Oen
Well-Known Member
Why should any of us bother replying to a thread which might simply be deleted, Stazi (or BBC Radio 3) style?
THAT thread about UKSA...
- Thread starter Oen
- Start date
Aardee
Well-Known Member
I suspect it was more to do with disclosure of personal information than the actual content...
Danny Jo
Well-Known Member
I can't find it, so maybe it has been deleted. A shame if it has, because it was stuffed with good advice on writing curricula vitorum. Cavee, everyone, there might be a classicist around.
scotty123
Well-Known Member
"I suspect it was more to do with disclosure of personal information than the actual content..."
Evidence please, since UKSA spend a lot of money with YBW publications!
Evidence please, since UKSA spend a lot of money with YBW publications!
Oen
Well-Known Member
Nope, the critical stuff was pulled long before the deletion, by the author.
Barr Avel
Well-Known Member
I did warn everybody that I was sure it would get pulled & JJ agreed, citing Gypsy Moth sponsorship as well as advertising revenue...
My only surprise is that it took so long!
Marc.
My only surprise is that it took so long!
Marc.
G
Guest
Guest
[ QUOTE ]
I did warn everybody that I was sure it would get pulled & JJ agreed, citing Gypsy Moth sponsorship as well as advertising revenue...
My only surprise is that it took so long!
Marc.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have a feeling that "journalistic licence" was involved there ... let it run so long - let people vent / rant / post ... so all see general flavour / replies ... then pull it in keeping with "possible parties requests" if any.
But of course I'm one of life's trusting types !!
/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
I did warn everybody that I was sure it would get pulled & JJ agreed, citing Gypsy Moth sponsorship as well as advertising revenue...
My only surprise is that it took so long!
Marc.
[/ QUOTE ]
I have a feeling that "journalistic licence" was involved there ... let it run so long - let people vent / rant / post ... so all see general flavour / replies ... then pull it in keeping with "possible parties requests" if any.
But of course I'm one of life's trusting types !!
/forums/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
Oen
Well-Known Member
I feel extremely guilty (by association) to be taking part in a censored discussion forum, especially where the censorship is driven only by commercial greed of the forum operator.
Phoenix of Hamble
Well-Known Member
Steady on!
We don't know at all yet whether that was why it was pulled....
Reading it through, it struck me that the thread was largely supportive of UKSA rather than anything else...
It might just as easily been the OP that requested it be removed...
We don't know at all yet whether that was why it was pulled....
Reading it through, it struck me that the thread was largely supportive of UKSA rather than anything else...
It might just as easily been the OP that requested it be removed...
G
Guest
Guest
[ QUOTE ]
I feel extremely guilty (by association) to be taking part in a censored discussion forum, especially where the censorship is driven only by commercial greed of the forum operator.
[/ QUOTE ]
I haven't seen any post or reamrk from any IPC authority saying it was pulled due Commercial pressure ... or maybe I missed something ?
The stupid thing is - the thread basically came out on UKSA side ! It was only personal data that was really contrary to common-sense.
I still have the link for it - but it comes up "Access Denied" ... unlike previous where pulled .. where it said something like ... "post deleted" etc.
I feel extremely guilty (by association) to be taking part in a censored discussion forum, especially where the censorship is driven only by commercial greed of the forum operator.
[/ QUOTE ]
I haven't seen any post or reamrk from any IPC authority saying it was pulled due Commercial pressure ... or maybe I missed something ?
The stupid thing is - the thread basically came out on UKSA side ! It was only personal data that was really contrary to common-sense.
I still have the link for it - but it comes up "Access Denied" ... unlike previous where pulled .. where it said something like ... "post deleted" etc.
l'escargot
Well-Known Member
[ QUOTE ]
I feel extremely guilty (by association) to be taking part in a censored discussion forum, especially where the censorship is driven only by commercial greed of the forum operator.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think that is a very large assumption - as others have said, it didn't show UKSA up in a particularly bad light. Keith is away at the moment, no mod has put up any reason for pulling it (which is the usual practice) and unless there were subsequent derogatory posts which we may not have seen, it looks more as if someone has pulled it "just in case" and I wouldn't be surprised to see an explanation in due course.
I think a lot of these cries of "censorship!" tend to be a bit hysterical, it's only a sailing forum FFS, not the root of democracy and world freedom.
I feel extremely guilty (by association) to be taking part in a censored discussion forum, especially where the censorship is driven only by commercial greed of the forum operator.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think that is a very large assumption - as others have said, it didn't show UKSA up in a particularly bad light. Keith is away at the moment, no mod has put up any reason for pulling it (which is the usual practice) and unless there were subsequent derogatory posts which we may not have seen, it looks more as if someone has pulled it "just in case" and I wouldn't be surprised to see an explanation in due course.
I think a lot of these cries of "censorship!" tend to be a bit hysterical, it's only a sailing forum FFS, not the root of democracy and world freedom.
G
Guest
Guest
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I feel extremely guilty (by association) to be taking part in a censored discussion forum, especially where the censorship is driven only by commercial greed of the forum operator.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think that is a very large assumption - as others have said, it didn't show UKSA up in a particularly bad light. Keith is away at the moment, no mod has put up any reason for pulling it (which is the usual practice) and unless there were subsequent derogatory posts which we may not have seen, it looks more as if someone has pulled it "just in case" and I wouldn't be surprised to see an explanation in due course.
