Text 44214, 262 rader
Skriven 2006-12-19 18:38:10 av Jeff Smith (1:14/0)
Kommentar till text 44190 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Your Fidonews Website
=============================
Hello Michiel.
19 Dec 06 11:50, you wrote to me:
MV> Hello Jeff!
MV> On Monday December 18 2006 20:47, you wrote to me:
MV>>> Which I should narrow down to "giving up on attempting to
MV>>> moderate those who refuse to be moderated". He has not giving up
MV>>> all together, he is still moderating.
JS>> Several of those same people have stated that they would
JS>> accept being moderated by someone that they respect.
MV> And the lion will lay next to the lamb. Yeah right...
The bottom line here is that many have liitle or no respect for
Björn as moderator and they show that by their actions and responses
to Bjorn as moderator.
MV> Jeff you are naive. Can't you see that this is an empty promise? Can't
MV> you see that by going along with it, you give everyone the perfect
MV> excuse to ignore every future moderator of this and every other echo
MV> in FidoNet? All the user has to say is "I do not respect this
MV> moderator" and he/she is excused.
It doesn't excuse them for their actions any more than it excuses
Björn for his inactions. We are all responsible for our actions and the
choices that we make. There is a cause and effect here Michiel. In this
case some are reacting to Björn and his moderation of this echo.
MV>>>>> Giving up <> not caring any more.
JS>>>> Giving up BECAUSE of not caring anymore.
MV>>> No, you are putting words into his mouth. My interpretation of
MV>>> his words is that he gave up on the impossible.
JS>> Semantics Michiel. The end result is the same.
MV> But the blame is laid somewhere else...
Saying something is impossible just puts limits on one's self. There
is almost always a way that something can done. Given the desire or the
thought to see it through to it's conclusion. It is true that we often don't
succeed at something. That is the reality of life. But to give up and use
the excuse that it is impossible to me is a way of trying to shift the blame
to someone or something else.
My interpretation of Björn and his words is that he has chosen to give
up because he no longer has the ambition to act as moderator. He may also
no longer wish to deal with those that may require moderation. I have no
problem with him feeling that way. What I have a problem with is his
acceptance of the chaos that results from him giving up on what he doesn't
want to deal with. He has stated that this is his way of moderating. If I
were moderator and no longer had the ambition or the desire to deal with
people I would find someone who did. The important thing would be a
continuation of an active moderator. In this case Björn has given up but
isn't willing or doesn't want anyone else to be moderator. Björn has also
refered to the current moderation style as the Z2 way of doing things. His
apparant zonal view of things may be a factor in his desire to stay as
moderator regardless of the condition that this echo degrades into being.
MV> A cultural difference pops up. Many Americans would rather die than
MV> admit something is impossible. They maintain that failure is due to
MV> not trying hard enough, not putting enough effort/money in it, etc
MV> etc.
I think that is a fair assessmant. Although I would say that many
things are not impossible. An attitude that I think springs from Americans
way of seing a goal and not wanting to give up achieving that goal. They
may not be able to reach that goal. But that fact should not label that
goal as impossible to achieve. The factors relating that failure to reach
that goal may be differant tommorow. <g> Another differance I think is the
comparatively short time America has existed compared to Europe.
MV> Europeans take a nmore pragmatic approach. They accept not
MV> everything is possible and when confronted with the impossible, they
MV> redirect their efforts to those things that are within reach.
Redirecting one's efforts is good when one has decided that they
can no longer achieve their goal. But that shouldn't mean that that goal
is impossible. Maybe the circustances were wrong? Maybe the time was wrong?
Maybe the person was wrong? Maybe a differant approach was needed? I think
that there are always alternatives. It is just a matter of one's desire to
find them.
MV>>>>> FidoNews echo <> FidoNews megazine.
JS>>>> Björn is the link here. He is responsible for both.
MV>>> Point is that he has not given up on the FidoNews magazine, as
MV>>> your words suggested.
JS>> Then maybe the situation is even worse than was thought.
MV> That negative attitude is going to bite you in the back some day.
Probably slightly farther south. <g>
MV> You seem to be determined to see something negative in everything
MV> that the currect FidoNews editor does or doesn't. IOW you are
MV> demonising him.
Not at all. I think that Bjorn does a decent job as editor. IOW,
I have little or no problems with his abilities as editor. The points
that I have made about the problems that I DO have with him as editor
and moderator have been consistant. Those being his inability or simple
refusal to actively moderate this echo and his inability to keep his
personal, political, religous views and his bias out of his duties as
editor or moderator. Those are things that Björn is responsible for.
JS>>>> There was no specification made on the webpage that Bjorn had
JS>>>> no control or input regarding it's contents.
