Censorship and Walleye Central

[Bo Fisher]

I have been following the PWT chamberlain threads with a lot of interest. While doing so, I read it like anything on internet, knowing that it is a lot of opinion, differing opinions, some facts, some people who are who they say they are, and some people who don't say who they are, and so on. I do not read it as gospel truth, sort of like a newspaper editorial, or watching the story line develop on a tv show: It is real-life drama.

I have been "logging into" walleye central many times a day to see what's new. I tell all fisherman I know to check it out.

It looks like the PWT and Chamberlain threads i have been following have been removed.

I hope i am wrong.

I love walleye Central, and everything on it, but I do not believe in censorship.

If they have been removed for cause, please post the reason(s) why, and your editorial policy.

Sincerely,

Bo Fisher

[Juls_WI]

It's in the archives.

Juls

[Dave in Mpls]

But not in tact...

[AquaMan]

Just curious, why was it dumped? Good or bad, the string was providing some very intersting reading/info. I thought the banter was civil and quite responsible over all. Did it just get too long?

AquaMan~~~~~~~~~~~~~

.·´¯° --- "It all begins and ends at the water's edge"

Eric@crowncomputerinc.com

[gilman911]

I tried an archive search and was not successful. Guess I'm not as computer literate as I thought. Could you give me some hints or guidence? Next time I will ask for help where I really need it, catching eyes. Thanks

[Juls_WI]

When you hit the archives page...click on number 326. That page will have the archived threads.

Juls

[Zach]

http://www.walleyecentral.com/cgi-bin/dcf/dcboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=8813&forum=generaldiscussion&archive=yes

[Zach]

So ... what are you trying to say ?

[Eyelander]

Like I said before if you start stepping on toes the whole post or at least parts of it will be removed!

When I posted message about North American Fishing Club Ripping people off and got numerous replys from anglers having similar problems with them the post was removed . I do admit tempers flared after the president of that club posted a reply, I am guilty of some name calling and made a public apology for the way I behaved.

Those replys should have been removed not the entire post.
If you ask me it's POLOTICS everything comes back to the almighty dollar.

Don't get me wrong I love WC and think it's the greatest site on the web, But I don't agree with removing postings that talk bad about a product or organization if there truly is a problem with them.
I will continue to report any problems I have so that other anglers don't have to waste there time and money.
Read this before it gets removed from the board.

[EyeJacker]

Me thinks someone thought the "hooks" were being over sharpened!:-) It was a good read, stimulating to say the least. It,apparently, was too painful to withstand some rather critical introspection, which in other forums can be a sign of robust health. Trying to determine if a mistake was made and by whom can be uncomfortable.

[cisco]

As in the newspaper business, there's an old expression: "It's a free press if you own one."

Applies equally to websites.

[Walleye Guy]

I too am somewhat troubled by the removeal of the PWT Blackeye/Chris Bahl post.I had a similar experience a few years ago and found this post quite interesting and close to home.It may have been getting a little lenghty but everyone seemed well behaved over all.There were alot of good points being made both for and against.I thought it was a very healthy discussion.Why was it removed?At the request of Chris,the PWT,the SD DNR.We would just like to know why.This was obviousely a very popular topic and post.Thank You.I'm personaly against Censorship unless something offensive or vulgor is being removed.

[800proX]

yup - unless there is defamation, vulgarity, and outright blatency to be a jerk, i see no reason to have everything wiped off as well. i posted this under a new topic yesterday "another one bites the dust" as in any form of speech against a pro seems to be a prime candidate for getting nixed.

i guess those posts were just over 18" - and it got thrown into the lake rather quickly!!

i am, and quite sure most are, waiting for season to open and that should alleviate some tension i would assume. hope we get the ability to "agree to disagree" and only those that rip someones character or uses vulgar language have there INDIVIDUAL post be removed. i know some stuff is in the archives, but cannot help but notice over 100 posters comment, but only shows 80 - hhmmmmmmm??????

jeff

[EyeJacker]

A little respect for the dead please. We are trying to have a quiet funneral here! :-)
Jack

[Hawgeye]

This is a perfect example of why this site and Scott Golden elects to censor! Because you are disappointed in a company that you feel does not meet its advertising remarks, does that mean you need to bash them with scam, scumbag, stealing ....type language? Please refrain from that so the censor wand does not get used. I am tired of the personal attacks like this. Stick to the facts that they did not do this that or the other thing but comments of namecalling and judging the company based on your experience is unfounded.

