Sunday, December 31, 2006
Dissed
A comment on the Internal UK Indymedia listserver says an article has been hidden:
All it said was:
Disinfo? Disruptive? Moi?
http://indymediawatch.blogspot.com/ back up and open (358655)- disinfo, disruptive (using FTP's name and email!)
All it said was:
Indymedia Watch back up and running.I can see the disinformation there...
Are you interested in making Indymedia what it was supposed to be?
Would you like to see a consistent policy in the Hiding and Removal of posts and comments ?
Would you like the Indymedia moderstors to be open in their application of the Editorial Guidelines ?
Indymedia Watch blog is the place for you.
Roy Bard
Comments:
<< Home
Attributing an article to someone who never wrote it, and who doesn't hold the views it offers is indeed disinformation.
It also breaches the advertising guideline.
So even if it was signed by Raul/ex IMCer/UKIMC monitoring team/ Indymedia GB or any of the other handles used by that disinformationist it would still have been hidden
It also breaches the advertising guideline.
So even if it was signed by Raul/ex IMCer/UKIMC monitoring team/ Indymedia GB or any of the other handles used by that disinformationist it would still have been hidden
Attributing the article to someone who never wrote it is indeed disinformation.
What are you talking about?
In any case, given the anonymous nature of the medium, it seeks a rather tenuous point. How do we know for example that you are actually "Sam Wilson" - or even the person who posts here under that handle?
As for It also breaches the advertising guideline. I fail to see your point. There is no shortage of stories containing references to other sites, which remain on the newswire. It seems a link here was a bit too 'hot to handle' and your excuse just a little bit too convenient.
Sorry Sam, you are not fooling anybody other than yourself.
What are you talking about?
In any case, given the anonymous nature of the medium, it seeks a rather tenuous point. How do we know for example that you are actually "Sam Wilson" - or even the person who posts here under that handle?
As for It also breaches the advertising guideline. I fail to see your point. There is no shortage of stories containing references to other sites, which remain on the newswire. It seems a link here was a bit too 'hot to handle' and your excuse just a little bit too convenient.
Sorry Sam, you are not fooling anybody other than yourself.
You sir are a hypocrite - perhaps you've forgotten that you deleted posts falsely made under your handle?
Its fine to signpost another site as part of a news article. Indy Media watch is not news, its a sick joke.
Happy New yeaqr
Its fine to signpost another site as part of a news article. Indy Media watch is not news, its a sick joke.
Happy New yeaqr
You sir are a hypocrite - perhaps you've forgotten deleting comments posted under your handle by someone else.
A link to another site contained in a news story is fine - Indy media watch is not news - its a sick joke.
Happy New Year!
A link to another site contained in a news story is fine - Indy media watch is not news - its a sick joke.
Happy New Year!
Oh Gee Sam, you got me yet again, with your superior intellect.
I feel so defeated and crushed, it just hurts.
Oh the humiliation!
I feel so defeated and crushed, it just hurts.
Oh the humiliation!
A link to another site contained in a news story is fine - Indy media watch is not news - its a sick joke.
And yet you can't tear yourself away can you?
Nobody here would miss you.
Post a Comment
And yet you can't tear yourself away can you?
Nobody here would miss you.
<< Home