MV>>> An omission that goes on the tab of Jim Barchuk. *He* is the one
MV>>> that maintained the website.
JS>> Considering the "Current" information available from that
JS>> website is from 2003. I think "MaintainED" is indeed the
JS>> operative term.
MV> Yes, that is what I wrote.
MV>>> I see that fidonews.info is still free. I could register that -
MV>>> like you registered fidonews.net - and put up a web site where I
MV>>> say that you, Jeff Smith, are a contact for that web site. Does
MV>>> that make you responsible for its content?
JS>> I would be responsilble for straightening you out and having
JS>> you remove my name.
MV> Nonsense. When *I* put something on my website it is *my*
MV> responsibility and my responsibility alone. If I were to put something
MV> about you on my website that you disagree with, I would have a good
MV> reason for that. And so I would not remove it merely because you
MV> asked. Consequently you have no control over what I put on my website
MV> and therefore you can never be responsible. Period.
You do have a thing for control don't you Michiel?
If you listed me as a contact for your website that I had nothing to
do with and no control over. It would befall me to inquire as to why you
placed my name there and to see that you removed it. Could you refuse? Of
course you could. But it would only make you look inept in the control of
your website. In this case your hypothetical situation does make much
sense. Other than to show that you like to be in control and like to control
others as much as possible.
MV> Anyway, it is not the job of the Fidonews editor to spider the web for
MV> false or misleading information and attempt to correct it.
Then whose would it be? Who else would be responsible for maintianing
the integrety and accuracy of the information regarding Fidonews?
JS>> It would make me responsible at least in the eyes of those that
JS>> visited the website and had little or no prior knowledge of the
JS>> reality of the situation.
MV> Then you are accepting responsibility for something that you do not
MV> control. Not a smart move.
No. Using your scenario YOU would be making me responsible by putting
my name and/or contact info on YOUR website. Based on your actions others
would look at me as being responsible for your website. See how senseless
doing something like that would be?
MV>>> Yes, a short statement on the web site would help, but the
MV>>> problem is that it is not under anyone's control but the owner
MV>>> of the web site.
JS>> Then the problem befalls the owner of that website. If Bjorn
JS>> has no connection to that website other than Jim displaying out
JS>> of date Fidonews information I would not expect Bjorn to be
JS>> responsible.
MV> Right. So we agree that Björn is not responsible for what is on the
MV> fidonet.org web site. Now will you retract your statement about him
MV> not caring any more in relation to that web site?
I will say that the condition, and accuracy of the Fidonews.org
website should not be used as an indication of Björn not caring. It
should instad be used as an indication of Jim not caring about his website.
MV>>> People apparently still have not learned to not take everything
MV>>> they find on the web as gospel. What happened to fidonews.org is
MV>>> - unfortunately - rather typical.
JS>> Typical but also preventable.
MV> How?
MV> How are you going to prevent someone form registering a domain that
MV> has "fidonews" in it, building a web site that contains (in your eyes)
MV> misleading information and then abandoning it so that the (in your
MV> eyes) misleading information is frozen? How are you going to prevent
MV> that from happening again?
JS>> While I don't think there was any intent to mislead. I do think
JS>> that Jim could have avoided or prevented misunderstandings with a
JS>> few words.
MV> The "typical" was not so much about the misleading information, but
MV> about the web site being abandoned and the information - misleading or
MV> not - being frozen.
MV> There are *many* fidonet related web sites that are abandoned and that
MV> contain outdated or otherwise incorrect information. Here is another
MV> one: http://www.fidonet.us
MV>>> I wish you luck with fidonews.net. I hope it will not be a
MV>>> rehash of fidonews.org.
JS>> Thanks Michiel. If it comes to be. One thing that it will
JS>> not be is a forum for me to editorialize or express my personal
JS>> opinions.
MV> "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"...
MV> If you do not intend to do anything other than just make FidoNews
MV> available, what will be the added value of that web site? There are
MV> dozens of places where people can read or download FidoNews. What is
MV> the added value of yet another one?
JS>> That would be what my personal website would be for.
MV> Fidonews.net *will* be your personal web site.
No. I have a personal website that I would use to express my personal
views if I so choosed. I also have Fidonet regional and net websites
with their own domains and email servers.
MV> You registered the domain name. It is your initiative, you are the
MV> one responsible. That the name has a resemblance to the official
MV> newsletter of the FidoNet community does not change that.
MV> Cheers, Michiel
MV> ... full fidonews archive at: http://www.vlist.eu/downloads/fidonews/
MV> --- GoldED+/W32-MSVC 1.1.5-b20060315
MV> * Origin: http://www.van.der.vlist.org (2:280/5555)
Jeff
--- FMail/Win32 1.60
* Origin: Twin_Cities_Metronet - MN USA (1:14/0)
|