Aurora Citizen

News & Views from the Citizens of Aurora Ontario

Removal of 2 Comments

Posted by auroracitizen on February 22, 2009

Recently 2 comments were deleted from the site after they had been posted. People have inquired why. Here is our explanation for those who are concerned.

The 2 comments were initially posted by the moderator because we post all messages unless the language is deemed to be particularly vitriolic. We have only rejected 3 messages of this type thus far — so we are trying to be as liberal as possible. This has been the only criteria we have used to date to prevent accusations of stifling conversation or trying to create our own particular bias or spin. People have been free to express their opinion regardless of whether we agree with their opinion.

However, these 2 comments introduced a new twist.

  1. Person A (Anonymous) posted these 2 comments trying to masquerade as person B. In fact, we initially thought they were submitted by person B.
  2. They were identical word for word in 2 separate locations.
  3. They indicated that the person B had made specific statements. However, contrary to online popular reference techniques, they did not link to where those statements were made. It is not our job to try and figure out whether another person is being quoted correctly.
  4. There was no additional commentary on the statements. This was why they were initially thought to be posted by person B.
  5. Person B indicated they had not submitted the posts.

Therefore they were removed.

Feel free to express your own opinions, but please do not express an opinion dressed as someone else.

If you want to quote someone in this blog , please follow protocol and reference the comments by post and date (as everyone to this point has done).

If you are referencing another online source (i.e. a newspaper, Council Minutes, etc), please include the link so people can easily review the comment in context.

We trust no one is unduly offended by these simple rules of conduct.

Use the envelope and pencil icons immediately below to forward this post to friends or leave a comment.

Advertisements

12 Responses to “Removal of 2 Comments”

  1. Heather Sisman said

    “The fact that you post as often as you doing, using all the identities you do, and knowing that you neither work nor live in Aurora but accompany
    a councilor with another blog, to so many meetings etc. informs us, beyond what you imagine.”

    Awesome. So you know I moved from Aurora – after befriending Evelyn and developing an interest in Aurora politics.

    And you know that I go to council meetings, which is rather astute of you – given that it’s not a secret.

    I’m sure you also know that I have no idea what you’re inferring to have deduced from my participation on this blog (other than maybe I’m interested, and am not afraid to sign my name). You’ve used a lot of space to indicate your superior knowledge…why not just spill the beans? What else do you know?

    My other question would be why you’re spending so much time worrying about me. I’m fine. Really. Thanks for caring.

  2. Anonymous said

    As usual Heather you’ve missed the point.
    I do have a copy of the comment, as do many, but now I have additional information about the workings of this blog, and so do the “others” who now realize the purpose and skew of this site.

    The fact that you post as often as you doing, using all the identities you do, and knowing that you neither work nor live in Aurora but accompany
    a councilor with another blog, to so many meetings etc. informs us, beyond what you imagine.

    The deleted comment shows the character of its author.
    And we are aware of your relationship to the author and your obsessive, defensive responses to a comment/deletion. Much was revealed. No need to question the identity or purpose of the Aurora Citizen.

    Enough said; the evidence stand for all to see.

  3. Heather Sisman said

    Robert The Bruce – Let me know when the hat competition is! I like your sense of humour!

    And, to Anonymous who’s choking – (and to RtB too) – one of the benefits of having a Google Id is that you can sign up for google reader (and gmail,and all the other google goodies) so that if someone removes a comment in the future, you’ll still see it in the reader, and you won’t have to choke to death.

    Alternatively, someone could EMAIL OU THE PART YOU MISSED if you belonged to Google. It’s sad that you’re choking and dying and whatever else you’re doing. If you didn’t choose to rely on an Anonymous identity, somebody could share the ‘missing comment’ with you.

    Maybe your foil hat is too tight?

  4. Robert the Bruce said

    It seems that a lot of “anonymous” posters here are in need of an aluminum foil hat. I think you are looking for something that is not there. Clearly, as indicated by “Aurora Citizen” that someone was trying to masquerade as someone else – perhaps someone of note, I did not see them – and to keep the integrity of the blog, they were removed. I personally do not believe that there was anything more than that. Maybe I am naive.

    An like Sir John A above, I am not really Robert the Bruce. I have chosen this name for purposes of this and other blogs to create a “handle” that is recognizable and to still keep my anonymity – I still have to walk the streets of Aurora you know!

    Fuimus

  5. Anonymous said

    WOOOOH there’s a lot of smoke here.
    I got pointed here and I think I can figure out what’s going on.
    I say where there’s smoke there’s fire and man there’s a lot of smoke. I’m choking. I need fresh air.

  6. Heather Sisman said

    I think you’ll agree after reading this that I’ve proven my point. I posted as Sir John A Macdonald. I used the name/url button below the comment field to ‘choose my identity’.

    Nobody knew the difference, and yet a few of the anonymous posters stompted on each other trying to say that there are different reasons some comments are posted.

    Follow this link to sign up for your own google account and then NOBODY can ‘masquerade’ as whatever name you set up.

    https://www.google.com/accounts/NewAccount

    I signed up with my own name, but you could just as easily use a phony one.

    Now, if everyone would kindly stop jumping on me for having ‘special privileges’ – I’m eager to read some other comments that were posted here today.

    Whoever copied and pasted the posted the now retracted post from Evelyn’s blog about Councillor Wilson, who knows, it might have stood had you used a user name and gave credit to the author.

    I don’t understand why you figured you should post it here (or why anyone would need to keep a printed copy? Google caches them for all of eternity.)

    I wonder too, were you trying to poke at Councillor Buck or Councillor Wilson by sharing the post with this side of the blogging world? Don’t you think Councillor Buck has enough to say without your help? If you play nicely, she might post your comments too!

    :o)

  7. Anonymous said

    Aurora Citizen
    February 11, 2009
    Will this appear as an external entry by Aurora Citizen?
    I don’t think so.
    We are not fools out here and are aware of defensive spin.

  8. Anonymous said

    The first line was the name of the person and the date in regular type.
    How was it submitted?
    I tried to submit without “Choosing an Identity”.
    It was not accepted.
    Please explain.

  9. Aurora Citizen said

    The post was published externally by Anonymous — they did not use a user name like Sir John. However the first line of the post used a specific name that was not their own.

  10. Anonymous said

    How did something get published WITHOUT A USER NAME?
    Sir John A. Macdonald, you see you used an IDENTITY.

    The “spam” did NOT have an IDENTITY.
    This suggests that it was not submitted in the usual way but ORIGINATED with the blog moderator or administrator.
    To put it a different way it appears to have originated WITHIN, not outside as the term “spam” would imply.

  11. Sir John A. Macdonald said

    The moderator DID publish the comments (1st sentence in the 2nd paragraph).

    Then the moderator learned that the comments were not submitted by the name indicated….so the comments were removed.

    I’m not really Sir John A. Macdonald, I’m just showing how simple it is to ‘pretend’ to be someone else. I hope the moderator does publish this comment though, even though I’m contravening the rules.

  12. Anonymous said

    I’d appreciate understanding how a “comment” was published one evening, then deleted in the wee hours of the following morning.

    The interesting part is that when it was published on this blog there was no “identity”, heading it up.

    That suggests to me that the moderator, or administrator had to have published the comment.

    No one pretended to be anyone, as I see it.
    Someone who controls this blog published it.
    Perhaps, someone had a change of mind.

    The problem is that the people behind this blog choose to be secretive, and from that position spin, spin, spin.
    This situation is a perfect illustration of this blog’s lack of credibility.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: