Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
| Messages 1 - 104 of total 104 in this topic |
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 27, 2014 - 02:13pm PT
|
So, that was interesting...
The thread about ST management reading PM's just got erased. I am not sure what that means, but it is sad to see that ST management chooses to delete threads rather than respond to what is a relatively serious accusation.
|
|
Port
Trad climber
Norwalk, CT
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:16pm PT
|
That was.....weak.
|
|
Heyzeus
climber
Hollywood,Ca
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:17pm PT
|
Did the guy who started it get wacked too?
|
|
kunlun_shan
Mountain climber
SF, CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:17pm PT
|
:-(
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:18pm PT
|
Maybe but it may have been part of an elaborate disinformation campaign by the person who started that other thread--he may have deleted it himself in sort of a "false flag" operation.
If the ST admins are as nefarious as he would like us to believe, I highly doubt they would have "tipped him off" that they were reading his emails; instead, they would have continued to monitor his emails (to what sinister ends, who knows???)
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:24pm PT
|
And beyond just deleting the first post, where the rest of it can be recovered like some other threads in the past, looks like every post in the thread was deleted directly from the database:
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=2517669
If I look at my history of posts, the post I made in that thread no longer shows up. An end user can't do that unless they fully hack the website enough to get admin permissions on the DB. Pretty unlikely.
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 02:25pm PT
|
I wonder how long this thread will remain.
BTW, it looks like all of khanom's post and any thread he started are now gone too. Dr F part 2.
|
|
StahlBro
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:27pm PT
|
Let's see...
Send emails using a service provided by someone else about starting a competing service
Get advised that you should stop
Start a thread about it
Get whacked
Wierd....
|
|
Norton
Social climber
quitcherbellyachin
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:29pm PT
|
what did Khanom do that was so wrong that he had his account deactivated?
I don't see how he violated any forum rules
he just pointed out that our Private Messages to each other are being monitored and posted that
was he "banned" because he should have known not post that?
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 02:34pm PT
|
what did Khanom do that was so wrong that he had his account deactivated?
I don't see how he violated any forum rules
I agree with you 100%. Then again, there really are no rules for posting at ST. Our use of this site is at the whim of "management," and management has no interest in justifying its actions to us. ST management has also shown itself to be very capricious and intolerant of any comments that paint them in a less than positive light.
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 02:37pm PT
|
Starting the countdown to deletion...
Five.
Four.
Three...
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:39pm PT
|
Damn! I even did ctrl-c on his whole op, but then didn't save it anywhere, and did other ctrl's on top of it!
Maybe we can all get deleted forever!
|
|
Ahwahnee Bartender
Big Wall climber
Fog Town
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:42pm PT
|
My Ctrl + C worked. Here ya go:
khanom
Trad climber
Greeley Hill
Topic Author's Original Post - Oct 27, 2014 - 11:56am PT
I feel I have a responsibility to my friends and fellow forum members to post this. I'm sorry it's long, but I need to be thorough.
During the recent discussion about the disappearing of Dr. F, several people said they felt they had to leave in part because of the lack of clarity in this forum's policies. A poster asked "but where would we go?" and I sent an email through this site using the member-to-member email function (aka "private messages) to reassure them it was possible and gauge their interest. I mentioned that I might bring it up publicly -- I didn't do that, and had decided against any mention of it here at least until it was set up. Even so: I don't think that would necessarily be "wrong", and it doesn't violate any written policies of this forum. There have been announcements of new climbing forums in the past and there was never any problem. Same with guidebooks. Yes it probably depends, but it didn't happen anyway.
Within about half an hour of sending the message I received an email from RJ Spurrier, who is the "senior editor" and "web developer" here:
It has recently come to our attention that you have been soliciting feedback from forum members on the concept of creating your own forum.
While you have every right to do whatever you'd like to on your own, we would ask you to respectfully please refrain from using the SuperTopo forum or our resources to recruit or promote for your own competing activities.
Again, I hadn't said a word about it in the public forum. I knew what had happened, but needed RJ to say it explicitly. He did. To my request for clarification he replied:
When we say, "the SuperTopo forum or our resources" we also include features we offer such as member to member messaging.
If you know anything about the technical side of email servers or forums you know that typically these communications are not encrypted. Anybody with the right "privileges" could read them. And the Terms of Service (ToS) say that they have the right to investigate, among other things, violations of the terms. So even though neither the ToS nor Supertopo's Privacy Policy say anything about reading your email, the legality of the action isn't something I want to focus on here. If you are interested there are legal implications and I would imagine that any lawyer would say that at the least Supertopo is legally vulnerable because of the nature of the email interface and the ambiguity of their written policies. That's for Chris to figure out.
To my mind there are three issues of immediate importance:
1. What is suspicion? What is cause for reading your messages? I never mentioned anything about starting a new forum publicly. The only thing I've done is criticize the management -- both for a lack of clarity in moderation policies and for a lack of respect toward the forum members. It wasn't even all that harsh. Others agreed or said similar things.
So what prompts management to read your member-to-member emails?
Any criticism of how the forum is run?
Would they read the emails of a suspected guidebook author?
A member suspected of encouraging participation in another forum? Apparently so.
Doesn't this seem a little incongruous for the "the most open home for discussion on the Internet"?
2. The reading of member-to-member communications is routine
There are some reasons to think this:
"Suspicion" seems to have an incredibly low threshold.
This is important: In the case of this forum, there is no reason to store the message. It's just a form to send an email to mask member's email addresses for "privacy". It might be queued for delivery but there is no reason to hang on to the message. That means that there has to be code in place to store the message and/or send it to an admin. And that means that it's not a one-off thing. Systems are in place to make reading of your "private" messages easier.
From a technical point of view it would be more efficient to store -all- messages sent through the system for some indefinite period of time. This is the only way you could search them for violations of your unwritten policies.
3. While we may not expect absolute privacy, I think we have a right to some trust
You can say there is no expectation of privacy here. I would qualify that: there is no expectation of absolute privacy. I don't imagine anybody is using the PM function to send highly privileged communications. But I think it's not unfair to expect that the administrators would have enough class to respect your privacy when communicating with other members of this forum.
