Date   

locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

On Wed, Oct 10, 2018 at 05:26 AM, Max H. wrote:
Please ensure that your group adheres to our Terms of Service. [As long as these are labeled as the rules/TOS, it's kind of redundant. Better to start with your objective:]
I disagree and would definitely refer to the TOS here. Otherwise, people who haven't read it (which is probably 99.99999999% of users) may think this is just some airy goal rather than an agreement grounded in a legal document.

I agree with most of the rest of this. I'm not quite sure I love the last additional sentence.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Not permitted groups

Barbara Byers
 

Disagree, sounds like false equivalence.

Barb

 


On 2018-10-10 01:54 AM, Shal Farley wrote:

J,

I'm with Brian in liking examples. The only problem I see is that as
further conspiracy theories proliferate, they're likely to become
obsolete and need periodic updating. ;)

The more serious problem, as I see it, is that the examples given all point in the same political direction.

If examples are to be useful then draw them from various ideologies, perhaps including some not based in U.S. politics; otherwise they make a mockery of the respect for diversity espoused in the initial paragraph.

Shal




locked Re: Not permitted groups

Max H.
 

OK, I'll give it a shot. I've had to word things for both companies and Government agencies, so I hope this might work for a larger audience. I tried to italicize my additions and use strikethrough for deletions, although I didn't bother doing that with the intro, as I rearranged some of the wording:

Please ensure that your group adheres to our Terms of Service. [As long as these are labeled as the rules/TOS, it's kind of redundant. Better to start with your objective:] We at Groups.io believe in freedom of expression, and it is our intention to respect different perspectives and enable them to co-exist seamlessly and effortlessly. [Made the wording more clear and direct.] With that said, we do not permit the following:
 
- Pornography, adult content or nudity (this will link to the existing pornography page).
- Harassment of any kind.
- Groups dedicated to illegal media sharing or other illegal activities. [As someone pointed out, it's not always illegal]
- Groups dedicated to the promotion of extreme, hateful, or exclusionary ideas. [more general]
- Groups dedicated to the promotion of conspiracy theories, including but not limited to: Gamergate, Pizzagate, and Qanon. [I think this is now covered by the previous item.]
- Groups that are designed strictly to be advertisements or to otherwise game our group directory clickbait[To me that covers anything trying to game the system.]

While we hope to work with you to follow these guidelines, the interpretation of these rules is completely up to Groups.io moderators and management. 


moderated Re: retroactively change Display Names in group activity log #suggestion

 

J,

However, the retroactive change does not occur in the group or message
activity log.
I have an aversion to altering prior entries in anything referred to as a "log". To the extent that I'd rather the entries were stored as flat HTML strings rather than being created on the fly for presentation.

Display Names are retroactively changed in posts after they are
changed.
I'm not a fan of that either, for much the same reason: it irrevocably edits history, and causes a diversion between what I've saved in email folders and what is in the Messages "archive". Yes, I put scare-quotes around "archive" because I know that usage is in disfavor. But it accurately reflects my feelings about "how things should be".

But I think I lost this argument once long ago.

You could argue that I can still find the pre-name-change activities
by searching on the email address, ...
Those too can change, though not as facilely.

Maybe it would be better if there were an activity log equivalent to "All Posts By This Member" - a search that is based on an immutable identifier for the member.

Shal


locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

J,

I’m with Brian in liking examples. The only problem I see is that as
further conspiracy theories proliferate, they’re likely to become
obsolete and need periodic updating. ;)
The more serious problem, as I see it, is that the examples given all point in the same political direction.

If examples are to be useful then draw them from various ideologies, perhaps including some not based in U.S. politics; otherwise they make a mockery of the respect for diversity espoused in the initial paragraph.

Shal


locked Re: Not permitted groups

kr402
 

I might agree, but that's up to Mark.

On Tuesday, October 9, 2018, 9:27 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 09:14 PM, kr402 wrote:
I was just pointing out that  it was not included 
in this list, because yes Mark said,
or if I missed anything.
I stand corrected on the fetishes! I still would not mention them. ;) 


locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 09:14 PM, kr402 wrote:
I was just pointing out that  it was not included 
in this list, because yes Mark said,
or if I missed anything.
I stand corrected on the fetishes! I still would not mention them. ;) 
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Not permitted groups

kr402
 


On Oct 9, 2018, at 7:44 PM, J_Catlady <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Yegads I would specifically not
get into mentioning "fetishes." 

