Outrageous

[JDW]

I awoke this morning to find an email notification that there had been a new post in one of our more popular threads here in the Compact Mac Forum. (I will refrain from mentioned the title of that thread so as to avoid trouble.) Upon clicking the link in that email this morning, which should normally take me to the new post, I was met with a "The topic or post you requested does not exist" error. Clearly, the entire thread has either been hacked or moved to another forum section or it was deleted.

It would be nice to hear a formal explanation from the overseers of this site as to what took place. And while I am not worrying too much that our other threads will be met with a similar fate, it does me make think twice about posting here until I know for certain.

Thank you.

 

[~tl]

It has been removed. We had a complaint about the naming, shaming and general slanderous comments made towards eBay sellers for listing their items with high prices. The matter is being looked into, and we appreciate your patience. For the time being, please refrain from starting another of that type of thread.

Thanks.

 

[JDW]

We shall humbly refrain, of course. But due to the cryptic details on precisely why it was deleted, please allow me to offer my best guess...

Certain vintage Mac EBAY sellers were mentioned by name in that thread. Those names appeared in Google because this forum is indexed by Google. At least one of those sellers in the past found our informative thread and then decided to masquerade as one of us and began posting in the now-deleted thread. That seller in disguise later got upset and stopped posting. A few months went by, and his overpriced goods would not sell on EBAY, so he assumed his potential buyers were Googling up less than stellar info about him -- info that led back to our poor thread. He blew his top and threatened the owners of this site. The owners immediately backed down, and rather than locking the thread to prevent future posts and posting a polite note as to why it was being lock, the thread was deleted without a public statement.

If that is what happened, it would be reassuring if it were publicly stated more plainly from the owner's of this site. Because once again, we certainly do not want to spend time posting here in fear of those posts (how innocent they were intended to be) are at some point deleted because someone selfish makes an idle threat. I know how depressed and down right discouraged I was when I lost so many hours of posts due to a server HD crash, so I don't wish to see something similar happen in the form of increase thread deletions in the future.

Please also know that I did not start that thread, nor did I submit the last couple posts either. But I did find the thread informative. So for those of you who never read the thread but are now reading this, it perhaps matters little to you at this point. But if you wish to know who to be cautious with on EBAY, please simply PM me and I shall be happy to offer all the information I can, privately.

EBAY can be a dangerous place to shop. It is therefore a real blessing to be able to share helpful information with other Classic Mac fans if possible. I certainly wish others had warned me in the past about certain sellers before I sent them my money.

Happy & Safe Classic Macing!

 

[Mike Richardson]

The solution is to Google-proof any specific mentions of the said eBay sellers.

So, for example, instead of "eBay seller stuffnthings234 is a rip off", you should say "eBay seller stuffREMOVEnthings234 is a rip off (take out REMOVE)".

 

[Christopher]

I found a picture I posted here in google when i was searching Sony Vaios...

It showed my pic of the garbage picked iMac G4 but the keywords were Sony Vaio... Kinda creepy when you think about it.

 

[Bunsen]

Self-censorship is the worst kind.

IMHO, threads like the one in question are not only valuable, but essential to the operation of both the free market and democracy, protected under law (IANAL) and ought be defended with vigour.

 

[JDW]

Bunsen, you are right on the money. But "Sys-Ops Commander" used the word "slander" in his post above. He used it in the legal sense such that I believe the EBAY seller who lodged the dastardly complaint likely said he would "sue" over having been slandered unless the thread was removed. This is just a guess, but we cannot do anything other than guess while details remain thin from "upper management" here at 68kMLA.

Because much of the information presented in our now defunct thread was by and large "factual" (as opposed to flat out lies), it would be difficult if not impossible to win a Slander or Libel case against 68kMLA or any posters here. But in this day and age, the mere "threat" of legal action causes most people to cower in a corner without giving it a further thought.

Despite this, "Sys-Ops Commander" said the situation was still under investigation. So I look forward to hearing the result of that.

 

[Mike Richardson]

I found a picture I posted here in google when i was searching Sony Vaios...
It showed my pic of the garbage picked iMac G4 but the keywords were Sony Vaio... Kinda creepy when you think about it.

Search adoptamac.com on Google Images. Tons of 68kMLA forum images come up. They are really missing the mark lately with the Image search.

 

[Mike Richardson]

Owners of forums and other internet/online services are not liable (at least in the USA) for the actions of their members. A slander case would be pursued against the poster(s), not the forum operator.

We can surmise this is being hotly debated in the War Room since the icon is lighting up quite frequently in the past few hours.