As with the lack of a moderation policy, with no defined standards for the circumstances under which "private" messages may be read, one is inclined to conclude that all circumstances are fair game.
In every other forum I've been involved with the policy is either clearly stated "we can read your PMs" or "we will never do that". I make no judgement about which policy is "right". But in every case the expectations are fairly clear and users can act accordingly.
You are welcome to debate the legitimacy of my asking a member about their interest in a new forum. Note again that I specifically refrained from doing so in the public forum. I did not PM hundreds of members, only one. The discussion was moved to normal email immediately. This forum doesn't exist and the vague idea that arose was not intended to compete with this one. Can you call something competing when it doesn't exist yet?
Bottom line:
Know that "member-to-member" emails through this forum are routinely monitored by the "administrators". We don't know who can view them nor how long they are retained. This is not mentioned in the terms of service or privacy policy nor are there any stated guidelines as to what is considered appropriate content for member-to-member communications or grounds for administrators reading them. If there were, I obviously wouldn't be posting this topic.
I'm guessing this thread will be deleted and I will be banned. Obviously, it's trivial to keep re-posting this until I feel a sufficient number of people have been informed of this unwritten policy.
Chris and RJ: I warned you. I gave you several days to address this issue privately. In your arrogance you didn't even see the gaping hole you fell through. Deleting this topic would only further reinforce the points I'm trying to make. I don't expect you'll deign to engage the unwashed masses, but you could at least have enough class to keep pretending this is "the most open home for discussion on the Internet"
scrubbing bubbles
Social climber
Uranus
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:02pm PT
I can just picture Cmac laying on his portaledge, contemplating the next day's A4+ pitch....while also reading thru my emails
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:02pm PT
Wow, this sounds super lame.
How many of our PM's are they reading?
I guess member to member, isn't really private.
These guys are often their own worst enemies.
Don't hold your breath for your thread to be around long!!
Censorship Rules!!!
bouldering88
climber
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:07pm PT
I had a username usurped by the site super secret admins, and used later by them to post.
It was a symbol.
Ever since then, no trust.
limpingcrab
Trad climber
the middle of CA
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:08pm PT
You sure your friend didn't rat you out?
Norwegian
Trad climber
dancin on the tip of god's middle finger
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:14pm PT
my secrets they are better spent drifting
than they are harbored to my fears.
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:15pm PT
Oh MY!
Credit: Fritz
Dave Kos
Social climber
Temecula
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:15pm PT
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/10/27/california-highway-patrol-officers-accused-stealing-nude-photos-from-female/
Big Mike
Trad climber
BC
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:17pm PT
Thanks for the heads up Eric
Malemute
Ice climber
great white north
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:19pm PT
No time to moderate the as#@&%es, but time to read emails.
This lack of scruples is typical of corporate america.
steelmnkey
climber
Vision man...ya gotta have vision...
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:20pm PT
Bottom line:
Know that "member-to-member" emails through this forum are routinely monitored by the "administrators". We don't know who can view them nor how long they are retained. This is not mentioned in the terms of service or privacy policy nor are there any stated guidelines as to what is considered appropriate content for member-to-member communications or grounds for administrators reading them. If there were, I obviously wouldn't be posting this topic.
Sounds like Facebook.
Ron Anderson
Trad climber
Relic MilkEye and grandpoobah of HBRKRNH
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:24pm PT
Who cares? Not me. Im sure they got some laughs from mine IF that is the case. Or perhaps some one ratted you out eh..
"Zed,,, Maynard here- the spider done caught some flies"
How about some PROOF of your accusations.. Theory be set aside.
BJ
climber
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:25pm PT
Could the person(s) you PM'ed have ratted you out? And the forum had nothing to do with reading your PM's? It depends on the forum, in Washington, NWHikers has an absolutely low threshold of privacy. Tom will rat you out and spy on you out of vindictiveness.
I doubt that is the case here.
Jingy
climber
Somewhere out there
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:32pm PT
ST's 3 goals are total shite in my opinion...
2) Preserve history
A lot of Historical Gold has been posted here from Yosemite, Colorado, Alaska and around the world. I love the fact that a web search for old climbing history often directs the searcher to the SuperTopo Forum. Best of all, many of the people who made that history post here! Some people have asked if this historical stuff is safe here. Answer: Yes. We have been around since 2000 (the Stone Age in climbing Forum time) and are not going anywhere. We have a business model learned from living in Camp 4: even with low income, you can always keep your expenses even lower. (And grab leftover pizza from the Curry Deck when necessary).
What happens to the thread when they are stripped from the walls without a trace...
What about that history...
No worries... it no longer exists.
never mind, back to the discussion...
This one too...
3) Have the most open home for discussion on the Internet
For good or bad, SuperTopo is the least moderated, least categorized, least divided up forum out there. One page, simple layout, post em' if ya got em' That is what people love and hate about the Forum, myself included.
This one feels like it used to be true... at least kind of.
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:36pm PT
Some people are upset that Dr. F. was banned. I am not. I'm surprised that he wasn't banned long time ago. Anyone could have seen it coming. Everyone else who was as "over the top" in such volume of political posts and personal attacks was banned long time ago.
Some people think the standards are too "arbitrary." Compared to sites that have lots of clearly defined rules and regulations, they are. The administrators generally let just about anything go until they decide something is just too much or too excessive. And so there is a higher degree of arbitrariness in their decisions, but that's inherent in the management model they are using. You may not always like the "calls" they make--and I don't always--but the end result is that the forum is much more open and permissive than it would be if they were lots of technical rules that were consistently applied to everyone. So I like it this way. If you want a forum with lots of rules that create predictability as to what will and will not be banned, there are other choices. You will probably decide that Supertopo is a better forum though.
If they are reading the private messages sent through the "Send email" function, I think they really should add a clear disclaimer right there: "Messages sent through this form may be read by site administrators." I hope someone just ratted khanom out. Sometimes, people you think are your friends aren't.
scrubbing bubbles
Social climber
Uranus
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:39pm PT
Once I sent a PM that in about 25 pages described in rich lascivious detail about 100 of my "sexual conquests" of some of the world's most passionate and beautiful women...