I do not support that particular company that you are referring to for many of the 'reasons' that you have stated but not because you need to namecall.

Posters, please stop that rhetoric and keep within the lines of decency and respect. Disagree, state opinions, provide facts, but please, stop with the disrespectful namecalling.

[Hawgeye]

This is a perfect example of why this site and Scott Golden elects to censor! Because you are disappointed in a company that you feel does not meet its advertising remarks, does that mean you need to bash them with scam, scumbag, stealing ....type language? Please refrain from that so the censor wand does not get used. I am tired of the personal attacks like this. Stick to the facts that they did not do this that or the other thing but comments of namecalling and judging the company based on your experience is unfounded.

I do not support that particular company that you are referring to for many of the 'reasons' that you have stated but not because you need to namecall.

Posters, please stop that rhetoric and keep within the lines of decency and respect. Disagree, state opinions, provide facts, but please, stop with the disrespectful namecalling.

[jayw]

If you don't like how they run the board start your own and run it the way you want. It's their house so it is their rules.

It is amazing how everyone wants to tell them how it should be run while sitting on a chair enjoying the fruits of their labor.

You guys(Zach, Scott) are doing great ignore the whinners and be proud of what you have created.

[Unforgiven]

Yes Sir!

[Unforgiven]

I said YES SIR!

[Unforgiven]

>judging the company based on your experience is unfounded.

Wow, finally an honest answer! Am I alowed to use vowels or must I buy them from you?

[Absolutely True.]

NOT! How many of these posts would have made your local paper? Hardly any of 'em. How many of these posts would have been laughed off the phone if you called your local paper? Most of you would have been told, "Sorry, not interested." Unless you agreed with the editorial policy of that paper. That part of your statemment is true. However, even the sour posts get tacked up here. And, the threads in question stayed mostly intact until the accusations and name calling started. Then they were singly yanked. When the verbal abuse kept coming the thread was archived. Go look, it is still there. The internet is NOT the same as a Newspaper. And this site is waaaaaaaaay more fair to the expression of free thought than any other place I know. Also, all posts don't stay or get archived due to trying to keep the board fresh and the size of the pages managable. Would you want to wait 20 minutes for a page to load? I think not. As to another post asking for guidlines, read the caviat on the message center page. It clearly states the rules of secorum. You can't get name calling and slurs published in a newspaper. If the paper printed uncooth verbal abuse, they'd be liable for slander, as would the author. We all have that chance, somewhat annonymously here.

[Uncle Ben]

How does one tell people that a product is very bad without "verbally abusing" the company that is selling the very bad product? Really I want to know seriously. Hope I didn't verbally abuse anyone with this post. If I did I'm very sorry.

[Scott Richardson]

It's tough to referee this kind of site and have everyone agree or applaud what you do all the time. I think Scott et al do a terrific job and I appreciate all the work and soul searching that I know it takes.

I have always wondered if people used their real names if the posts would clean up in a big hurry. I have never really understood why people don't. With anonimity comes a lack of responsibility. I don't say anything here that I wouldn't say in a face-to-face conversation. Why does anyone?

Scott Richardson

[cisco]

Why is the messenger, and not the message so important?

When names are used there is both positive and negative impact completely independent of the message. It's a concept known as ascribed status.

From the earliest times of our nation many of the most powerful expressions of belief (opinion, if you will) came from no less than John Adams, Sam Adams, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, etc. More recently we've had active commentary from Felix Frankfurter, Wm. O. Douglas, Earl Warren, and others who wanted their message evaluated without attachment to their names.

It is so easy to attack an anonymous post, but usually it substitutes for rational response to the message.

[Papa Bear]

Uncle Ben it is real easy to tell the two apart, IMHO.

