[Imc-sydney] Re: [Imc-sydney-content] Hidden <em>node</em>.

[Cameron Gregg]

diet simon wrote:
> Please note: this list is archived and searchable via the web.
> 
> I disagree in this case.
> 
> His basic premise that there are too many of us is correct. He puts it a 
> bit weirdly but I wouldn't call it stark raving mad.
> 
> He does take a passing swipe at gayness, but is that enough to 
> disqualify him?
> Is it our policy to remove anything that is even vaguely anti-gay?
> I dislike such comments as much as presumably anyone in our group, but 
> I'm also chary of censorship. Where do we draw the line?
> 
> "I disagree with what you are saying, but I will defend to the death 
> your right to say it"?
> 


Fair call, I'm glad you spoke up Diet. I tend to hide things rather 
quickly these days, rather than giving the benefit of the doubt. I guess 
a couple of years of beating my head against a wall wears you down.

So to answer your question, we should hide things according to whether 
they meet our editorial guidelines, remembering that they are guidelines 
and not strict sharia law. The real decision comes from collective 
consensus, meaning if you object strongly to something being 
hidden,voice your objection (as you have done) and the story goes back 
up. Does that sound like reasonable collective decision making to 
everyone else?

anyhow, I have unhidden it, albeit before i read your post and for other 
reasons.

I still think the author is a loony.

Cam