I did not come up with the 
idea to mention "fetishes".
Like I stated in the past it was mentioned.
I was just pointing out that  it was not included 
in this list, because yes Mark said,
or if I missed anything.

Hey, anyway I thought Mark said he didn't want to get into discussing the content. People are adding stuff. We're just supposed to focus on the language.:)

this is what Mark said

On Oct 9, 2018, at 1:45 PM, Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:

I'm not interested in a debate as to whether these things should be allowed. I'm just looking for any suggestions for how to improve the text, or if I missed anything.

I do not see anything in Marks post that says 
'focus on the language', although I guess
text = language. 

Anyway my post was on
or if I missed anything.

Have a blessed 😊 evening,
J_Catlady 🐱 


locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

I’m with Brian in liking examples. The only problem I see is that as further conspiracy theories proliferate, they’re likely to become obsolete and need periodic updating. ;)


On Oct 9, 2018, at 8:25 PM, Brian Vogel <britechguy@...> wrote:

I disagree with Shal in regard to the use of the phrase "including, but not limited to."   I find it to be incredibly useful to give concrete examples of the sort of thing being described. 

One could also use the wording, "some examples would be:  [make list here], and anything similar in nature."

Giving concrete examples of a thing not allowed makes it much less abstract, and also makes it much easier to strike "anything similar in nature" under stated rules if someone were to be foolish enough to break the rules.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Not permitted groups

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

I would also warn those who insist that anything explicitly banned is interpreted as a challenge that anything not explicitly banned is implicitly allowed.

It is better to clearly set forth the overall tenor one wants, and have justification to remove content under "the rules/terms of service," than to avoid doing so.

The old phrase, "There oughta be a law!," has parallel here.
--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


locked Re: Not permitted groups

Brian Vogel <britechguy@...>
 

I disagree with Shal in regard to the use of the phrase "including, but not limited to."   I find it to be incredibly useful to give concrete examples of the sort of thing being described. 

One could also use the wording, "some examples would be:  [make list here], and anything similar in nature."

Giving concrete examples of a thing not allowed makes it much less abstract, and also makes it much easier to strike "anything similar in nature" under stated rules if someone were to be foolish enough to break the rules.

--

Brian - Windows 10 Home, 64-Bit, Version 1803, Build 17134 
     Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.

          ~ H.L. Mencken, AKA The Sage of Baltimore


locked Re: Not permitted groups

KWKloeber
 

Those that will do IT (whatever IT is defined as) will still do IT, regardless of warnings, terms of service, whatever.
Disallowing IT, is like a magnet, a gauntlet thrown down as a challenge. We should have learned in the last two thousand eighteen years (discounting BC) that you can’t legislate moral behavior. Not saying don’t bother, “just sayin.”
Remember the “do not call list”? How’s that workin out for everyone?😳
Probably more effective is just pulling the shotgun out of the cabinet and putting an end to the offender.


locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 02:51 PM, kr402 wrote:
In the past it also said no fetishes
Yegads I would specifically not get into mentioning "fetishes." 
Hey, anyway I thought Mark said he didn't want to get into discussing the content. People are adding stuff. We're just supposed to focus on the language.:)
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

On Tue, Oct 9, 2018 at 07:08 PM, Steph Mathews wrote:
I would also add that this could cause people to have infected computers or other pieces of technology.
I disagree and distinctly would not mention anything like that. (I don't think it's likely that Mark will anyway.) 

As it stands someone can edit/make changes on the site for the group they’ve created and not get it approved.
For that matter, I can create a group for comic book fans and after approval, turn it into a raging porn site. I don't understand the suggestion about the block, but I think that group owners are already prevented from activating their groups until they're approved.

I do agree with the suggestion to clarify "gaming our group directory" and have already made the same suggestion.
 
--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


locked Re: Not permitted groups

Patty Sliney
 

What Shal said.  Extremely well-worded.  My thoughts exactly.

Patty S.


locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

Mark,

- Groups dedicated to media sharing or other illegal activities.
Media sharing is not itself an illegal activity, and certainly isn't when you are the content creator. The ToS already covers Copyright violations, but maybe you want to mention that here specifically.

Shal


locked Re: Not permitted groups

 

Mark,

I'd recommend against listing alt-right and the other conspiracy theories by name. Partly because I don't want to have to go look them up to see what they really mean, partly because I don't want other people to go look them up.

Ken and Liam kind of miss the point, but also make the point. "including but not limited to" is seldom interpreted as intended. Usually people read an exclusion list and say, "I'm not that so I'm ok" without further consideration.