Telling a product is bad-
I Just bought the widgetflash 2000 and am not happy at all. What a piece of junk. I think it is poorly made and it broke the first time I tied it on.......and so on..... State your dislike and back it up with FACT.

Bashing a product-
The widgetmater 2000 is a total piece of c**p and the morons that designed it should have them rammed up their......get the picture?

Disagreeing with a post/person, (strongly)
I read your post. Are you crazy? Where did you form that opinion? Was it based in fact? Were you there? I don't think so on either point. Let me tell you how it really went.

Bashing a post/person,
What have you been smoking you idiot! Geat real or drop dead. It is narrow minded twits like you that stink up the place with the diarhea spewing from their mouths.

Bashing is purely mean, vulgar words with the intent to belittle or embarass. Bashing is someone saying something is junk, or a piece of c**p and they have never owned used or touched one.
It is extremely easy to disagree without the vulgarities and questioning of the authors sexual orientation, family lineage or relative IQ.

There, now I hope I have been able to make my original point more clearly now.

[Golden]

You know, discussions are great. They are healthy. They are the very fabric of society.

Arguements are not constructive, they end up in name calling, and verbal abuse and personal vendettas.

Now, what is the difference between a discussion and an arguement? That is a tough call. But someone has to make the call, and unless you have a better idea, that is me.

When a thread becomes a name calling contest or is filled with accusations that are not backed up with facts. That is an arguement.

The Chris Bahl thread was not deleted, it was archived and is still viewable in the archives. You can use the search engine to get to it.

There had to be some posts removed from it since they were deflamatory, name calling and had no value to the "discussion".
What is left is the best I could do to salvage a resemblence of a normal, healthy, active discussion. Not an out of control arguement.

Then, it starts again. I try to let it go to see how it will end up. Guess what? It went bad in a hurry and now we have someones Mom involved and are discussing her? That is unbelievable.

So, it was not archived, it was deleted.

I'll say it again.

Discussions are healthy, constructive and welcome. Arguements, name calling and personal vendettas are not welcome.

Try to think of it like I do. Read it aloud with your 6 year old kid sitting next to you. If you will do that it's probably something that will stay online. If you wouldn't do that, it's probably going to get the cyberdust button.

Have fun, discuss the pros and cons of any item or event you wish and we'll just keep moving forward.

Fair enough?

Scott

[Juls_WI]

What else can I say? You Da Man! ;-)

Juls

[TBO/MN]

I second that.

Good Fishin'
TBO/MN

[Backwater Eddy]

Yup

Backwater Eddy

[Pitts]

Yep I learn more by reading this web site than most people that have countless magazine subcriptions. I don't need to sort out the bull.

Thanks Scott

Pitts

[PW]

I agree and I wouldn't want to be in your shoes trying to make these decisions. You will Never please all the people all the time. Keep doing what you have been.

[EyeJacker]

Cisco,
A lucid and percetive comment. Remaining anonymous tends to preclude a flood of vulgar e-mail, obscene phone calls or a Kook at the door!
Jack

[GetReel]

Scott, You'll never have to edit anything from me and I appreciate your efforts so I don't waste my time on worthless trash talk.

Chris

[Scott Richardson]

I've never had a vulgar email from identifying myself. And, I know how to work the delete button if I do.

The message certainly means less without knowing who the messenger is. Staying anonymous reduces the import of what's said. It also allows people to say things they would never say otherwise.

Failing full accountability, the next best thing to do is read your posts with this thought in mind, "Would I want my kids to know I wrote this?"

[Uncle Ben]

Papa bear, it sounds like economic class racism to me. Some people just talk that way because of their enviroment. (ever been in a bait shop?)

[Papa Bear]

Not at all. I have spent time in many bait shops. I dont talk that way then or now. Anyway. The point was, you can say someting is cheap or bad without getting abusive, derogatory or name calling. This forum is super as you can come here and say whatever, voice an opinion, talk up a product, learn and on and on. I also don't know where I even elluded to class or racisim based on one's social station. Unless the last statement was misleading at all. Basically opinion is opinion. Dislike is an opinionated frame of mind. However, you still need fact to back up an accusation. My second 2 cents. C Ya.