US Indymedia Global Indymedia Publish About us
Printed from Boston IMC : http://boston.indymedia.org/
Boston.Indymedia
IVAW Winter Soldier

Winter Soldier
Testimonies
Brad Presente

Other Local News

Spare Change News
Open Media Boston
Somerville Voices
Cradle of Liberty
The Sword and Shield

Local Radio Shows

WMBR 88.1 FM
What's Left
WEDS at 8:00 pm
Local Edition
FRI (alt) at 5:30 pm

WMFO 91.5 FM
Socialist Alternative
SUN 11:00 am

WZBC 90.3 FM
Sounds of Dissent
SAT at 11:00 am
Truth and Justice Radio
SUN at 6:00 am

Create account Log in
Comment on this article | View comments | Email this article | Printer-friendly version
Announcement :: Technology
Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
14 Oct 2004
Bad policy. Very bad indeed. Unfortunately, we will have to address this new development in a most obtuse way. POOF.

This work is in the public domain
Add a quick comment
Title
Your name Your email

Comment

Text Format
Anti-spam Enter the following number into the box:
To add more detailed comments, or to upload files, see the full comment form.

Comments

Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
14 Oct 2004
Yes, we have taken to deleting posts by a handful of individuals who have repeatedly abused the open-publishing nature of this site. We will, however, continue to hide the majority of posts that violate our editorial policy--not delete them. We realize that not all our users may agree with this policy of deleting repeat offenders, but we also figure that it will not terribly upset most of our users either. If you want to spell out why you think this policy is especially harmful, please do so and those of us in the editorial collective will certainly consider your thoughts.
Depends On What Your Deleting.
15 Oct 2004
If it's worth reading? To me? Or to you? Censor for who's cause? Yours? Then the question is because it's hurting YOUR feelings?
Censoring is wrong. Put those right, left and middle comments in a post. That way all of us can either reply or go to the next post.
And for the Posts? If there not XXX rated? Leave them alone!
For IMC being supposed liberal. Where's the Freedom Of Speech?
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
Oh boy is this place going to be fun to watch as the election grows near.

"Open Publishing" (only if it conforms to our agenda)

"Hiding" (comments that do not reflect the views of the collective)

"Deleting" (articles and comments that express an alternative viewpoint)

"Purging" (anything that the collective does not want the search engines and archive sites to capture )

Does that just about sum up current Boston IMC policy?

Also anything not news or news releted can be hidden/deleted except for infomercials from the Lucy Parsons Center as the collective has to kiss deriere so they can hold their meetings for free.

(deriere is froglaise for ass)

So did I get it right?

Can I be an editor as I know the guidelines so well?

I really think Boston IMC should re-consider Pete Stidman's sugesstion and track IP adresses of posters.

That is the only sensible thing to do given the current deluge of crap on here.
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
Kris,

They are not just deleting (where you can see the header and the reason) they are PURGING!

That means there is no record or information about a post visible at all!

(but it is still there, lurking on the server.............)
So Do We Snatch The Server?
15 Oct 2004
We could pull an FBI!
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
The Boston IMC's policies for hiding and purging material are at
http://boston.indymedia.org/mod/info/display/policy/index.php
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
Kris,

The FBI does not need to "snatch" this server. There is nothing on it worth snatching....

:)
Spell out why I think this policy is especially harmful you say?
15 Oct 2004
Lets see....where to start:

Censorship is wrong, no matter what you say to try to justify it. That said, both the Left and Right media outlets have biased policies on what they consider to be newsworthy and what they consider not to be newsworthy. For this discussion, lets say that the IMC websites represent a digitized, dynamic version of the classic newspaper. Both are linear formats, both have columns and articles and editorials, right?

The "Corporate Media" for-profit conglomerates have their media outlets in the form of television, radio and cable news networks. A web-formatted version of the large corporate cable news networks appears in the CNN, Fox News, and ABConline. I say all of this to remind you of what youre up against.

