Karl`s PC Help Forums Last active: Never
Not logged in [Login ]
Go To Bottom

In memory of Karl Davis, founder of this board, who made his final journey 12th June 2007

Post Reply
Who Can Post? All users can post new topics and all users can reply.
Username   Need to register?
Password:   Forgot password?
Subject: (optional)
Icon: [*]
Formatting Mode:
Normal
Advanced
Help

Insert Bold text Insert Italicised text Insert Underlined text Insert Centered text Insert a Hyperlink Insert E-mail Hyperlink Insert an Image Insert Code Formatted text Insert Quoted text Insert List
Message:
HTML is Off
Smilies are On
BB Code is On
[img] Code is On
:) :( :D ;)
:cool: :o shocked_yellow :P
confused2 smokin: waveysmiley waggyfinger
brshteeth nananana lips_sealed kewl_glasses
Show All Smilies

Disable Smilies?
Use signature?
Turn BBCode off?
Receive email on reply?
The file size of the attachment must be under 200K.
Do not preview if you have attached an image.
Attachment:
    

Topic Review
Redwolf5150

[*] posted on 26-12-2007 at 23:24
I had some comments on some of my youtube videos that I deleted.

One video was last year's highlight slideshow of the girl's volleyball team. A couple creepy, borderline pedofilic comments hit the waste bucket.

On one of my funeral for a soldier videos, someone made a crude, antiwar remark that was over the top, IMHO. ESPECIALLY since the soldier's widow linked the video to her myspace profile!

So it, too, hit the trash.

Other than that, I'm pretty lenient on allowing bad remarks about my work. If you are going to make art and put it out in public, you have to expect comments. -- good AND bad.

kewl_glasses
Badgergirl

[*] posted on 22-12-2007 at 20:10
Quote:
Originally posted by Dreamweaver
Quote:
Originally posted by Badgergirl
I've just been viewing a youtube vid (I'll post the link later probably in RSE when I can find where it was!)

I posted a comment in my usual non-aggressive style and waited to see the coment up in full. I got "Comment pending approval"

If someone does not want to see my pov posted on the web, they'll delete it. Mine probably will, because I can't see any of the "negative" comments that have been responded to by others. Mine isn't negative, but I DID post my thoughts in an honest way. (In direct response to another comment)

The rest of the 400 ish comments were very fawning and sappy, all in praise of the video, which was a 12 year old boy phoning a radio station.

I'll let you know if I get my comment posted.


Is this your first comment on youtube?

I ask only in light of recent publicity regarding that site and its content?


Nah, I've been on youtube for years! This is the first time I've come accross this kind of censorship.

Janet, you seem to have taken the line that I'm talking of the great "freedoms of speech", in a political and moral sense. I merely meant, my freedom to post a comment is being curtailed.

If I had a larger point about how far we can "go" in this society, I would have posted it in RSE, because it concerns ethics and the difference between a right and a privilidge.

A public site like youtube is screening my post so that it must be a positive one. My view may not be heard.
Dreamweaver

[*] posted on 22-12-2007 at 13:49
Quote:
Originally posted by Badgergirl
I've just been viewing a youtube vid (I'll post the link later probably in RSE when I can find where it was!)

I posted a comment in my usual non-aggressive style and waited to see the coment up in full. I got "Comment pending approval"

If someone does not want to see my pov posted on the web, they'll delete it. Mine probably will, because I can't see any of the "negative" comments that have been responded to by others. Mine isn't negative, but I DID post my thoughts in an honest way. (In direct response to another comment)

The rest of the 400 ish comments were very fawning and sappy, all in praise of the video, which was a 12 year old boy phoning a radio station.

I'll let you know if I get my comment posted.


Is this your first comment on youtube?

I ask only in light of recent publicity regarding that site and its content?
LSemmens

[*] posted on 22-12-2007 at 13:06
There is no such thing as true freedom of speech, even in America. We all tend to modify our speech in some way to suit the context of the situation. Even here, we may allow some latitude, but we don't tolerate many things that are liable to cause offence to the greater community, libellous or illegal things. So, even here there is no freedom. I would hope, that we do not filter out dissenting views as appears to have happened in the you tube instance.
scholar

[*] posted on 21-12-2007 at 22:49
That does sound suspicious.

I wouldn't imagine many people give much weight to the opinions posted. (Like the book review comments on a book jacket. How often do you even read a negative comment on them? :P:P:P)
janet

[*] posted on 21-12-2007 at 22:48
But it's still not about freedom of speech ...

I'd agree it's about integrity- and have left fora and newsgroups that were run along similar lines.

Not because my freedom of speech was being denied but because there was simply no discussion.
Badgergirl

[*] posted on 21-12-2007 at 22:40
Quote:
Originally posted by scholar
I could imagine someone posting a person's real-life name, address, phone number, credit card numbers, perhaps an accusation that the person is a pedophile or torturer of animals, or that he works for Al Quaeda. On a busy site, many people might read it before a moderator deleted it. It sounds as if this site just requires human eyes to look at a post before it goes up. That seems reasonable to me.

We have a number of people here who are involved in web sites. If you had a really horrible experience from a post, would you put in a delay-for-approval step?

If the person who views posts selects only those to his liking, that would be different than the kind of safety-censorship of which I speak. Still, it's their "house."


Thing is Scholar, it's ONLY the gushing comments that have been allowed. Some are responses to other people's opinion, and the origianal piece has been deleted.
scholar

[*] posted on 21-12-2007 at 22:11
I could imagine someone posting a person's real-life name, address, phone number, credit card numbers, perhaps an accusation that the person is a pedophile or torturer of animals, or that he works for Al Quaeda. On a busy site, many people might read it before a moderator deleted it. It sounds as if this site just requires human eyes to look at a post before it goes up. That seems reasonable to me.

We have a number of people here who are involved in web sites. If you had a really horrible experience from a post, would you put in a delay-for-approval step?

If the person who views posts selects only those to his liking, that would be different than the kind of safety-censorship of which I speak. Still, it's their "house."
janet

[*] posted on 21-12-2007 at 20:18
But that's hardly about freedom of speech - any more than arguments which have happened when mods have deleted posts here come under the heading of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech, at least as usually meant, deals with governmental control of speech, and the right of the citizen/subject to express herself.

There's no guarantee of freedom of speech - on YouTube, on this forum or indeed, in places such as LiveJournal (and in that, I'm not talking about recent changes, but rather the ability of the journal owner to delete things comments made by others).

I'm not at all convinced there should be "freedom of speech" on the web, to be honest. There are a lot of things I'd rather *not* have in the public forum.
Badgergirl

[*] posted on 21-12-2007 at 19:58
I've just been viewing a youtube vid (I'll post the link later probably in RSE when I can find where it was!)

I posted a comment in my usual non-aggressive style and waited to see the coment up in full. I got "Comment pending approval"

If someone does not want to see my pov posted on the web, they'll delete it. Mine probably will, because I can't see any of the "negative" comments that have been responded to by others. Mine isn't negative, but I DID post my thoughts in an honest way. (In direct response to another comment)

The rest of the 400 ish comments were very fawning and sappy, all in praise of the video, which was a 12 year old boy phoning a radio station.

I'll let you know if I get my comment posted.