Hence if you want to say no extreme ideologies say exactly that. Unless you want to include every extreme ideology except the one(s) listed.

On the other hand if your purpose is to allow only goodthink on your service, then you're ignoring history's lessons (as well as Orwell's) about that very dark path.

Shal


locked Re: Not permitted groups

Steph Mathews
 

Mark, Below are my thoughts, your words will be in between quotation marks.

 

“Please ensure that your group adheres to our Terms of Service.”  Some people might not know what adheres mean.  “We believe in freedom of expression and Groups.io, as a broad-based service, is designed to respect many different perspectives and enable them to co-exist seamlessly and effortlessly. With that said, we do not permit the following:

 

- Pornography, adult content or nudity (this will link to the existing pornography page).”  I would also add that this could cause people to have infected computers or other pieces of technology.

“- Harassment of any kind.

- Groups dedicated to media sharing or other illegal activities.

- Groups dedicated to the promotion of alt-right ideas.

- Groups dedicated to the promotion of conspiracy theories, including but not limited to: Gamergate, Pizzagate, and Qanon.

- Groups that are designed strictly to be advertisements or to otherwise game our group directory.”  You might want to reword that.  I don’t know how, but someone could easily not know what you mean or not understand it.

 

Also, I have 1 more suggestion.  As it stands someone can edit/make changes on the site for the group they’ve created and not get it approved.  Yet, anyway.  The suggestion is put somekind of block in place to prevent then from doing anything till you make your decision because that could easily trick them in thinking that it is approved and that they can start getting the word out.  Have a blessed day! Steph


locked Re: Not permitted groups

William Finn
 

Mark,

You should add flat earth, fake moon landings, the moon is a projection , alien landings and geocentric universe to the conspiracy theories section :)

Oh and my favorite,  we are all part of an AI computer simulation :) 

Liam 


On Tue, Oct 9, 2018, 4:46 PM Mark Fletcher <markf@corp.groups.io> wrote:
Hi All,

I'm working to better signal what groups are not permitted, as I don't think I currently do a good job of that during the group creation process. Here's some text I've come up with; please let me know if you have any suggestions. I'm not interested in a debate as to whether these things should be allowed. I'm just looking for any suggestions for how to improve the text, or if I missed anything.

Thanks,
Mark

Please ensure that your group adheres to our Terms of Service. We believe in freedom of expression and Groups.io, as a broad-based service, is designed to respect many different perspectives and enable them to co-exist seamlessly and effortlessly. With that said, we do not permit the following:

- Pornography, adult content or nudity (this will link to the existing pornography page).
- Harassment of any kind.
- Groups dedicated to media sharing or other illegal activities.
- Groups dedicated to the promotion of alt-right ideas.
- Groups dedicated to the promotion of conspiracy theories, including but not limited to: Gamergate, Pizzagate, and Qanon.
- Groups that are designed strictly to be advertisements or to otherwise game our group directory.


locked Re: Not permitted groups

Ken Schweizer
 

Hi Mark,

 

What about:
Groups dedicated to the promotion of Socialist or Communist ideas.

 

Ken

 

"And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." God

 

From: main@beta.groups.io [mailto:main@beta.groups.io] On Behalf Of Mark Fletcher
Sent: Tuesday, October 9, 2018 3:46 PM
To: beta@groups.io
Subject: [beta] Not permitted groups

 

Hi All,

 

I'm working to better signal what groups are not permitted, as I don't think I currently do a good job of that during the group creation process. Here's some text I've come up with; please let me know if you have any suggestions. I'm not interested in a debate as to whether these things should be allowed. I'm just looking for any suggestions for how to improve the text, or if I missed anything.

 

Thanks,

Mark

 

Please ensure that your group adheres to our Terms of Service. We believe in freedom of expression and Groups.io, as a broad-based service, is designed to respect many different perspectives and enable them to co-exist seamlessly and effortlessly. With that said, we do not permit the following:

 

- Pornography, adult content or nudity (this will link to the existing pornography page).

- Harassment of any kind.

- Groups dedicated to media sharing or other illegal activities.

- Groups dedicated to the promotion of alt-right ideas.

- Groups dedicated to the promotion of conspiracy theories, including but not limited to: Gamergate, Pizzagate, and Qanon.

- Groups that are designed strictly to be advertisements or to otherwise game our group directory.

 

11901 - 11920 of 30380