The Right has all the bases covered. How did they do it? They DO NOT censor. They spin. They allow all manner of items to become potentially "newsworthy". They highlight stories which reflect their values, and give little or no coverage of what does not.

When presented with "fluff" or extremely localized stories, newspapers DO report it, however they simply "hide" it on one of the less read sections to make room for the so-called "newsworthy" stuff. You dont get your newspaper with little rectangular shaped holes where the censors have CUT OUT what they dont like.

Hiding is better than deleting. Unless you have decided that the hidden comments and articles are taking up too much space on the server, just HIDE them and stop DELETING them as though they never existed. One man's "disruptive individual" is another man's "opposing viewpoint", worthy of publication.

Perhaps some of us ENJOY reading some of the comedy in those hidden articles and comments. Last I heard, the comics section is still the most popular section in the premium Sunday Edition newspapers. Perhaps if you look at how it works from the reader's viewpoint. The reader must LOOK for the "hidden articles" link, and then choose to comment on it...or not. How does that hurt the newswire? Does it take up precious right column links? Just hide them, dont delete them.

Censorship - the changing or the suppression or prohibition of speech or writing that is condemned as subversive of the common good.
Delete Away
15 Oct 2004
The IMC is the property of its collective. It is free to do with its property as it sees fit. Keeping rightwing trash out is a good start.
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
" The IMC is the property of its collective. It is free to do with its property as it sees fit."

So it is not an "open publishing network" it is just as authoritarian and biased as the news media it seeks to replace.

Thanks for clarifying that for us!
The Clown is a clown.
15 Oct 2004
There is nothing authoritarian about deleting rubbish from your own website. Boston IMC would be authoritarian if it had an authoritarian structure. It does not have an authoritarian structure.

Let me guess, your idea of a an anti-authoritarian farm would a farm that just let the weeds grow? My idea of an anti-authoritarian farm would be a farm where the farm workers owned the farm and ran it for their own benefit.
WOW. Just....WOW. You have opened my eyes to wide eyed clarity, "@"
15 Oct 2004
"Let me guess, your idea of a an anti-authoritarian farm would a farm that just let the weeds grow? My idea of an anti-authoritarian farm would be a farm where the farm workers owned the farm and ran it for their own benefit. "

GUESS WHAT? The Right agrees with you. To them, these IMC outlets and pretty much everything you stand for (anarchy or socialism, as inferred by your statement which follows), are the weeds. Dont try at see it in any other way. The Right and the mainstream media are the farm, and this place would be considered a weed.

and this comment...

"My idea of an anti-authoritarian farm would be a farm where the farm workers owned the farm and ran it for their own benefit."

Um...since WHEN did someone need to have an entire farm for "their own benefit"? Well, I can tell you when: in AMERICA, farms are for producing GOODS which are then SOLD. A farmer is not going to toil and spend money on equipment and fertilizer and spend time tending his farm unless he is going to PROFIT from it in some way (financially or politically or both).

S.R.D., you are still sqeaking the "@" word from inside of the walls. Time to call an exterminator. The IMC network is the last best hope for the Left media. As soon as it becomes like the Right, the Right will absorb it and commercialize it.

Fortunately, there are over 100 IMC sites....left. Each one is a different editorial environment, and the censorship is not nearly as severe as Boston IMC. The comments by "@" are inconsequential ("There is nothing authoritarian about deleting rubbish from your own website"). Who decides what is and what is not rubbish? Using what criteria?
I don't know who you think you are communicating with.
15 Oct 2004
SRD?

You don't own the Internet. Therefore you have no right to "weed" it out. Additional, Seizure, your concept of "benefit" excludes "rational self interest." If a collective were to make decisions in their rational self interest the benefit they reap would be greater than just what they do within their collective. Their benefit would be measured in the kind of world they create and how embeddedness in that world effects them. You measure only one benefit from that embeddedness: profit. I measure all benefits (e.g. creating a world that one would want to live in, something that goes beyond profit).

