I know that the discussion is still ongoing but I want to quote my post from the last thread to make sure it does not get lost in the transition.
So it actually has a name and is called Streisand Effect .. good to know.
Because that was the point I tried to make when NS was just banned (in the Gutter, tho, since that banning led to a minor drama bomb there), and how the way it was handled will ultimatively led to the exact opposite outcome than the desired.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Petals within petals within petals, tadpole. The truth lurks below an opulence of illusion."
—Neerdiv, fallowsage
Once again, the disgraceful conduct of many of those who are against this decision makes it hard to feel any sympathy whatsoever for them. Talking about "homes", "devaluation of culture", and the Trail of Tears in this context is actually so ignorant as to be offensive.
The oppression suffered by those under the man who (N_S) saw fit to use to represent him on this site is real oppression. Certain people losing their posting privileges for violating the well-publicized rules of the site that they chose, of their own free will, to visit is not. Get some perspective.
There are many levels of oppression. To diminish one group's suffered oppression because it doesn't compare to the level of oppression felt by another group is insensitive and rude.
Actions made in retaliation to an unjust moderation action are a special circumstance. They should not be punished, especially given that most of the information that was posted here was public information beforehand.
I didn't mock or diminish anything, Harkius. He brought it up. I'm well aware that our situation pales in comparison to that of those affected by Gaddafi.
Not really. They also forbid posting information about dozens of things. Where to find illegal substances. How to create proxies. Sales on other websites for pharmaceutical substances. Etc.
Just add this one to the list.
The things that are forbidden are all against the law or as for proxies could lead to legal trouble.
This wasn't against the law. This was publicly available information. There is a big difference between those two things.
Ok, so, it turns out I have to run out for a dinner appointment, but I will say this very quickly: Limited information causes unlimited problems.
A platitude, I know, but I've been saying that to myself over the past few days to help myself see this issue from both sides, and I am confident that there are two sides, so that I can objectively make a decision.
From the staff's end, we saw a violation of a direct request not to talk about the Curse negotiations. We banned members to comply with that control of information.
From the banned members' end, they saw what looked like the staff pulling the rug out from under months of negotiations, apparently in good faith, to keep their social space. More to the point, they saw that happening at the same time we were trying to keep the Curse info under wraps, put two and two together, and wanted to call us on our perceived deception.
And you know what? As is often the case, both sides are right, at least in their perception of things.
Even more to the point? Neither party was operating with full information. More on this later.
Manders, others, I would ask that you tone down the emotional language. Calling anything on a web forum "oppression" really does a disservice to everybody. Thank you.
When I return, a fuller explanation of my stance, responses to others, etc. But I really must be going.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
From the staff's end, we saw a violation of a direct request not to talk about the Curse negotiations. We banned members to comply with that control of information.
To that end, do you believe the request not talk about it was unreasonable since it was public knowledge to the whole internet (via scg) and from the sounds of it something all the gutterites already knew about by the time the incident that caused the bans to occur?
To that end, do you believe the request not talk about it was unreasonable since it was public knowledge to the whole internet (via scg) and from the sounds of it something all the gutterites already knew about by the time the incident that caused the bans to occur?
That's more complicated than I have time to answer now.
I will say that my personal opinion, and I do stress personal, is that the bannings should be overturned.
There's more to it than that, but as I said I need to run out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Can we have Megiddo removed from the forum forever please?
i'm pretty sure i can find your ***** online within 3 minutes
To that end, do you believe the request not talk about it was unreasonable since it was public knowledge to the whole internet (via scg) and from the sounds of it something all the gutterites already knew about by the time the incident that caused the bans to occur?
I would hardly call an unsubstantiated rumor in a 2 post thread 'public knowledge'.
The request stood for a month and a half without incident and with apparent acknowledgement of the sensitivity of the information a hand. It was not a recent request, this was not sudden defiance against an unjust request.
This was a group getting fed bad information through a malicious leak and overreacting.
I would hardly call an unsubstantiated rumor in a 2 post thread 'public knowledge'.
The request stood for a month and a half without incident and with apparent acknowledgement of the sensitivity of the information a hand. It was not a recent request, this was not sudden defiance against an unjust request.
This was a group getting fed bad information through a malicious leak and overreacting.
1. But it was out there for anybody to look for it to see and people did see it as I've seen people link to it. Therefore how is it not public knowledge?
2. If the group was fed bad info that was malicious why was the gag order still enforced? Why was the gag order not lifted so that the two sides could discuss this and the truth come out? Tightening the gag order just made this incident worse.
