[News] Squeak News Retraction

[Ron Teitelbaum]

I agree that a silent post of intentional spam or personal attacks makes a
lot of sense.  This was neither of those.  I don't expect that we will be
making many more of these mistakes.  In general I agree with you solution.

Ron

> -----Original Message-----
> From: news-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:news-
> bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On Behalf Of Giovanni Giorgi
> Sent: Monday, October 30, 2006 9:48 AM
> To: The mailing list for the Squeak News Team
> Subject: Re: [News] Squeak News Retraction
> 
> All right.
> On deleted posts, I prefer the "silent way" as exposed by Joel Sposky on
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/BuildingCommunitieswithSo.html
> 
> It works great and all the page is a worth read ;)
> [....]
> 
> Q. Why do posts disappear sometimes?
> 
> A. The forum is moderated. That means that a few people have the
> magick powah to delete a post. If the post they delete is the first
> one in a thread, the thread itself appears deleted because there's no
> way to get to it.
> 
> Q. But that's censorship!
> 
> A. No, it's picking up the garbage in the park. If we didn't do it,
> the signal to noise ratio would change dramatically for the worse.
> People post spam and get rich schemes, people post antisemitic
> comments about me, people post nonsense that doesn't make any sense.
> Some idealistic youngsters may imagine a totally uncensored world as
> one in which the free exchange of intelligent ideas raises everyone's
> IQ, an idealized Oxford Debate Society or Speakers' Corner. I am
> pragmatic and understand that a totally uncensored world just looks
> like your inbox: 80% spam, advertising, and fraud, rapidly driving
> away the few interesting people.
> [...]
> 
> 
> On 10/30/06, Giovanni Corriga <giovanni at corriga.net> wrote:
> > Il giorno dom, 29/10/2006 alle 22.17 -0500, Ron Teitelbaum ha scritto:
> > > All,
> >
> > > I've deleted a news item I posted because it was inaccurate.
> >
> > > I'm sorry for posting the item and my bad attempt at humor.
> >
> > There's no problem, we're not the NY Times. But anyway, I propose these
> > guidelines for editing/deleting posts:
> >
> > - if you've just published the post and need to edit or delete it, just
> > do it: the probability of anyone having alread read the post is so low
> > there's no need to worry about that.
> >
> > - if after an hour or more you need to edit the post, edit it and add a
> > notice at the end of the post (with the editing date in case it's
> > different from publishing date).
> >
> > - if after an hour or more you need to delete a post, delete its content
> > and place a deletion notice instead. ("The post was deleted because it
> > contained erroneous facts etc. etc.")
> >
> > Any comments?
> >
> >         Giovanni
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > News mailing list
> > News at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/news
> >
> 
> 
> --
> "Just Design It" -- GG
> Software Architect
> http://www.objectsroot.com/
> _______________________________________________
> News mailing list
> News at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/news