You are short sighted. I am not.

Clearly, you do not understand anarchy. Unfortunately, many of those calling themselves anarchists do not understand anarchy either. This is not surprising since most Buddhist do not understand Buddhism, most Christians do not understand Christianty, most Muslims do not understand Islam and most Jews doe not understand Judaism.

Anarchism is about freedom. One cannot have freedom if one cannot delete bullshit from their own website. The freedom to delete is as much a freedom as the freedom to add.
Our policy
15 Oct 2004
So far we are only deleting posts for two reasons.

1.) they come from one of two highly disruptive individuals that we have singled out, who have been plagueing our site and other IMC's for years with nonsensical posts that noone wants to read.

2.) they are highly offensive or disruptive and contain photo, video, and or audio files. This is a policy set up in reaction to IMC's being used to store large files for nazi websites in the past.

We are still an open forum for those who are interested in posting news and in-depth commentary about current events, which is the reason indymedia was founded in the first place. We are trying to create a balance between open publishing and maintaining a site that is beneficial to all the communities that use it. Over time all IMC's seem to eventually choose some amount of article hiding/deleting.

An important note WE DO NOT HIDE COMMENTS FOR BEING RIGHT WING. it is only when derogatory, hateful or insulting language is being used in an attempt to disrupt constructive discussions and degrade them into a silly flame war that we step in.
RESPONSE to "@"
15 Oct 2004
"Clearly, you do not understand anarchy. Unfortunately, many of those calling themselves anarchists do not understand anarchy either. This is not surprising since most Buddhist do not understand Buddhism, most Christians do not understand Christianty, most Muslims do not understand Islam and most Jews doe not understand Judaism."

Actually, I understand anarchy quite well. I understand it completely. Obviously, you have your own concept of what anarchy is. Here is the OFFICIAL definition (not subject to your re-interpretation):

An·ar·chy:
Pronunciation: 'a-n&r-kE, -"när-
Function: noun
Etymology: Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek, from anarchos having no ruler, from an- + archos ruler -- more at ARCH-
1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : DISORDER
3 : ANARCHISM

The official definition notwithstanding, there is no real-world example of anarchy because it CANNOT manifest, and HAS NOT manifested in any permanent or semi-permanent form anytime in human history. Even the pre-hominids lived in a hierarchial society. Insects have government! We have had this discussion before. Your interpretation is yours alone.

"most Buddhist do not understand Buddhism, most Christians do not understand Christianty, most Muslims do not understand Islam and most Jews do not understand Judaism."

What a presumptuous statement.
I support Boston IMC's postion on deleting.
15 Oct 2004
There is no contradiction between free speech and removing bullshit. Bullshitters are free to publish on their own toilet paper - physical or virtual.

Go for it.
Re: Dictionary Definitions
15 Oct 2004
Language is fluid and self-evolving. Dictionaries are, amongst other things, an attempt to reign in language under the thumb of authority. The definition of "anarchism" differs from one source to another specifically because the various sources wish to sell it under a rubric that works to their own benefit.

The only true meaning of "anarchism" is anti-hierarchicalism. That's it. Anything else is an attempt to characterize some form of something else (e.g. anarcho-communism, anarcho-capitalism, etc). Statist define anarchism in terms of what they fear it would do to their states and not in terms of what it might create in the absense of a state. That is exactly why the man you most fear put up a thought experiment about what anarchism might be like in a world where government never even began to exist (thus the science fiction website MarsAnarchy). Your arch-enemy's approach scared the shit out of you from the start for he started with the proposition of no state and asked where it might lead. This allowed him to focus on the positive aspects of anarchism - it's creativity and not the negative aspects - it's destruction of hierarchical order.

