1 – “...we have no idea of facts of any specific thing, ever. Certainly alarms may be sounded here, but can they be always be believed? “
- While I don’t feel like I’m a Lemming, blindly following others when alarms go off, I would rather err on the side of safety and believe that there could be a real cause and reason for alarm.– after that I could care less if it was fiction or fact. I still ask you – would you want the respect paid this provide or not?”
2 – “We all understand to take everything we read here with a grain of skepticism, including claims that may be used to squelch the distribution of information.”
- Agreed – including skepticism about you and your intent. I still do not understand why there is a debate when it comes to a matter of personal safety. Take the case recently where the TSA Marshals shot and killed someone who presented an unknown threat. While no one could be sure he was carrying a bomb, the shot and killed him because he could have and that is acceptable cause for lethal force. In this case do you debate it, make unfounded claims, hold someone suspect of there true intent, allow others to flame each other all to determine if there was a real safety issue? No – you shoot the thread dead and leave it to be discussed where you have an audience that wants to here all sides and facts. That is my opinion and not the cause for why the thread was dropped and voices were squelched. That you have to argue with the moderators – of both DC and LV boards. The LV board moderator has since closed the thread. Have you presented your case there?
3 – “Name changes are commonly dispensed information here and useful.”
- Agreed. And if it was just that and no information came out indicating safety issues it would have been welcomed with open arms. I’m also sure there would have been a long debate as to what the cause for name change since apparently it is precieved by most ho0bbyist as an act of deception hiding bad reviews and the reasons for those. It wasn’t just a matter of name changes once someone brought to light an issue of safety.
4 – "There are basically two questions then. “
- Good Question -
Question 1 - “Who then makes the decision that some claim (credible or not) should be believed”
- Each person who reads the threads and information found in other threads related to the claim will make a decision to believe a claim or not to believe a claim. They may look further to determine what is the truth and facts supporting the claim. But most of the claims I see posted are not based on facts but are subjective opinions and open for doubt, questions and debates.
Example - If this was a claim that a provider doesn’t treat everyone the same and you have two or more sides speaking out on it, who decides if any ones point of view or opinion is to be believed – you make your own decision, case by case.. Again, this claim had safety overtones which in my opinion it was properly handled.
Question 2 - “Who then makes the decision that some thread should be stopped or some information prevented from being shared?
- Policy, the moderators, staff and admin. But I bet you already knew this answer.
5 – “I think the answer to that first question relates directly to the second question.”
- I disagree and have shown you why in the comments written above. The moderator seldom inflects his personal opinions and beliefs on a board – at least on this board. He has allowed open discussion on many subject and unless it violated TER Policy or was started to disrupt or becomes disruptive, does not provide a significant benefit (such as sports talk – LOL) the post will be allowed. If you wish to find out more, I suggest you ask each moderator and see what they say. I would be willing to bet that each handles their board a little different.
6 – “Doesn't the self-posting of a face picture and contact information on the public internet comprise a move by the one person with the greatest interest that is essentially the essence of the dissemination of the information?”
- Yes, but how it relates to this subject is really the case. While it is not known why someone would openly post her face and provide contact information only to later state the change was made for safety is subjective and open for discussion – with the provider if she so wished to. Your interpretation would appear that she granted open dissemination of her new information on the TER board. I don’t disagree, but this, as I’ve said, would require the answer to why be provided by her. An explanation was provided; it was her intent to protect herself. While it wasn’t the answer we would have expected of someone who has posted her face and information that the fact she gave an explanation was enough and with regard to personal safety – it’s better to err and pull the post – that is my opinion – ask the Moderator.
7 – “My point is: don't shoot the reader. Or the person who relates what he read or saw. “
- The removal of the post was not shooting the reader. But the person who related what he read provided the possible cause for it’s removal – again – safety.
8 – “If the provider asks that the thread be pulled, then it should be pulled. But even that is problematical, since she started the ball rolling with her ad.”
- I disagree. Just because a provider doesn’t like what’s been said or written shouldn’t be enough to have it pulled. That would mean any provider who doesn’t like a thread where her name, services, request for information, good bad or indifferent including comments made about her take precedence above what the intent of this board is about. Sharing of information that is not harmful, spiteful, mean or in this case, a possible safety issue should be allowed as long as it doesn’t violate other TER policies. Anyway this is contradictory to your comment (6).
The only case where this in fact would apply is if in fact a provider doesn’t like what’s being said or posted or reviewed and has asked or requested to be de-listed. In this case, no discussion would be allowed.
9 – “What would be worse is if the free flow of information in this marketplace of information was staunched because of some misplaced belief of some reported problem. “
- I can agree to this as long as it has nothing to do with personal safety. Determining misplaces beliefs should be determined after you can prove by fact or evidence there is no safety issue. That’s why the Marshals are instructed to shoot first and ask questions later. This is to eliminate the threat to many. In this case I would have removed the thread to protect the provider allowing for later discussion such as this.
10 - “The issue of dissemination or no dissemination is for her to decide, not the TER members. And her initial posting would seem to be a statement in favor of disseminating.”
- Dissemination of her information and any other provider information is what TER is about. And TER is about members and what they share with each other. However, passing information where one knows there is a possible safety issue or is threatening in nature shouldn’t be allowed. The only exception would be if a provider was knowingly passing STD’s. Yet even in that case I don’t believe it should be posted openly without first showing the proof or evidence that someone is passing STD’s – how would we know it’s not someone who is vindictive?
All that I’ve share such as yourself are independent point of view. I appreciate you effort to post on this subject. Yet I still feel this isn’t something which needed to be discussed here as much as it should be posted to the National Board.
I wait for your comments to my post with great anticipation. That is to say if our Moderator doesn’t remove it first… Oh, and you might want to ask the Moderator by PM to answer these questions and voice his point of view.