3. Once known and leaked why did you enforce a gag order on a non-staff group in the first place? This is an unreasonable request seeing as it broke no laws and eventually led to the incident at hand now.
If you truly look at this objectively, you'll end up unbanning everyone for posting information that was already public at the time they got banned. Anything else is just more sweeping under the rug. I am encouraged by your post, though.
Strictly speaking, the public post was officially just an unconfirmed rumour. In the interests of ensuring the deal could go as smoothly as possible, it basically fell onto the staff not to acknowledge the SCG post and to do its best to suppress any leaks from within this site. We're talking about a business deal here, and those kinds of leaks have the potential to cause actual damage to the site's reputation (thus lowering its value) and also have the potential to affect the deal adversely. This is not a minor thing.
Strictly speaking, the public post was officially just an unconfirmed rumour. In the interests of ensuring the deal could go as smoothly as possible, it basically fell onto the staff not to acknowledge the SCG post and to do its best to suppress any leaks from within this site. We're talking about a business deal here, and those kinds of leaks have the potential to cause actual damage to the site's reputation (thus lowering its value) and also have the potential to affect the deal adversely. This is not a minor thing.
and what is the value of the site?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Originally Posted by Arcadic View Post
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
Strictly speaking, the public post was officially just an unconfirmed rumour. In the interests of ensuring the deal could go as smoothly as possible, it basically fell onto the staff not to acknowledge the SCG post and to do its best to suppress any leaks from within this site. We're talking about a business deal here, and those kinds of leaks have the potential to cause actual damage to the site's reputation (thus lowering its value) and also have the potential to affect the deal adversely. This is not a minor thing.
Actually in the interest of being objective here, this is wrong.
1. Suppressing and censoring information leds to not only the Streisand Effect, but also backlash at being suppressed and censored.
2. The suppression and censorship and bannings hurt the sites reputation and probably these negotiations more than just coming clean or just doing nothing at all.
3. The best coarse of action is to do nothing at all and just say that the rumors are rumors. Eventually people will get board and think nothing of them. It's not until you take action that confirm the rumors have some truth that the damage is done.
This is an unreasonable request seeing as it broke no laws and eventually led to the incident at hand now.
If the sensitive information is thought to potentially jeopardize the sale of the site, it is within the owner's full right to ban the members.
Perhaps the information was already public; but, this does not mean that the owner has to be open to promoting further dissemination of the information, esp. on his own forum. When it comes down to it, this is a private site and it has the right to censor what it wants.
It's a really difficult point to argue that trivial site drama should take precedence over a financial transaction that has real world implications on an individual.
Actually in the interest of being objective here, this is wrong.
This is your opinion and it is not the obligation of the staff to follow it. The question whether or not it will benefit or harm the site is irrelevant. It merely matters that the staff or owner has the right to enforce this gag order.
Guardman: And what if uncontrolled rumours and fearmongering cause the deal to be broken off?
Then censoring and suppressing the deal would've made it worse. If the rumors escalated to a point where it was harming the deal then it is best to come clean.
Basically my point here is no matter the situation censoring and suppressing these rumors make the situation worse in every possible circumstance. This has been proven time and time again.
I still find it hilariously ironic that a website famous for leaking/spoiling information banned some of its longtime users for leaking/spoiling information.
If the sensitive information is thought to potentially jeopardize the sale of the site, it is within the owner's full right to ban the members.
Perhaps the information was already public; but, this does not mean that the owner has to be open to promoting further dissemination of the information, esp. on his own forum. When it comes down to it, this is a private site and it has the right to censor what it wants.
It's a really difficult point to argue that trivial site drama should take precedence over a financial transaction that has real world implications on an individual.
This is your opinion and, regardless of whether it is correct or not, it is not the obligation of the staff to follow it.
1. While a private site can do whatever they want, once you start suppressing and censoring the user base in some way such has been seen here what you are actually doing is hurting the site.
2. Trivial drama can cause the collapse of a financial deal if it is not handled right.
3. It is my opinion, that is true. But my opinion is backed up by fact. If they don't want to use, they don't have to. But I am putting it out there along with my reasoning in the hopes that they do.
1. But it was out there for anybody to look for it to see and people did see it as I've seen people link to it. Therefore how is it not public knowledge?
2. If the group was fed bad info that was malicious why was the gag order still enforced? Why was the gag order not lifted so that the two sides could discuss this and the truth come out? Tightening the gag order just made this incident worse.
