Home › Forums › Archives › Community Center › Forum Support › Bug Reports › Squashed Bugs › Staff Room › Deleting posts question
- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 10 months ago by Philip.
-
AuthorPosts
-
June 18, 2007 at 2:05 pm #27210PolarBearNPRParticipant
So today I deleted my first and second posts. Scantily clad (nearly nude) girls are, in my never to be humble opinion, inappropriate content for the public site. Also, it was a bit spammy, saying to go to several sites (links mentioned) for more webcam stuff like this.
So – here’s the question . . . is there a policy, or do we just use our judgement to get rid of stuff that is offensive to someone coming here for help with a webcam issue on Yahoo?
I know we have had some silliness going on, but these particular posts were significantly over those lines. Innuendo is one thing, naked butts, etc. are another.
June 18, 2007 at 6:10 pm #162322DavidParticipantI think it’s always been a judgment call, thats such a hard thing to setup a policy on. Anything you wouldn’t want your mom, er, I guess or son in your case ;P to read, probably shouldn’t be on here. Any links to sites containing nudity should be removed, (though its impossible to police everything) any image links that are inappropriate… it really just comes down to a judgment call. If in doubt, just check with someone else though, or move it to review.
June 18, 2007 at 7:42 pm #162325PolarBearNPRParticipantThanks, David. The posts were definitely not for a public forum like this – and the guidelines you mentioned are always good to keep in mind – in any venue. Usually I do check with Ryan, but in this case . . . no . . . I didn’t want him to see it for review.
Hehe, now everyone’s dying to see it . . . sorry boys . . . it’s nothing new, but nothing we want posted (and sanctioned) here, either.
June 19, 2007 at 9:14 am #162326PhilipModeratorI’ve just deleted a post where this guy was trying to sell mobile phones at attractive prices. BBB is not eBay!
June 21, 2007 at 4:00 am #162323MrOatsMemberHeather wrote:Thanks, David.I thank you also. I’m not used to post deletion…
Now I know what to do. 🙂
June 21, 2007 at 4:34 am #162321Jeff HesterKeymasterTo expand on Dave’s reply, it’s impossible and impractical to police every outbound link–not to mention that a page that might be fine one week could change to not-fine the next.
The obvious offenders are usually also spammy in nature. “Check out my cam…” and their ilk. The gray area comes when providing legitimate, contextual links to relevant material that may either contain stuff that we wouldn’t allow here (a lot of swearing or nudity) or the site might have some of that elsewhere.
I ran across a good example of this today on GigaOm. Great site for info on the latest Web 2.0 startups. At the end of a story about the iPhone, he linked to this story on Valleywag (a gossip blog run by Gawker Media–Nick Denton’s company) which in turn reposted a personal ad that appeared on Craigslist.
Now all three of those sites (GigaOm, Valleywag and Craigslist) are reputable, good sites that I use and even recommend. The content is certainly the sort we would not allow directly on BigBlueBall (or at least, we haven’t to date!). But would we allow a link to it? It’s not so easy.
Linking to any of those three site’s home page would certainly be fine. Linking to the article on GigaOm is harmless enough (most people would miss the other link anyway). I would argue that even a link, in context, to the Valleywag article would be ok (maybe in the context of weird things seen on the net?).
What I probably would delete is someone (like the freaky rich guy) posting directly on BBB, or even posting a direct link saying something like “hey, I’m looking for a girlfriend, read my post on Craigslist here.” That would be creepy, spammy and outside the purpose of either 1) addressing IM/communication issues or 2) building community. If it doesn’t fall into one of those two categories, it really doesn’t belong.
I know that I didn’t allow my kids to swear, etc. but they certainly were exposed to it. While they needn’t be exposed to it here at BigBlueBall, it’s likely that many of the outbound links will take them to places where they’ll be exposed to that (and worse). There’s simply no way for us to police the net, nor judge every outbound link.
Bottom line? Apply the first test — does this link support the goals of the site? If it passes that, it will probably be ok.
Use common sense, and if in doubt, soft-delete the post and ask about it here.
June 21, 2007 at 11:35 am #162324PolarBearNPRParticipantThus sayeth the . . . ummm . . . big guy.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.