protected.
I feel drug testing would be better off in the hands of a not-for-profit, democratically monitored (as in, without the intervention of a central governmental power) entity run by rotating leadership drawn from private, independent medical professionals. Its charter, guidance and procedures completely "open-source".
I have to admit I'm no fan of the "parent" Yahoo senior management, but I still fail to see how $8B / year should be considered "struggling". Yahoo is dumping their one profitable division to a company that never caught up.
Investors are idiots who think that there should only be a #1.
I don't think anything like "fair use" would amount to shit in a system of ban-by-accusation like in the DEB. Who will establish fair use when the judicial system is bypassed?
He should be perma-banned without deliberations, right after they shuttle DEB out of hell.
However, this will no longer be an issue once the government comes in and fixes everything. In the post PRO-IP, post ACTA Web 3.0, each website you use will require its own discreet HDMI cable. And that's the only reason why iPad, in its current form, will fail.
I'm confused. Is Microsoft contending that they have a copyright on classified documents? If there is any malfeasance at all, wouldn't this be more akin to theft of trade secrets?
I've got suspicions that this point has been hashed out many times on TD, but...
We need an apology from Earth, or God, or whoever is responsible for creating the air that bullies and pervs use to fuel and support their nefarious activities.
So you are not tempted to upload videos that offend human dignity.
... or provide a free video hosting service,
or be an executive of a company that does anything with content,
or create content not pre-approved by Vatican dogmatists
or speak your mind
or have any hope of escaping tyranny in the 3rd millenium
Another adroit observation IMO. It is most annoying that our major media players incessantly define our system as being "Free Market", diluting the original context and worthy ideal into representing the twisted, mutated remains of a system of mercantilism.
The obsolete network of record labels, and their baffling level of access to legislative power (and the trampling of individual rights this cronyism is bringing about) pretty well illustrates the whole farce.
On the post: Misguided Outrage At NY Times' Ethicist Over Ethics Of Downloading A Book
Re: So many excuses for theft
On the post: Misguided Outrage At NY Times' Ethicist Over Ethics Of Downloading A Book
Moderation Protocol
Conflicted and doubtful would describe how I feel about the following idea (and I think I've seen something similar before): It might be a useful public benefit if there were a service respectable sites could subscribe to that categorizes and logs moderation of comments.
Considering all the commenting that goes on, this would require a massive store that would also have to be open for public review (adults only for the comment content section, obviously).
Actually a site full of moderated comments might very well be an entertainment draw for some people (you know the type... yeah me too sometimes).
Obviously there would be concerns about slander/etc. and information on the site would have to be tagged as "most likely complete bullshit" if it could even avoid being sued out of existence in its first few minutes of existence.
There has been a massive amount of work (and plenty of Rhodes Scholar brains) done on context> search matching by the major search engines for some time. With some more direction, this type of logic could be applied even to political discourse (topic context negative, topic context positive, agree/disagree etc.) In theory, a lot of the moderated comments could be automatically categorized.
With a service like this in place, people could get a picture of a sites community moderation, e.g.: "Suspected Bias - ".
I don't know. Probably not worth it at all... but crap like this article and comments on Mediabistro makes me worry for the easily convinced.
On the post: UK ISP Says It Will Not Follow Digital Economy Bill Rules
Re: pay for your entertainment
The Pirate Party's charter is the future of the entertainment industry, and they have no one to blame but themselves.
On the post: Now Wi-Lan Sues Everyone Over Bluetooth Patents
Re: Re:
Do you have another fine example of how bad Wikipedia articles can be?
On the post: Verizon CEO In A State Of Denial: Pretends Broadband Is Great... But Also Says He Wants To 'Throttle' Heavy Users
On the post: CNN Dusts Off Ancient Moral Panic Over Out Of Print Game That Was Banned A While Back
Yellow Journalism
Makes me wonder what the real (invisible in the mass media) political conversation is about to be..,
Every untold story of consequence has its O.J. Simpson counterpart.
On the post: Digital Economy Bill: Proposed By The Unelected, Debated By The Ignorant, Voted On By The Absent
Re: Amusing and sad
Somehow I feel I've seen that show before. I can't tell one room full of vacuous tools from the next.
On the post: How Pfizer And The US Gov't Set Up A Fake Subsidiary To Take The Brunt Of Lawsuit Over Falsely Marketed Drugs
Re: Cronyism
Agreed. I seriously doubt whether the remedies we (the regular people) have for malfeasance by drug manufacturers would even be affected one bit. Whether the drug is FDA approved or not is irrelevant when someone is actually injured or killed by negligent drug design or manufacturing.
People make the argument that you *need testing and validation of drugs, and I tend to agree. Where I tend to disagree is when it is asserted that it must be through government action alone that people can be protected.
I feel drug testing would be better off in the hands of a not-for-profit, democratically monitored (as in, without the intervention of a central governmental power) entity run by rotating leadership drawn from private, independent medical professionals. Its charter, guidance and procedures completely "open-source".
On the post: Rupert Murdoch Doesn't Recognize That There's Competition Online
Re: Please stop
On the post: And The Next Battle Is Apple vs. Google... As Microsoft/Yahoo Fade Off Into The Sunset?
Re: Re:
One acronym: OS7 (at least the first several variants)
On the post: And The Next Battle Is Apple vs. Google... As Microsoft/Yahoo Fade Off Into The Sunset?
Apropos tangent
Investors are idiots who think that there should only be a #1.
On the post: Peter Mandelson Accepts Responsibility For Copyright Infringing Political Poster?
What Case?
He should be perma-banned without deliberations, right after they shuttle DEB out of hell.
On the post: Are Publishers Putting Too Much Stock In The iPad, Or Are They Just Doing It Wrong?
Re:
However, this will no longer be an issue once the government comes in and fixes everything. In the post PRO-IP, post ACTA Web 3.0, each website you use will require its own discreet HDMI cable. And that's the only reason why iPad, in its current form, will fail.
:D
On the post: RIAA Takes The Cake: Equates File Sharing To Children's Fairy Tale
Warning
Avert your eyes children, it may change form!
On the post: Microsoft Uses DMCA To Force Cryptome Offline
Huh? v2
On the post: Internet Addiction Might Actually Get Recognized By The Official Book Of Mental Disorders?
IANA(non)
On the post: Incredible: Google Execs Found Guilty Because Of YouTube Video; Given Six Month Suspended Sentences
Re: Re:
We need an apology from Earth, or God, or whoever is responsible for creating the air that bullies and pervs use to fuel and support their nefarious activities.
On the post: Confused Musician Threatens Google, Blog Because Her Works Are Found Elsewhere On The Internet
Re: Re: Except...
Damn Pierates!
On the post: Incredible: Google Execs Found Guilty Because Of YouTube Video; Given Six Month Suspended Sentences
Re: Re: Idiots of all sizes
... or provide a free video hosting service,
or be an executive of a company that does anything with content,
or create content not pre-approved by Vatican dogmatists
or speak your mind
or have any hope of escaping tyranny in the 3rd millenium
On the post: SellaBand Bankruptcy Shows Poor Execution; Not A Condemnation Of Fan Funding
Re: Failure is always an option
That about sums it up right there.
Another adroit observation IMO. It is most annoying that our major media players incessantly define our system as being "Free Market", diluting the original context and worthy ideal into representing the twisted, mutated remains of a system of mercantilism.
The obsolete network of record labels, and their baffling level of access to legislative power (and the trampling of individual rights this cronyism is bringing about) pretty well illustrates the whole farce.
Next >>