3. Once known and leaked why did you enforce a gag order on a non-staff group in the first place? This is an unreasonable request seeing as it broke no laws and eventually led to the incident at hand now.
1. Unsubstantiated rumors are still unsubstantiated. Or is it also common knowledge that man was never on the moon and martians gave computer technology to humans?
2. The bad info was that the gutter was getting shut down. The recent leaks were retaliatory to that information.
3. I cannot say for certain, because I was not directly involved with creating the request. But personally I see it like this:
Disseminating the private, personal information of other users also doesn't break any laws, but it is certainly something we would go to lengths to stop. This was private, personal information about Hannes' life that had the distinct chance of never impacting the site in the slightest.
That, combined with the fact that it could also prove harmful to the site if released, even by the staff, more than justifies the request imho.
I will reiterate that the request was honoured without incident for a month an a half, so it is clear to me that it was not seen as unjust at the time.
I will also note that we answered the Gutter's question about the leak as frankly as we could in order to foster the understanding over the gravity of the situation.
1. Unsubstantiated rumors are still unsubstantiated. Or is it also common knowledge that man was never on the moon and martians gave computer technology to humans?
2. The bad info was that the gutter was getting shut down. The recent leaks were retaliatory to that information.
3. I cannot say for certain, because I was not directly involved with creating the request. But personally I see it like this:
Disseminating the private, personal information of other users also doesn't break any laws, but it is certainly something we would go to lengths to stop. This was private, personal information about Hannes' life that had the distinct chance of never impacting the site in the slightest.
That, combined with the fact that it could also prove harmful to the site if released, even by the staff, more than justifies the request imho.
I will reiterate that the request was honoured without incident for a month an a half, so it is clear to me that it was not seen as unjust at the time.
I will also note that we answered the Gutter's question about the leak as frankly as we could in order to foster the understanding over the gravity of the situation.
If you think it's fair to compare martians to what happened here, you need to take a long hard look at what you're doing
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Originally Posted by Arcadic View Post
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
To gutter members it just confirmed what the staff had hinted at before, it wasn't just a random unconfirmed rumor.
If you wanted to keep the reputation in tact you shouldn't have acted with ill repute.
Don't try to turn the blame around on the staff. The Gutter knew a part of the story, and they were instructed in no uncertain terms not to speak of it, as doing so could cause very real damage to the site's reputation or to the deal itself. Certain members then took it upon themselves to ignore this instruction and engaged in actions which could have resulted in that same damage. The staff might not have handled the situation with perfect aplomb, but we are not to blame for the actions of individuals with a grudge born out of incomplete information.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So it actually has a name and is called Streisand Effect .. good to know.
Because that was the point I tried to make when NS was just banned (in the Gutter, tho, since that banning led to a minor drama bomb there), and how the way it was handled will ultimatively led to the exact opposite outcome than the desired.
—Neerdiv, fallowsage
There are many levels of oppression. To diminish one group's suffered oppression because it doesn't compare to the level of oppression felt by another group is insensitive and rude.
Good day, sir.
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
The others were banned under the pretense of an unjust gag order.
The Family
Tired of corporate corruption ruining your favorite MtG site?
Come join ours!!
We even have Mafia!!
The things that are forbidden are all against the law or as for proxies could lead to legal trouble.
This wasn't against the law. This was publicly available information. There is a big difference between those two things.
A platitude, I know, but I've been saying that to myself over the past few days to help myself see this issue from both sides, and I am confident that there are two sides, so that I can objectively make a decision.
From the staff's end, we saw a violation of a direct request not to talk about the Curse negotiations. We banned members to comply with that control of information.
From the banned members' end, they saw what looked like the staff pulling the rug out from under months of negotiations, apparently in good faith, to keep their social space. More to the point, they saw that happening at the same time we were trying to keep the Curse info under wraps, put two and two together, and wanted to call us on our perceived deception.
And you know what? As is often the case, both sides are right, at least in their perception of things.
Even more to the point? Neither party was operating with full information. More on this later.
Manders, others, I would ask that you tone down the emotional language. Calling anything on a web forum "oppression" really does a disservice to everybody. Thank you.
When I return, a fuller explanation of my stance, responses to others, etc. But I really must be going.
To that end, do you believe the request not talk about it was unreasonable since it was public knowledge to the whole internet (via scg) and from the sounds of it something all the gutterites already knew about by the time the incident that caused the bans to occur?
I will say that my personal opinion, and I do stress personal, is that the bannings should be overturned.
