Censorship

Hey, I have been told that the PRI web site is censoring reasonable comment. Is this true and why is this happening

Cybil

 

How can you ask why it is happening just after you ask is it true.? Surely you would need to confirm that it is true before pursuing a line of questioning about why it may be happening. I would like to suggest you withdraw the last question until you get an answer on the first or explain wtf you are talking about!

 

I'd like to know what you're talking about too. Who told you there was censorship and did they give examples? Why haven't you posted that here?

If you really mean the PRI website, then you should email Craig Mackintosh or the Lawtons or post in the blogs and ask there. We don't really have much to do with the website even though this forum belongs to them and is hosted on it. If you do email them you might want to be more specific about what you're talking about.

 

What a strange question. All strange questions should be removed at once! Strange questions will not be tolerated!

 

Do you mean here, or the permies.com site were your post may not be your actual text, let alone threads and discussions. (Please note this site you are viewing has nothing to do with the American site Permies.com)

 

It's unfortunate,but yes they do Cybil.Robust comments are sometimes tolerated sometimes not.Certainly the questioning of the the host or the organisation will usually find your comment in the digital waste basket.
Best Wishes
Fernando

 

"reasonable comment" was the term used in Cybil's post. Care to give and example FP? Anything recent?

 

The waste basket is probably kinder than allowing such "reasonable comment" through to be subjected to scrutiny by the astute members of the forum. It seems a shame that Cybil has not returned to the discussion after making the original comment.

 

The comments relate to the PRI web site articles and the actual comment made on the World Permaculture Day article has been sent to me and was:

“Great interview and especially fantastic to hear Liz and Kat discuss what permaculture is all about - earth and people care and fair share. They and all the permablitzers out there are really making a difference and getting community involved in permaculture. They are giving and giving.

Brilliant World Permaculture Day result on the Gold Coast that epitomizes the community efforts on the Gold Coast and people everywhere with the Gold Coast Permaculture group hosting over 230 people at Three Worlds for non-stop workshops from 10 am to 3 pm.”

I am also told that a comment on the "Nick Huggins Urban Permaculture Course" relating to the uneconomic nature of the design was not posted. Is it just this particular person that is being censored?

 

Further to my last - I do apologise for asking two questions at once Purple Bear and for not being on the site since Saturday. It was the weekend afterall!

 

What makes you think that is censorship? Looks like technical glitch or human error to me. It's a bit of a worry that people assume censorship before anything else.

Anyway, it doesn't really have anything to do with the forum, although some members maybe aware of what happened. If you really think this is a problem then please email Craig and tell him of your concerns (you might be able to PM him through the forum too).

 

who by ?
why did they think so ?

 

The PRI people, apart from paying the bills, have little to do with this site.
There is no censorship here though sometimes I wish there was.

 

Interesting that technical glitches happened twice to the same person and that person did email Craig Mackintosh I am told and no response was provided to either query. That the PRI people have nothing little to do with this site is perhaps a good thing as it allows issues such as this to be raised.

Is the comment from Michaelangelica on "wishing there was" censorship one that indicates a preference to sweep such matters under the carpet so that the PRI can exercise censorship over the permaculture movement? A strange thing to say I should think. This site is about Permaculture in all its forms and that includes people's right to honestly (but not in a nasty manner) comment on permaculture issues, the veracity of comments made in posts and/or its relevance or otherwise.

Fernando made the comment that "robust" comments were often trashed in apparent self interest. Can't we have dissenting comment on what is apparently only designed as a media promotion site for the PRI? Are we seriously honest about what we are doing here are are we wishing to yet establish another authoritarian regime that dictates what is and what is not said on behalf of permaculture? I suggest that the PRI web site is far more influential than this forum and as such, should be open to serious and relevant comment whether it agrees, disagrees or is blandly neutral on what is being stated.

 

Cybil, I find all three of your posts difficult to understand and still don't know where you're coming from.

 

Go away Cybil, put out your crazy soapbox somewhere else.

 

Too much for you to take in Michaelangelica? Not surprised! You made the stupid comment on censorship and now wish to denigrate the response. Obviously indicative of your strong intellectual leanings.

I am just responding, quite logically, to the posts made Paula. What don't you understand?

I am stating that I have been advised that the PRI web site is censoring reasonable comment on permaculture on its web site. I am stating I have been provided with one of those posts and posted it and also, in response to other posts, stated that I am advised communication has been had with the editor and this was not responded to by the editor. I the most recent comment I am also responding to the encouragement by Michaelangelica of this sort of censorship in the permaculture world and questioning the intelligence of that remark.

Is not censorship in the permaculture world not a topic for this forum? We can have companies going bankrupt on the forum and every plumber and his cat out there attempting to garner business but not apparent censorship by the PRI.

 

OK, I'll bite.

I must admit I have had a little trouble following your points too Cybil. (And I'm not yet convinced that you aren't a bot of some description).

The comment you posted as your example doesn't seem at all controversial, so I suspect this may not be a case of censorship. Perhaps your friend/correspondent is just having difficulty getting the posts to upload properly? Particularly if there have been a couple of posts that don't seem to have made it. Perhaps he/she is also having difficulty with emails getting through. This may explain way the editor has not returned the call, so to speak. I think the folks at PRI are also fairly busy people from what I gather, so perhaps a random email is low on their list of priorities. I know I get a lot of spam and junk email and I am only a very light user.

I've seen some pretty robust discussion on the PRI articles and am at a loss to explain why such an innocuous comment would have been deliberately 'censored'. Unless I am missing something?

Having said all that I don't see why it would not be permissible by the owners of a website to sensor as they see fit. After all it is just one website, it does not represent all of permaculture. Unless you are giving it Idol status.

I think the people here are pretty happy in general to have robust discussion, provided the respondents are clear and concise in the message and point of view they are trying to relay. When a discussion degrades into half truths, accusations and hints of a whiff of something that may or may not happen and is presented unclearly, many folks, myself included, start to wonder about the motives of the person. And like I said, with the proliferation of net-bots out there it is hard not to be cynical.

Happy to discuss your concerns further and I'm happy to explore your thoughts on censorship in permaculture in general, especially where claims are substantiated. Although I'm not really sure how you can censor a grassroots movement.

 

What Grahame said.

We're talking about two, but no more than two, innocuous, uncontroversial posts not appearing on what of the blog posts. Why on earth would admin censor them? Still sounds like a tech glitch or human error to me. Ask anyone who runs a blog and they will tell you shit happens that is nothing to do with censorship.

I know you have all this reliable information about what happened, but we don't, so I suggest you PM Craig via this forum and present all the evidence to him. If it's really such a big deal. Personally I wouldn't bother him or anyone in a position like his over a couple of missing comments. Unless there is some context we don't know about (the commenter is Craig's archenemy or has previously been asked to not post promotional material or spam) I really don't see any evidence that this is a case of censorship.

And, please don't make out that this forum won't tolerate discussion about censorship or controversial topics. You don't know this place and you're making unfounded judgements about it and that's not likely to go down well.

 

I'm really wondering now what your agenda is. I've been reading the main site for a handful of years and I've never seen it as a promotional site for the PRI. Yes it does contain posts about the PRI, but it also contains many other useful and interesting posts. For gods sake, the PRI pay people to write blogposts about permaculture. How is that promotional of the PRI?