Anarchism is a hard sell because it is faced with the task of destroying the state - a very difficult challenge. Anarchists, unfortunately, spend too much of their time thinking about the state and not enough time thinking about the absense of a state. Your enemy's approach is to step around the state and leave it behind. Boo! It's scares you.

Somewhere out there in the world, your enemy is laughing his ass off at you.
Let history, science and reality be the judge.
15 Oct 2004
"That is exactly why the man you most fear put up a thought experiment about what anarchism might be like in a world where government never even began to exist (thus the science fiction website MarsAnarchy). "

I dont fear you. I never have. I dont like you, but that has nothing to do with our ongoing conflict. You seem to think that anarchism is merely another choice to be made, along with democracy, socialism, communism or the like. Such is not the case. Anarchy is an UNNATURAL state, and there is nothing in nature or the physical world which operates in an anarchistic manner except things like fire, explosions, wars, and otherwise disruptive or cataclysmic events. Anarchism, at best, could be considered a transitional state between disorder and order. The natural state is order, not disorder. Living things NATURALLY order themselves in a hierarchy, from bacteria to humans. Inanimate matter also NATURALLY organizes itself into structured units (molecules and atoms). Anarchy is nothing more than a notion....not supported by anything real. Empirical evidence supports hierarchy and not anarchy. This is not just my opinion, it is a fact.

"Your arch-enemy's approach scared the shit out of you from the start for he started with the proposition of no state and asked where it might lead."

As an American, I interpret any effort to destroy my country and its governmental system as a personal attack against myself, my family and the entire free world. In fact, by definition, ANY country would feel threatened by anarchy since ALL countries are run by governments. You dont scare me, you disgust me. I have been more than willing to hold a discussion with you on our forums, but you still are under the impression that we are Cycorp or the FBI or whomever your current theory says we are. I would be willing to communicate with you on a neutral territory (say, Voy Forums or via e-mail), but invariably you force our discussions to break down into useless finger-pointing tete a tetes. You seem incapable of organizing your thoughts (your mind is anarchy).

"This allowed him to focus on the positive aspects of anarchism - it's creativity and not the negative aspects - it's destruction of hierarchical order."

Destruction of hierarchial order IS destructive by its very nature. Hierarchial order is a natural state. Anarchy disrupts it, and there is nothing positive about that. Creativity can and has thrived in hierarchial societies (which is all of them). Anarchy is not only unnatural, it is unnecessary. ANYTHING is better than anarchy, but capitalism is best (as evidenced by the fact the the US is the greatest, most powerful and productive countries in the history of mankind).

How can you argue anarchy in a world which has been created by eons of hierarchial progress and cooperation? It is you who fears (you fear me, you fear reality). You choose to replace reality with your interpretation of it.
Point made, Matthew. I have to agree....to a point.
15 Oct 2004
"There was a point where the war between KOBE and DeVoy nearly took over site and another where neo-Nazis began flooding the newswire with postings. If we didn’t edit the site by getting rid of such things, it would be useless to the larger community."

I agree. That is why I dont use my KOBE name here. The vast majority of my most recent postings are still pro-right wing, but I feel that I can make my point and stand on my principles without useless faming and finger pointing. You will NEVER see me post some wild tinfoil hat theory about who is who and what is what. If I can present my views and not be deleted, that is preferable.

I will continue to remain non-combative and non-disruptive, and I will continue to present my right wing views. I actually have a lot of respect for the IMC network.
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
Stid Man said:

"WE DO NOT HIDE COMMENTS FOR BEING RIGHT WING. it is only when derogatory, hateful or insulting language is being used in an attempt to disrupt constructive discussions"

Matt hides posts for being righ wing (he calls it "counter to mission"). The Joe hides any objections.

"We" occurs anytime more than one IMC member collaborate to hide or delete something. Usually the posts do not get offensive until one person has his posts deleted from the server.

Stid Man also said:

"This is a policy set up in reaction to IMC's being used to store large files for nazi websites in the past."