There's more to it than that, but as I said I need to run out.
I would hardly call an unsubstantiated rumor in a 2 post thread 'public knowledge'.
The request stood for a month and a half without incident and with apparent acknowledgement of the sensitivity of the information a hand. It was not a recent request, this was not sudden defiance against an unjust request.
This was a group getting fed bad information through a malicious leak and overreacting.
No, but I do think it needs to be put into perspective that it wasn't the request that caused this problem.
1. But it was out there for anybody to look for it to see and people did see it as I've seen people link to it. Therefore how is it not public knowledge?
2. If the group was fed bad info that was malicious why was the gag order still enforced? Why was the gag order not lifted so that the two sides could discuss this and the truth come out? Tightening the gag order just made this incident worse.
3. Once known and leaked why did you enforce a gag order on a non-staff group in the first place? This is an unreasonable request seeing as it broke no laws and eventually led to the incident at hand now.
Strictly speaking, the public post was officially just an unconfirmed rumour. In the interests of ensuring the deal could go as smoothly as possible, it basically fell onto the staff not to acknowledge the SCG post and to do its best to suppress any leaks from within this site. We're talking about a business deal here, and those kinds of leaks have the potential to cause actual damage to the site's reputation (thus lowering its value) and also have the potential to affect the deal adversely. This is not a minor thing.
and what is the value of the site?
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
It has to have value if they are buying it.
Most popular/biggest mtg forum bar wizard's.
Actually in the interest of being objective here, this is wrong.
1. Suppressing and censoring information leds to not only the Streisand Effect, but also backlash at being suppressed and censored.
2. The suppression and censorship and bannings hurt the sites reputation and probably these negotiations more than just coming clean or just doing nothing at all.
3. The best coarse of action is to do nothing at all and just say that the rumors are rumors. Eventually people will get board and think nothing of them. It's not until you take action that confirm the rumors have some truth that the damage is done.
Perhaps the information was already public; but, this does not mean that the owner has to be open to promoting further dissemination of the information, esp. on his own forum. When it comes down to it, this is a private site and it has the right to censor what it wants.
It's a really difficult point to argue that trivial site drama should take precedence over a financial transaction that has real world implications on an individual.
This is your opinion and it is not the obligation of the staff to follow it. The question whether or not it will benefit or harm the site is irrelevant. It merely matters that the staff or owner has the right to enforce this gag order.
Then censoring and suppressing the deal would've made it worse. If the rumors escalated to a point where it was harming the deal then it is best to come clean.
Basically my point here is no matter the situation censoring and suppressing these rumors make the situation worse in every possible circumstance. This has been proven time and time again.
GWBKarador, Necrotic Ooze SubthemeBWG
1. While a private site can do whatever they want, once you start suppressing and censoring the user base in some way such has been seen here what you are actually doing is hurting the site.
2. Trivial drama can cause the collapse of a financial deal if it is not handled right.
3. It is my opinion, that is true. But my opinion is backed up by fact. If they don't want to use, they don't have to. But I am putting it out there along with my reasoning in the hopes that they do.
1. Unsubstantiated rumors are still unsubstantiated. Or is it also common knowledge that man was never on the moon and martians gave computer technology to humans?
2. The bad info was that the gutter was getting shut down. The recent leaks were retaliatory to that information.
3. I cannot say for certain, because I was not directly involved with creating the request. But personally I see it like this:
Disseminating the private, personal information of other users also doesn't break any laws, but it is certainly something we would go to lengths to stop. This was private, personal information about Hannes' life that had the distinct chance of never impacting the site in the slightest.
That, combined with the fact that it could also prove harmful to the site if released, even by the staff, more than justifies the request imho.
I will reiterate that the request was honoured without incident for a month an a half, so it is clear to me that it was not seen as unjust at the time.
I will also note that we answered the Gutter's question about the leak as frankly as we could in order to foster the understanding over the gravity of the situation.
If you think it's fair to compare martians to what happened here, you need to take a long hard look at what you're doing
scumbag
Want Higher Level Card Evaluation? Visit Diestoremoval.com
Don't try to turn the blame around on the staff. The Gutter knew a part of the story, and they were instructed in no uncertain terms not to speak of it, as doing so could cause very real damage to the site's reputation or to the deal itself. Certain members then took it upon themselves to ignore this instruction and engaged in actions which could have resulted in that same damage. The staff might not have handled the situation with perfect aplomb, but we are not to blame for the actions of individuals with a grudge born out of incomplete information.