A few days later RJ, relating a bawdy tale of his own on this Forum, plagiarized whole passages of my scandalous PM, almost word for word...too lazy to come up with his own adjectives
That's when I began to lose all faith
snarky
climber
Hoisington
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:41pm PT
I guess that explains why I get periodic "Keep up the good work!" from the admins after forwarding a bunch of gay senior porn.
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:42pm PT
I don't expect absolute privacy for member-to-member messages. I wouldn't send anything I was afraid of having other folks find out. Honestly, the same goes for email unless it is strongly encrypted and directly sent to a destination server that the receiver physically controls (which is about 0.0001% of email users).
That said, it is definitely disturbing to think that a member-to-member message triggered a personal response from an admin, especially when the nature of that message was not crossing any lines that required law enforcement but was simply a matter of petty competition.
If this is the full story, it is way out of line of reasonable administrative activities. It doesn't seem illegal, just inappropriate.
Sketch
Trad climber
Not FortMental
Oct 27, 2014 - 12:42pm PT
khanom
Trad climber
Greeley Hill
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 12:43pm PT
I have been hoping to be wrong. I was hoping that somehow I'd forgotten something I posted or a PM I sent. I've gone over everything I've said publicly and privately for nearly a week to make sure.
The person in question says absolutely no, they did not say anything. And remember, this all happened in about 30-35 minutes.
Is there another possible explanation other than the scenario I describe? Sure. It's just very hard to see.
But there are two things:
read again what RJ said
even if somehow magically a little bird whispered in RJ's ear, why is there an unwritten policy that I may not send private messages containing certain content?
If Chris wants to provide an alternative explanation that's believable, I'm all ears. Better yet, state the policy. That's the point of this post.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Sport climber
moving thru
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:43pm PT
|
It would be nice to know what's really going on....gossip, 2nd hand info and innuendo just don't cut it. Jess sayin', lynnie
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 02:52pm PT
|
There is something wrong with your link.
;)
|
|
Gnome Ofthe Diabase
climber
Out Of Bed
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 02:54pm PT
|
The original,as almost always, was better more tongue in-cheek.
I was told I was getting old and the computer was something I had to take in my stride
So I spent some time getting a clue and then used a feature that only implied anonymity now my secret is out and all I can do is pout that MY secret rock and guide will get snaked.
It has lost a lot in this representation of a two-pitch climb an all
Pistachio event
On the shaded side of the canoyon Darkthawts D’nim
Pistachios who climb in the newest hot spots .
Climb from the sun to the shade, belay from a comfortable stance.
them young nuts don’t bother with This kind of advice
climbing all most the whole line in sun
|
|
limpingcrab
Trad climber
the middle of CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 03:18pm PT
|
Thanks for the response.
It's a service provided by a private company, do what you gotta do.
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 03:25pm PT
|
Wow. So since google uses an automated program to search for keywords in e-mails sent to gmail accounts, you think it is ok for your to periodically open and read correspondences between members. Although I guess I should not be surprised, I am disappointed and a little creeped out that Cmac and RJ do this.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 03:26pm PT
|
rj,
thanks for the reply.
Just curious, if you wanted to, could you (1) restore the original Dr. F science v religion thread? and (2) nuke just the original post to "archive" it?
Out on a limb...
I appreciate what additional info you can offer in this regard.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Sport climber
moving thru
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 03:27pm PT
|
Seems reasonable to me. (Ran a corporation for 20 years.)
|
|
GDavis
Social climber
SOL CAL
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 03:35pm PT
|
Thanks for clarifying RJ. I agree using services provided by ST to drive participation elsewhere is whack. Another forum on someone's website ain't a bad idea, but based on the posts and posters who feel compelled to leave/start anew, I would prefer the current content on ST ;)
More TR's please, everyone!
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 03:41pm PT
|
Given that this forum exists as part of a for-profit corporation, canceling folks who use the service to compete against you seems legit. There is no entitlement or rule that the forum must exist for the betterment of humanity or providing equal access to free speech on any topic. That it does so most of the time is a privilege, not a right, that we enjoy.
The idea of admins hanging out reading messages sent privately between forum members did seem pretty creepy to me, but RJ's explanation gave a pretty reasonable context for why that would happen in this case.
Thanks RJ for the explanation even when you are not required to do so. It makes me feel more comfortable using the service to understand the manner in which it is maintained.
There was a time a few years back when I was distracting myself with learning how the HTTP protocol works in more detail, and started messing around with hand-crafted packets, for example to bypass the client-side web form controls, and change what type of climber I showed up as. Pure intellectual curiosity on my part, absent of any malice and no harm done to the site, but I was definitely meddling with things that could have been destructive if I had bad intent, because I was poking around at holes in the server-side security. RJ exercised pretty reasonable judgement and courtesy asking me to stop, which I did, and I provided some little feedback on closing that hole, and I had no problems after that.
I have to say RJ's balance of enforcement and restraint was very reasonable in that, the only case for which I know all the details.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 03:55pm PT
|
So here's a left field question: RJ, why is the member to member email not working half the time?
|
|
Lorenzo
Trad climber
Oregon
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 03:59pm PT
|
Awanee Bartender. You are a hero.
FWIW , I have also copied the deleted posts.
All power to the people.
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:29pm PT
|
Re: High Fructose:
Just curious, if you wanted to, could you (1) restore the original Dr. F science v religion thread? and (2) nuke just the original post to "archive" it?
Not easily, but I have it on my to do list. The deletion of the science v. religion thread was accidental collateral damage.
There is some backstory here that may help place this in context.
As you'll recall, in September the site was increasingly being attacked by professional spammers. To help fight them off, we implemented a one-click nuke capability which removes the spammers post and the entire spam thread. This was something of a fire-fighting tool while we worked on developing a more sustained approach. We spent some time performing analysis to determine exactly who was spamming the site, how, and how we might best stop it.