I think a lot of these cries of "censorship!" tend to be a bit hysterical, it's only a sailing forum FFS, not the root of democracy and world freedom.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's the same old story ... someone mentions the dreaded C word ... and then before you know it - it becomes "fact" ....
Bah Humbug !!
[ QUOTE ]
I feel extremely guilty (by association) to be taking part in a censored discussion forum, especially where the censorship is driven only by commercial greed of the forum operator.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think that is a very large assumption - as others have said, it didn't show UKSA up in a particularly bad light. Keith is away at the moment, no mod has put up any reason for pulling it (which is the usual practice) and unless there were subsequent derogatory posts which we may not have seen, it looks more as if someone has pulled it "just in case" and I wouldn't be surprised to see an explanation in due course.
I think a lot of these cries of "censorship!" tend to be a bit hysterical, it's only a sailing forum FFS, not the root of democracy and world freedom.
[/ QUOTE ]
It's the same old story ... someone mentions the dreaded C word ... and then before you know it - it becomes "fact" ....
Bah Humbug !!
StugeronSteve
Well-Known Member
I have to agree that the general tone of the thread was behind UKSA. There was some criticism of an individual at the school, but that came with an acknowledgement that she could well have been at the end of her tether.
Shame it has been pulled, but let's wait to find out why.
Shame it has been pulled, but let's wait to find out why.
luty
Active Member
Is there a case for the employee mentioned to ask that it is pulled?
I'm not sure if I would be too happy if my copy emails were posted publicly without my authorisation and is the reason for my work emails having longer conditions attached than my mortgage contract...
I'm not sure if I would be too happy if my copy emails were posted publicly without my authorisation and is the reason for my work emails having longer conditions attached than my mortgage contract...
Pinnacle
Well-Known Member
I read all of it before it was pulled. The overall impression I got was of an experienced organisation trying to give sound practical advice, an annoyed parent who had paid for the course and an embarrassed young man who kept his head down.
My recollection is that tcm summed up the cv presentation issues really succinctly. Forumites would be well served by IPC if this part of the thread was still available for viewing.
To me, UKSA came out of it well ( albeit with a sense of exasperation in the tone of the e-mail we saw). I am therefore lead to the conclusion that it was the personal information issues that led to it being pulled. (Or maybe the candidate had seen enough?)
My recollection is that tcm summed up the cv presentation issues really succinctly. Forumites would be well served by IPC if this part of the thread was still available for viewing.
To me, UKSA came out of it well ( albeit with a sense of exasperation in the tone of the e-mail we saw). I am therefore lead to the conclusion that it was the personal information issues that led to it being pulled. (Or maybe the candidate had seen enough?)
Aja
Well-Known Member
Hold on. Who's forum is it? It's IPC's ball remember!
Donald
Donald
r_h
Well-Known Member
Had I been the son of the original poster, I'd have been desperate to have the thread pulled...
...I don't see how IPC could do anything other than comply with such a request.
...I don't see how IPC could do anything other than comply with such a request.
wetndry
Member
Two points:
Firstly the OP contained the full name and CV of an individual who had not (as far as we know) given permission for that info to be published. The name and CV remained there even after the email address and phone number were edited out of the post. Having some work to avoid, I Googled the name and found it, with email and phone number, on another marine employment website. That personal information alone was enough to justify removing the OP at least .
Secondly, IPC's lawyers might have recommended that the thread be pulled. Whilst the general tone of the thread supported UKSA, it's possible that the lawyers might have seen a potential case for trade libel and, given the generally cautious nature of legal advisors, I'm sure they would have recommended pulling the entire thread rather than risking a case.
A third thought - the individual whose CV was posted might have been able to make a case for libel too!
Firstly the OP contained the full name and CV of an individual who had not (as far as we know) given permission for that info to be published. The name and CV remained there even after the email address and phone number were edited out of the post. Having some work to avoid, I Googled the name and found it, with email and phone number, on another marine employment website. That personal information alone was enough to justify removing the OP at least .
Secondly, IPC's lawyers might have recommended that the thread be pulled. Whilst the general tone of the thread supported UKSA, it's possible that the lawyers might have seen a potential case for trade libel and, given the generally cautious nature of legal advisors, I'm sure they would have recommended pulling the entire thread rather than risking a case.
A third thought - the individual whose CV was posted might have been able to make a case for libel too!
duncan
Well-Known Member
totally agree but let's not end up rebuilding the thread here with the obvious consequences.
there is an excellent tradition on here of explanations being posted in respect of pulled threads; it can take time but normally appears.
I would like to think it's more inline with Magnacarter's suggestion than any conspiracy theory - but then I always like to believe missing pets are being cared for by the old lady down the road..................
there is an excellent tradition on here of explanations being posted in respect of pulled threads; it can take time but normally appears.
I would like to think it's more inline with Magnacarter's suggestion than any conspiracy theory - but then I always like to believe missing pets are being cared for by the old lady down the road..................
mikefleetwood
Well-Known Member
While not wishing to get drawn into the discussions of the original thread (my own views were well expressed by others, anyway), surely enough justification for withdrawing the thread would be the publishing of a private email? Most emails sent out by way of business have statements to the effect that they are for the recipient only, and not to be published or disclosed.