Let's try that out in a new sentence:

"The Dresden Firebombing was set up in reaction to Nazi expansionism. But it worked so well, we now use it against anything which expands."
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
Matty said:

"This [censorship] is generally understood to be editing the website. When we hide or delete stuff from our website, we are doing the same thing."

No, when you upgrade the page and add new pics, delete stale news, etc that is editing. That other thing is still called censoring. Also, you don't fit into the "most websites" crowd, because you offer open publishing. Yahoo Chat runs circles around you.

A simple chat server allows more freedom of speech, and does not squash dissenting views when they are dissenting from communism, socialism, or evangelical homosexuality.

You also said you are "like any other group of people." Come on now, don't lie. I saw you guys in person before.

And you DON"T delete my posts out of hand? Who are you kidding. Of the four majors at IMC, Pete, Eric, and Dan use the "policy" rightly, and Matt and Joe use them wrongly. Pete however states that he does not contravene Matt because he agrees with most of Matts opinions. He told me so in email.
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
15 Oct 2004
"Of the four majors at IMC, Pete, Eric, and Dan use the "policy" rightly, and Matt and Joe use them wrongly."

oh my god, his counting skills are almost as good as his flow.
Wow!
16 Oct 2004
Wow!
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
16 Oct 2004
It really is amazing the calm cool collectedness of the majority. Who else would sit idly by and be called things like, racist, sexist, homophobe, and anti-semite and not try to assemble 500 people to go and make a federal case in front of the Lucy Parsons Center.

If this were the communist utopia conceived of by you, Matthew, every time you leveraged your organization against straight, white, self-employed people, they would have to wave a bloody shirt outside the headquarters, speak in bad english, break windows, and stop showering.

Make no mistake: You do leverage your organization against straight, white self employed people. What's more, you guys subscribe to an outmoded, outdated, and extinct set of premises. Specifically, you think that black people, spanish people, people with broken legs etc etc etc don't have anyone representing them (eg self-representation.

Let's shave all this away and get to the skeleton of IMC: A few Shaggy's a couple of Scooby Doos, some Gilligans, and an anemic Abbie Hoffman with no Mystery Machine regularly meet to cop free stuff and complain about whitey. In order to eliminate the rank absurdity of the position, they try desperately to increase thier melanin intake, but to no avail.

Didn't you guys ever read Black Power, or any of the proper US oriented and originating power manifestoes? Carpetbaggers are OUT. Communism is ALIEN to the United States. Collectivizations and Soviets are lame 20th century contraptions. Che Guevara is a ten dollar banner for sale at the local Newbury Comix. Get a load of yourself. What a parody! What a zombie of the deceased alt-Boston of the 1980s!
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
16 Oct 2004
"It really is amazing the calm cool collectedness of the majority. Who else would sit idly by and be called things like, racist, sexist, homophobe, and anti-semite and not try to assemble 500 people to go and make a federal case in front of the Lucy Parsons Center."

Some evidence to back up my claims, in the form of links to now hidden comments you have made in the past (so anyone who wants to can make up their mind):

homophobic:
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/19124/index.php
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/19545/index.php
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/20177/index.php
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/25615/index.php

racist:
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/19744/index.php
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/26211/index.php

both of the above:
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/25889/index.php

homophobic & anti-Semitic:
http://boston.indymedia.org/newswire/display/26122/index.php
I'm Getting The Picture...
17 Oct 2004
See what ya mean...Matt.
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
19 Oct 2004
I could make a list of all the harmless things I ever said in here, and show which ones Matt deleted, and thereby prove that Matt is a hypersensitive twit, but I am not going to.
Re: Oh, so now we are DELETING things altogether?
20 Oct 2004
Yes. Along with whiskers on kittens and Julie Andrews dressed in draperies, posting my opinion in the allegedly open thread is one of my favorite things. But being redundant is not, I repeat IS NOT.