In early October, we went live with an enhanced anti-spamming release of the site software, which has has been relatively successful in preventing spam on the site. For example, in the last 20 days, there has been only one report of spam on the Death to Spammers thread. I'm not going to explain in detail what we did in our update, because it might help spammers figure out ways to bypass it.
This more aggressive nuke capability was still in place when Dr. F. was removed, and that resulted in the science v. religion thread to be deleted by accident. Unfortunately, that deletion mechanism is permanent, and so there is no easy way to restore the thread. But, it still might be possible with a bit of work.
Historic Thread Preservation
Since then, additional code has been added to SuperTopo to protect historic threads from being inadvertently deleted. Once a thread gets 300 posts, it is now considered "historic" and our administrative mechanisms to delete posts will leave the OP of historic posts in place even if the person's other posts are removed. While there may come a day when some special circumstance causes us to remove a thread of more than 300 posts, we don't anticipate that will ever occur. Our intention is to codify a policy which respects and protects threads which have significant community participation.
Regarding Survival's Q:
So here's a left field question: RJ, why is the member to member email not working half the time?
Sometimes email systems block the member-to-member emails because they think they are spam. Depending on the system, the messages may end up in a spam folder or get blocked at the server level. Since the recipient isn't expecting the message, they may not check their spam folder.
rj
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 27, 2014 - 04:33pm PT
|
I understand that ST would not want a competing business utilizing this site or allow any activity that would damage ST. I also get that the forum and messaging function are provided by ST and that I should not expect total privacy. What disturbs me is that RJ says that they
...do periodically spot check...
I may be wrong, but that implies that they are basically acting like Big Brother, and looking in whenever they damn well feel like it. Is that legal? Yes. It that ethical? In today's digital world, yes. I guess that I am just behind the times, because I find this to be rather creepy. When combined with management deleting threads that ask questions about TOS, it seems to me that the character of ST is becoming much more totalitarian... then again, maybe I am just out of touch with what passes for "normal" these days.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:43pm PT
|
I just checked with khanom and he swears I am the only person he emailed through the ST system about starting a new thread. He did this because I had also expressed unhappiness with the way that Dr. F.'s thread on science vs religion had been deleted with no warning. A lot of us put a lot of time and effort into that thread and went back to read and look at the many references on it from time to time. After 30 years of working around the U.S. military which practices arbitrary group punishment, I was not happy to see that on a climber's web site.
I expressed to khanom that I was interested in another website where women would feel more welcome and where Sherpas could post as well. Neither of these agendas would compete with ST.
I did NOT rat out khanom to the management. The only complaint I have ever made to them was about holocaust jokes. Even the boob thread which I found distasteful did not elicit a letter from me to the management. Therefore, if I have any reputation for integrity on this thread, trust me, I was not the source of the email contents for the web administrators here.
|
|
MisterE
Gym climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:44pm PT
|
Thanks for being forthright, RJ - it means a lot to those of us confused by recent events.
Also, thanks to Nutjob for some further clarification.
It is a difficult job you guys do, and I am sure the hits just keep coming 24/7.
|
|
bvb
Social climber
flagstaff arizona
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:44pm PT
|
Jesus. Who give a f*#k. People, get a life.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:45pm PT
|
rj, thanks for the reply and thanks for the clarification.
That 30k-plus science v religion thread was a jewel even if some disagree. Marking time. Marking participation. Marking sentiments. By internet forum savvy climbers no less. If a way could be found to retrieve it and archive it, that would be nothing short of... awesome. The way back machine works a bit, to a point, but doesn't come close.
Thanks again for the hearing and thanks in advance for whatever you can do.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:54pm PT
|
I too would like to thank RJ for his reply. Communication is always the basis for understanding and a lot of what has happened could have been avoided if the admin had posted even a paragraph after Dr. F's threads were deleted.
Hopefully, when the administration want us to know something in the future, they'll just tell us. Rumor and innuendo is always worse than the truth.If management wants some topics not to be discussed, that is of course their right, but please give us some guidance or at least warning about that.
And yes, if possible, please bring back the religion vs science thread. Week after week for the past several months, the New York Times was running a similar series, echoing what we had discussed on that thread in previous weeks, so it was state of the art so to speak and definitely produced lots of hits for the advertising count.
|
|
Michelle
Social climber
1187 Hunterwasser
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:56pm PT
|
There is no Constitutional Amendment that covers Privacy fyi, but having said that..
The at will user deletion policy blows. Y'all allow blatant threats and disrespect to continue yet when some little bitch with terminal butt hurt contacts you about their bruised ego (NOT ksolem), out comes the ban hammer. It's arbitrary and bullsh.it. Time after time after time I see the blatant misogyny ignored, the bullying allowed, if not encouraged. But hey, it is your website. You're entitled to your inconsistencies. I'll probably be deleted for criticizing the management.
|
|
bluering
Trad climber
Santa Clara, CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 04:58pm PT
|
Jesus. Who give a f*#k. People, get a life.
My thoughts exactly....
|
|
Michelle
Social climber
1187 Hunterwasser
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 05:18pm PT
|
^^^haaahahaaaa
|
|
Jingy
climber
Somewhere out there
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 05:28pm PT
|
Not that my help would actually result in anything of value getting done...
Unfortunately, that deletion mechanism is permanent, and so there is no easy way to restore the thread. But, it still might be possible with a bit of work.
 So, what can I do to get back some of my writings?
People have to know my position and why...
I fully understand that I will not be able to assist in this matter, not just because of lack of access and contacts, but even if I did have these things, I'm not exactly equipped with actually producing results...
and that's all that has ever really mattered.
|
|
stevep
Boulder climber
Salt Lake, UT
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 05:34pm PT
|
Thanks RJ for responding.
As far restoring the large nuked thread, I'd suspect what is in his list to consider is a restoration from a backup. Which is certainly doable, but restoring just a single piece of a backup is a lot of work, so I'd imagine it is not something he can turn around quickly.
|
|
Jon Beck
Trad climber
Oceanside
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 05:42pm PT
|
The deletion of the science v. religion thread was accidental collateral damage.
bwahhhhhaha, friendly fire!
