| | At Large Membership and Civil Society Participation in ICANN |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
Internet and US National Security?
|
Log in/Create an Account
| Top
| 5 comments
|
Search Discussion
|
|
|
|
The Fine Print:
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them.
We are not responsible for them in any way.
|
|
 |
|
I am, and have always been, a non-editor of ICANNWatch, I am not affiliated with ICW in any way. Since your change of software I haven't been able to find a stats page for the number of submissions, but I know that prior to that I had submitted more articles than anyone else, and I suspect that that hasn't changed. Only one of my hundreds (GAK!) of submissions has ever been rejected and that was at my own request. SFAICT none of my thousands of followup comments has ever been modded down. Nor do I disagree with your thoughts in this current article, or your response to my comment, other than this claim to editorial omnipotence. Of course, as O. W. Holmes Jr. and others have famously said: freedom of speech is not absolute. And as the late Yippee! Abbie Hoffman said in response to a question in a theatre at my alma mater UBC regarding whether freedom of speech includes the right to scream 'Fire' in a crowded theatre, Abbie screamed 'Fire'. Surprisingly, there was no stampede for the exits. It is all in the context, it is all about what one is willing to put up with to further one's goals. Therefore it is chilling to believe that, should I write something you consider uninteresting, wrong, silly, [...or...] dangerous it will be rejected. If my lack of rejection is just due to my buying into your dissing ICANN groupthink, then I guess I'll go elsewhere. I assure other ICANNWatchers that my apparent ability to do the ICW secret handshake is entirely coincidental. I intended to be a watchdog and Milton wants me to be a lapdog. Woof! Sure you're an editor and therefore an owner of this site and sure you can control what you wish to appear here, but if you think that robust dissent is best served by ignoring it, then, well, you're no better than ICANN. -g
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
|
|
|
Re:Something's screwy here
by fnord
|
| Starting Score: |
1 |
point |
| Karma-Bonus Modifier |
|
+1 |
|
| Total Score: |
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
I would be surprised if ALL of your submissions have been posted. But regardless of that factual issue, YES, almost all *substantive* and *original* submissions to ICW are posted, regardless of their political position. So if most of your submissions have been posted it's because you've made informed, substantive contributions. And that is, prima facie, a refutation of your statement:
"it is chilling to believe that, should I write something you consider uninteresting, wrong, silly, [...or...] dangerous it will be rejected."
Can we get real? First, as you yourself demonstrate, almost everything you post has been given air time. Now if you choose to be "chilled" by my open recognition of the editorial responsibility to maintain an interesting, accurate, constructive and well-informed web site, and by the need to avoid letting ICW become a shill for people with hidden agendas, then so be it. Name a SINGLE useful web site that posts anything and everything submitted to it.
Let me assure you that it's not disagreement per se with me or other editors that leads to rejection. I post a lot of stuff I don't agree with. But I also delete stuff that is blatantly self-serving (e.g., barely disguised advertisements, or repeated opinion pieces that have obviously been paid for by specific interests), stuff that is full of false assertions or contains highly consequential assertions that cannot be verified, stuff that is redundant (on any major development we may get three or four submissions saying the same thing), stuff that is way off topic, and stuff that is illiterate (you'd be surprised at some of the typo-laden, ungrammatical stuff we get) etc.
You can disagree with my personal editorial policy all you like, just please spare me the cant about it being censorship or about us being "no different from ICANN." You know better, I know better, and every reasonable reader knows better. And note well that any editor who gets to a ICW submission before me applies their own personal editorial policy, and there's surprisingly little coordination or discussion. It's about as free an environment as you can expect.
|
|
|
|
[ Reply to This | Parent
]
|
| |
Privacy Policy: We will not knowingly give out your personal data -- other than identifying your postings in the way you direct by setting your configuration options -- without a court order. All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their
respective owner. The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008 by ICANNWatch.Org. This web site was made with Slashcode, a web portal system written in perl. Slashcode is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
You can syndicate our headlines in .rdf, .rss, or .xml. Domain registration services donated by DomainRegistry.com
|