I love the smell of thread deletion in the morning.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 05:43pm PT
|
Rule number one and the only real rule here.
Never piss off the site owners, ever !!!
This is their lively hood.
They will protect that at all costs and YOU will lose .....
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 05:53pm PT
|
Rule number 2...Don't talk to the duck or look him in the eyes while he's smoking...
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:02pm PT
|
300 million radical terrorist
All you have to do is cut the head off.
No need to kill these so called 300 million.
The beast has a head or multiple heads.
Some of those heads are right here in our highest levels of our corrupt govt.
They are the prostitutes of the corrupt huge corporations and Bankers who have no souls ....
|
|
Braunini
Big Wall climber
cupertino
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:09pm PT
|
QTNL,, the next fruit loop down the tubes.
ANd dam skippy, if there are some 300 million radical terrorist islamists out there, then yes I want to see those 300 million either cease to exist. THe very same 300 million that have vowed to kill you or I. That makes me sensible, not bigoted. The bigots are in fact the terrorists.
annnnnd wasn't it Obama to declare war on them ?? Is he a bigotTU??
lol wtf are you even talking about
|
|
Fritz
Trad climber
Choss Creek, ID
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 06:34pm PT
|
Re Jim Brennen's mention: khanom publicly, was being a passive aggressive dick.
Yep, and his panties were bunched.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
Brujň de la Playa
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:30pm PT
|
|
|
son of stan
Boulder climber
San Jose CA
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:33pm PT
|
Yes people can go to jail for looking at others private communications.
"Personal message, often abbreviated as PM, is a private form of
communication between different members on a platform.
It is only seen and accessible by the users participating in the message."
ST could rename the 'PM' function something like 'VoyeurMessage'
or VM and everyone would be happy again.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:40pm PT
|
And if Khanom had accused cmac and R.J. of being Muslims and threatened to nuke them that would have been ok? Out in the open threats are ok (didn't michelle make that point?) but being passive aggressive makes you a dickhead.
Interesting.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
Brujň de la Playa
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:40pm PT
|
Now at midnight all the agents
And the Supertopo Crew
Come out and round up everyone
That knows more than they do
Then they bring them to the factory
Where the heart-attack machine
Is strapped across their shoulders
And then the kerosene
Is brought down from the castles
By insurance men ...
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:43pm PT
|
"lol wtf are you even talking about"
Who knows.
Who really knows.
WHO THE F$$K KNOWS.
|
|
zBrown
Ice climber
Brujň de la Playa
|
|
|
Oct 27, 2014 - 07:50pm PT
|
Tortuous logic (to say the least)
I fought the law and the law won?
"I will die MY way": OJ Simpson goes on hunger strike in jail
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 05:20am PT
|
Thanks for those elucidations RJ
|
|
mcreel
climber
Barcelona
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 10:04am PT
|
Looks like OJ might be on strike for a while.
|
|
dave729
Trad climber
Western America
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 10:10am PT
|
Chloe O'Brian: shut it down.
|
|
The Call Of K2 Lou
Mountain climber
North Shore, BC
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 10:52am PT
|
http://www.supertopo.com/termsofservice.pdfhttp://[/url]
By using the SuperTopo.com website, you agree to be bound by the
following terms and conditions (the "Terms of Service").
6. ...SuperTopo reserves the right at all times to remove or refuse to distribute any content on the Service, such as content which violates the terms of this Agreement. SuperTopo also reserves the right to access, read, preserve, and disclose any information as it reasonably believes is necessary to (a) satisfy any applicable law, regulation, legal process or governmental request, (b) enforce this Agreement, including investigation of potential violations hereof, (c) detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or technical issues, (d) respond to user support requests, or (e) protect the rights, property or safety of SuperTopo, its users and the public. SuperTopo will not be responsible or liable for the exercise or non-exercise of its rights under this Agreement.
|
|
Lollie
Social climber
I'm Lolli.
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 11:26am PT
|
"The protection of email from unauthorized access and inspection is known as electronic privacy. In countries with a constitutional guarantee of the secrecy of correspondence, email is equated with letters and thus legally protected from all forms of eavesdropping."
"United States
After 180 Days in the U.S., email messages stored on a server lose their status as a protected communication under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, and become just another database record. After this time has passed, a government agency needs only a subpoena—instead of a warrant—in order to access email from a provider."
"Several court cases have raised the question of whether e-mail messages are protected under the stricter provisions of Title I while they were in transient storage en route to their final destination. In United States v. Councilman, a U.S. district court and a three-judge appeals panel ruled they were not, but in 2005, the full United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit reversed this opinion."
Illegal.
Edit: but they may read any PM older than 180 days...
|
|
kunlun_shan
Mountain climber
SF, CA
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 12:57pm PT
|
Whether this "interception" of ST PMs is happening or not, I doubt that it would be illegal. Supertopo is privately owned and I'm guessing that anyone using it to send messages is under similar terms as people using software run by their employer. Sure its sending to people's email addresses, but the PM function is hosted by Supertopo.
see:
Email Monitoring: Can Your Employer Read Your Messages?
You probably have no right to privacy in your work email account.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/email-monitoring-can-employer-read-30088.html
|
|
klk
Trad climber
cali
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 01:01pm PT
|
Time after time after time I see the blatant misogyny ignored, the bullying allowed, if not encouraged. But hey, it is your website. You're entitled to your inconsistencies. I'll probably be deleted for criticizing the management.
yeah, the management/moderation weirdly parallels the disfunction in the forum itself.
|
|
limpingcrab
Trad climber
the middle of CA
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 01:22pm PT
|
This place is entertaining.
Especially all of the PM's I hack and read
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2014 - 01:24pm PT
|
F*#k you and your kitties! I like dogs!
;)
|
|
Braunini
Big Wall climber
cupertino
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 01:25pm PT
|
Whether this "interception" of ST PMs is happening or not, I doubt that it would be illegal.
pretty sure this is sufficiently covered in paragraph 6 that we all agreed to when we signed up
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 28, 2014 - 01:40pm PT
|
In all seriousness, pound for pound, my parents 24lb former stray tomcat is about the toughest animal I have ever seen. I've seen him chase off an 80 GSD, and think that most dogs would back down from him. We joke that he is more wolverine that cat.
|
|
MisterE
Gym climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 05:32pm PT
|
Guido, first off: Eric is a good man who contributes a great deal to Facelift and particularly Yellow Pines gatherings during Facelift - agreed.
That being said, what happens in person and on-line are two very different sides of the interactive coin.
I am not a computer geek, but I know he is very adept at this type of thing, and the inner workings, and from all disclosure here was delving into sensitive areas.
As Nutjob (who is also very adept) mentioned, he was also messing around in sensitive areas (http security holes) and was asked to back off, which he did - also giving some good information to RJ, Chris and company.
He was treated politely and with respect. Draw your own conclusions.
I am sad to see Eric go, that is all I can say beyond the above statement.
|
|
phylp
Trad climber
Upland, CA
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 05:55pm PT
|
I am very sad to see Khanom/Eric go. He is a positive force here.
I hope this decision can be reconsidered. I would like him to return.
Phyl
|
|
Big Mike
Trad climber
BC
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 06:04pm PT
|
It was pretty much cybercide anyways. He knew what was gonna happen. He said it in the op. He wasn't happy with the management and he chose to share his displeasure.
We will miss you Eric.
|
|
guido
Trad climber
Santa Cruz/New Zealand/South Pacific
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 06:06pm PT
|
Eric Lad
"from all disclosures here."
I see no information here or on the blown post that Eric was digging into forbidden territory or was warned about such transgression. Nutjob was but that is a different scenario and not related to Eric.
For the record it appears RJ and gang deleted my post on the orig Khanom topic.
So the interactive coin has been flipped and low and behold both sides are Heads!
|
|
Flip Flop
Trad climber
Truckee, CA
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 06:11pm PT
|
Dead Heads?
|
|
Psilocyborg
climber
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 06:30pm PT
|
the thing is.....this is all over ST policies not being clear.
just seems like a whole lot of sh#t over nothing
|
|
nah000
climber
canuckistan
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 06:30pm PT
|
[thanks for your posts, guido.]
here are a few comments regarding some of rj's initial answers:
1. Are we monitoring member to member communications?
No. We do periodically spot check, and we have responded to complaints of abuse in the past.
so more accurately that should be no, admin doesn't monitor every pm, but yes, they do monitor them whenever they deem "necessary".
2. Are member to member communications a secure and private communication that no one but you and the person you reach out to can see?
No. But, neither is gmail.
this is either a naive or disengenuous argument. larry page, eric schmidt or anybody else at google is not legally allowed to be opening and reading emails. even law enforcement is supposed to get warrants. to imply that the security and privacy of a pm that st admin can read at whim is on par with gmail's security and privacy would be funny, if it wasn't intended as a serious and legitimate statement.
We don't expect that anyone assumes that our member to member communication service is a secure communication channel.
admin was mistaken. while i may not have assumed that it was "secure" i did not assume that admin would be reading some of the private emails sent through supertopo. [and judging by the other posts, i'm not alone in this] while, i do appreciate the honesty, it should have been called LPM for "less public message", or some such.
[prior to this, i also assumed that admin wouldn't get politically involved and delete a thread about a would be vice presidential candidate, who was accused of exaggerating his climbing resume. given the ham-handedness of these latest rounds of "moderation", i'd no longer make that assumption. given the lack of explanation for that thread rendition, and all of the recent seemingly petty and sweeping deletions i would bet dollars to donuts that that thread didn't disappear without a little help from the admin.]
3. Would we remove posts or ban a member for soliciting for a competing guidebook or service?
Yes. And, we have done so in the past. We consider solicitation for a competing service or guidebook to be inappropriate on our site.
and by site rj means via supertopo enabled private email.
more interesting to me is that khanom wasn't deactivated until he started a thread letting everyone know that pm's aren't as private as many of us had assumed...
i'm sure that was just coincidence, and it was really all about "solicitation for a competing service". /s
pretty unimpressed, with the handling of a lot of this lately...
while in the past i've generally defended the moderation on this forum, and it has, imo, the best climbing content on the web, it's times like this where it seems that the quality is in spite of some of the underlying structure, rather than due to it...
while all those who say this is a private service, the owners can do as they like and if you don't like it you can leave, are of course correct, it doesn't change that a lot of the recent issues [dr.f, the kiwi, khanom, spammers] have been handled very amateurishly, imo.
that said, my intention with focusing on the negative is not to say that this place isn't generally effectively run. and i wouldn't wish the herding cats like task of being an admin on anyone.
but just because something is better run than its competitors, doesn't mean that there aren't places for constructive criticism. it is definitely a shame to see some of the quality contributors that have publicly left and i'm betting there will be a bunch more that we just won't see around here anymore.
assuming i'm not struck down by zeus' thunderbolt, i'll still be here...
plus, khanom doesn't have his competing site up yet. hahaha.
|
|
MisterE
Gym climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 07:29pm PT
|
Sorry about the whole mess. Apologies to all for any indiscretion or missed perception.
Ron is here, so I am out.
Peace, E
|
|
graniteclimber
Trad climber
The Illuminati -- S.P.E.C.T.R.E. Division
|
|
|
Oct 28, 2014 - 10:52pm PT
|
So were all khanom's posts deleted also? I don't see any.
If they were deleted, was this a good idea?
You can't even delete your own posts after they more than a week or two old. I thought this was put in place to prevent people from chopping up historical threads. Threads become difficult to follow if some of the posts in them are deleted.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado, Nepal & Okinawa
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:03am PT
|
The implication for me is that I'm busy downloading all the historical threads I'm interested in and I will never again spend time writing thoughtful replies on this site. One or two short comments now and then is it.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:07am PT
|
Oh Jan
Don't be like that.
Your posts and comments are some of the most crown jewels on this forum.
Whether they remain or disappear I will always cherish them within my heart .....
|
|
Flip Flop
Trad climber
Truckee, CA
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:11am PT
|
Good. Are you all rereading old threads and admiring the high quality repartee? Remember that zinger back in 2011? It was priceless.
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:29am PT
|
AHEM! I shall now pontificate upon this issue.
The climbing partnership is ultimately about trust. It's one reason we, many of us as strangers, have some inherent bond. The ST staff has violated that trust.
Comparing a google algorithm that scans for keyword purposes, with no human attached, with RJ's "I'll snoop when I get a notion", which is what "spot" checking actually means in this case, is so f*#king ridiculous that it's LOL-MacEnroe territory (you CANNOT BE SERIOUS!). Yes, I am literally laughing at you for trying to float this lame ass "excuse" or justification. Take off your clown shoes and join the adult world...because nobody over the age of about 7 is buying that horsesh#t.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:36am PT
|
Jan mentioned: "The implication for me is that I'm busy downloading all the historical threads I'm interested in and I will never again spend time writing thoughtful replies on this site. One or two short comments now and then is it. "
I'm stoked you are archiving. The Frank Sacherer thread is the best one on ST in my opinion. Tops. #1. It's disturbing that deletion of a single person AND THUS EVERY ONE OF THEIR POSTS, can trash an entire thread leaving it looking a lot like a homeless person is having with an imaginary person. Hand waving and yelling for no reason. If the person who gets zapped started the thread, then the whole thing just disappears.
I concur with Werner, your insights are valuable. If Blowhards likes Dave Kos or Gary leave no one will notice and the site will be better, such is not the case with you Jan. Your thoughtful replies are of substance and have value.
Regards:
|
|
LAhiker
Social climber
Los Angeles
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 09:33am PT
|
I came to SuperTopo as an outsider, concerned about the disappearance of Matt Greene. I have been impressed by the community of climbers here and am concerned that recent actions by the moderators serve to weaken that community.
JR, I appreciate your trying to explain your company's policy. SuperTopo does a public service by hosting the forums, trip reports, beta, trip reports, etc. Hosting these things also provides publicity for your company's maps and guides and makes your company look good.
But for the forums to make SuperTopo look good, they need to be run fairly and the community needs to remain alive and healthy. I think you begin to acknowledge this in your praiseworthy commitment to "historic threads" and to restoring the science and religion thread if possible. I suggest taking this one step farther and considering that SuperTopo may have responsibilities toward the community it fosters.
During the year I've been on SuperTopo, it's clear that Khanom has been a solid citizen of this site and community. For example, he started the "All Purpose Wildfire" thread and made frequent contributions to it, and he made reasonable comments on other threads.
While retaining the Wildfire thread, you have deleted all his useful contributions to it. By deleting all of his comments on other threads, you have rendered their conversations incoherent. By deleting all threads he has started that have fewer than 300 posts, you have deleted the contributions of all the other SuperTopo members that have posted in those threads. In short, you have weakened the community, punishing everyone for the alleged sins of one person.
I can understand that you don't want people promoting other sites on your site. But I don't see how one comment, in a message Khanom thought was private, constitutes promoting other sites. Judging by QITNL's post in this thread, in a situation where it might be logical for Khanom to promote starting a new forum, he refrained from doing so.
I can also understand how you might feel uncomfortable with a thread that says that the mods sometimes read people's personal messages; you might want to delete it. (Though if you think it's just fine for the mods to read people's PMs, why delete it?)
What I really can't understand is then deactivating the account of someone who started such a thread, deleting all of their other threads, and removing all of their posts on others' threads!
SuperTopo is known to be lightly moderated. Some are uncomfortable with the occasional racist and misogynistic posts that appear here, but most accept light moderation as a current characteristic of the site.
These recent draconian actions, however, run contrary to light moderation and threaten to do exactly what SuperTopo is apparently trying to avoid. They threaten to make people afraid to post more than brief comments on the site, to alienate longterm members of SuperTopo, and to push them toward other sites and forums.
For SuperTopo's sake and ours, I hope you will do the following:
1. Restore Khanom's account to active status.
2. Restore his threads, including those of fewer than 300 posts. Restore his posts on all threads.
3. Make clearer that personal messages may be read by the moderators. (I realize that that is implicit in the terms of service, but it could be clearer.)
4. Apply all policies in a consistent manner.
To do these things would be a sign, not of weakness, but of strength.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 09:43am PT
|
1. Restore Khanom's account to active status.
I'm all for it.
He didn't deserve to get banned.
His true intentions were to always make everything better.
He had no real ulterior motives to clash with the owners/admins.
Sometimes we misunderstand a persons true intentions .....
|
|
John M
climber
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 09:49am PT
|
Sometimes we misunderstand a persons true intentions …..
abosolutely..
And I agree with you about Jan. I hope she stays and continues to participate.
AHEM! I shall now pontificate upon this issue.
The climbing partnership is ultimately about trust. It's one reason we, many of us as strangers, have some inherent bond. The ST staff has violated that trust.
Comparing a google algorithm that scans for keyword purposes, with no human attached, with RJ's "I'll snoop when I get a notion", which is what "spot" checking actually means in this case, is so f*#king ridiculous that it's LOL-MacEnroe territory (you CANNOT BE SERIOUS!). Yes, I am literally laughing at you for trying to float this lame ass "excuse" or justification. Take off your clown shoes and join the adult world…because nobody over the age of about 7 is buying that horsesh#t.
You need to work on your pontificating. It lacks a certain superiority tone. Plus you make good points. I don't like the snooping either.
If someone makes a complaint about harassment, thats one thing. But beyond that. Stay out of my communications..
|
|
guido
Trad climber
Santa Cruz/New Zealand/South Pacific
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 10:11am PT
|
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 11:38am PT
|
|
|
NutAgain!
Trad climber
South Pasadena, CA
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 01:55pm PT
|
I don't generally read the political/religious threads to know if Khanom is an ass in that area, but in all the stuff I tend to read, he seems like a stand-up guy and definitely makes this forum more valuable for me to visit.
|
|
guido
Trad climber
Santa Cruz/New Zealand/South Pacific
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 02:34pm PT
|
LAhiker
Nice contribution, a note of sanity. Pretty silent up there at the top end?
|
|
Jingy
climber
Somewhere out there
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 04:51pm PT
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
Oct 29, 2014 - 08:29am PT
AHEM! I shall now pontificate upon this issue.
The climbing partnership is ultimately about trust. It's one reason we, many of us as strangers, have some inherent bond. The ST staff has violated that trust.
Comparing a google algorithm that scans for keyword purposes, with no human attached, with RJ's "I'll snoop when I get a notion", which is what "spot" checking actually means in this case, is so f*#king ridiculous that it's LOL-MacEnroe territory (you CANNOT BE SERIOUS!). Yes, I am literally laughing at you for trying to float this lame ass "excuse" or justification. Take off your clown shoes and join the adult world...because nobody over the age of about 7 is buying that horsesh#t.
always an opinion I can respect.
Agreed 100%
|
|
bvb
Social climber
flagstaff arizona
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 05:37pm PT
|
fapfapfapfapfapfap
|
|
RJ Spurrier
SuperTopo staff member
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 05:54pm PT
|
Thank you all for your feedback on this topic.
It seems clear that there is a consensus on several points:
The idea that someone can look at member-to-member communications is creepy
Khanom may have been prickly in some of his posts, but overall his history was very positive in terms of his contributions
From This Day Forward Member-to-Member Communications are Private
We have disabled storing of member-to-member communications and deleted all prior records of member to member communications from our server.
From this day forward, no one but you and the person you send a message to will see your message.
This may come with a cost, in that it effectively eliminates our ability to monitor member-to-member communications for spam or abuse. That said, it seems clear the no moderation of member-to-member communications is preferred by most, and the alternative of members needing to provide us copies of abusive emails seems work-able in cases where inappropriate use of the feature is occurring.
I will note, that when Google says in their Gmail privacy policy, "We use the information we collect from all of our services... to protect Google and our users," that I don't think their current privacy policy for Gmail materially differs from our old member-to-member communication policy which was intended to be able to periodically monitor for, and respond to complaints about, inappropriate content. Neither do I believe Google guarantees anywhere that only automated algorithms will be allowed to see your Gmail content. My belief is that they have retained the same right we previously did, which is to do what they need to in order to protect their service from being used in an inappropriate manner. But, that point is moot, since we're no longer storing, monitoring, or reviewing in any way, member-to-member communications from this day forward. Member-to-member communications are now, completely, totally, private as far as we're involved. (And, BTW, I'm not trying to slam Google; I consider their policies to be very reasonable. I personally love Gmail and use it every day despite having read their privacy policy.)
Khanom's account
Chris and I will be meeting up this weekend, and we will review and evaluate both the technical and policy issues related to Khanom's account status in that meeting. I think a number of valid points have been made on this thread, and those will be taken into consideration. There are also real technical barriers to restoring deleted posts, the same issues we face with science v. religion, but we'll scope those out as well. Of course, Khanom may not prefer to return to the forum, even if his account is re-enabled, but that is a separate matter and he can make that decision himself.
Thanks again for your thoughtful feedback on this topic.
rj
|
|
ncrockclimber
climber
The Desert Oven
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Oct 29, 2014 - 06:00pm PT
|
Thank you for your response. I really appreciate your new policy regarding the PMs.
Cheers!
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
mammoth lakes ca
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 06:03pm PT
|
RJ... didn't mean what i said about you and Chris...rj
|
|
nah000
climber
canuckistan
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 06:09pm PT
|
+2 on the pm policy change.
thanks for the continued consideration and increased transparency, rj [and chris].
|
|
Gilroy
Social climber
Bolderado
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 06:10pm PT
|
Thanks for taking the time to consider and reconsider the environment you are trying to create here, RJ. The open responses from site management really change the atmosphere/ "look and feel" of SuperTopo for me.
|
|
guido
Trad climber
Santa Cruz/New Zealand/South Pacific
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 06:29pm PT
|
Noble response there RJ, situation defused and all on standby for policy evaluation and changes.
Sorry to yank your chain so hard.
|
|
Guernica
climber
dark places
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 06:30pm PT
|
Excellent.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Oct 29, 2014 - 06:31pm PT
|
Wow, good post RJ.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2014 - 08:00am PT
|
Khanom you pussy.
Get your ass back in here.
Your updates this summer on the fire thread were the bomb!
You need to keep us updated on the latest small independent farm life also.
Juicy carrots growing in the ground keeps Ducks happy and healthy.
That too was the bomb!
Please keep throwing us the "good" bombs .......
|
|
Delhi Dog
climber
Good Question...
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2014 - 08:59am PT
|
Geez folks, I've been reading through this thread and kept wanting to post a reply, but figured I keep reading...(big lesson there for me).
Nice job.
Eric, I'd be another one that would appreciate you sticking around, butt do what you have to do. RJ- you're a good man.
cheers...and Jan yeah, keep sharing your thoughts:-)
|
|
Lollie
Social climber
I'm Lolli.
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2014 - 11:38am PT
|
Nice! Thank you, RJ.
For listening and acting upon it.
|
|
Braunini
Big Wall climber
cupertino
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2014 - 02:02pm PT
|
this will be remembered as the 9/11 of ST
|
|
DickSilly
climber
cutlass supreme
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2014 - 02:04pm PT
|
I think someone's about to get banned.
|
|
Braunini
Big Wall climber
cupertino
|
|
|
Oct 30, 2014 - 02:07pm PT
|
benghazi maybe
|
|
LAhiker
Social climber
Los Angeles
|
|
RJ, that's excellent news about the personal messages!
Thanks also for reinstating Khanom's account and for looking into restoring his posts. I appreciated his posts and hope he chooses to return to active involvement. In any event, I hope his posts and threads can be restored.
Thanks for listening!
|
|
| Messages 1 - 104 of total 104 in this topic |
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!