 

[Bunsen]

Mmm. Nuisance suit is nuisancey.

On the other hand, calling his bluff should be an option on the table as well. I imagine 95% of lawyers would laugh him out of their office.

Even if he did find a gullible/greedy/stupid enough lawyer, the first step is always a cease and desist letter. That's the point at which you even consider pulling the material

 

[iamdigitalman]

So much for freedom of speech and the right to assemble...

 

[Mac128]

Yeah I started the thread. What of it? I also posted the last few posts. So? If I recall, and since the thread has been removed I can't confirm it, there was no slander, just opinion about how highly priced certain sellers are compared to the market and other sellers who sell similar items for far less. I've seen far worse opinion on this site regarding Microsoft and Apple. Obviously Microsoft doesn't feel threatened by 68Kmla. And Apple probably could care less if we exist or not.

I don't recall any flat out accusations, rather, humorous musings and theories regarding the intent behind the exorbitant prices. If Google turns the spotlight on such sellers vis-a-vis this forum, it only demonstrates to potential buyers what we in the vintage Mac community think about the prices being charged and their relation to the market, not necessarily what we think of the seller or his selling practices. This is no different than the thousands of comments made about Microsoft all over the internet. Nor is this much different than the dozens of negative reviews I have read on Amazon pages, many targeted at the manufacturer. eBay enjoys a uniquely protected environment where only the two aspects of the transaction are rated: did the item ship, was it as advertised, with the seller protected against any unrelated negative feedback. eBay has even removed neutral feedback, leaving a conscientious buyer who is also trying to build their own feedback with little choice but to mark a less than satisfactory transaction as positive in order to avoid the last un-trumpable word by the seller.

So, clearly I think any threats of slander against this website are humorous at best. If someone posted "seller X IS a lier and a cheat", well then maybe there would be some cause for worry, but simply saying "seller X charges more than anybody else on eBay" is a legitimate statement of fact and speculating why that might be is no more slander than wondering if Steve Jobs is really sick and will soon leave Apple rudderless.

Oh well my two cents. Perhaps the "politically correct" thread should be titled: "Collecting Macs". Rather than point out how outrageous certain eBay auctions are, post a list of eBay sellers who specialize in vintage Apple products as a "service" to our members who are looking to acquire vintage Macs for their personal collections. Such a thread could then list the market prices one should expect to pay and the conditions that exist and what to watch out for rather than pointing out any specific examples. That of course does not prevent us from posting any find we think notable, without further commentary. Certainly we could comment on the quality of the item being listed without mentioning the seller specifically or whether it was overpriced? That would certainly be just as helpful as the rancorous tone the other thread tended to take on.

UPDATE:However, I have to conclude by saying, I feel a first amendment right (even though this is an international forum to which that term does not universally apply) has been violated by outside individuals by not being able to freely express opinion in a membership-based forum and discuss anything I damn well please within the accepted guidelines of the on-line community in which I participate. Certainly the moderators are well within their rights to protect themselves, but for any public individual to think they have the right to censor what is said about them always insults me – and lets face it once you start a business and put yourself out there in an international market, you are a public figure who has forfeited most of the personal rights a private individual possesses (at least in the US).[/u] Frankly if anyone feels something slanderous is being said about them, calling forth the lawyers without first directly challenging the person who made the accusation in the first place, is simply wrong. That's what's wrong with the world. It is a simple matter of becoming an anonymous member, as JDW points out it has likely been done before, and PM-ing the offending party. Most likely to avoid trouble, any seemingly improprieties might have been edited out by most of us. But I don't think that is the goal here. I think avoiding any hint of criticism about eBay practices is what is sought here and the entire thread is therefore "slanderous", specific references to names is what in their eyes make it possible to go to the moderators and have the whole thing quashed once and for all. Besides, that person or persons would have to contact an awful lot of us to remove specific remarks, which begs the question ... if so many people are individually complaining about the same thing, how can it be slander?

 

[Morrick]

Mac128, a man after my own heart. My thoughts exactly, word by word.

Cheers,

Rick

 

[heebiejeebies]

Woah, dooooood, that is like SOOO not gnarly. Totally fascist censorship there dooood. We have a right to say anything we want on the internet and you're like oppressing us dooood. I mean what do you think the internet is, ordered civilisation? Next you'll be trying to censor the graffiti on the walls of the bog in the library, man. :lol:

Just to put it in perspective:

http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/5677/planetshp6.jpg

 

[istar1018]

So, clearly I think any threats of slander against this website are humorous at best. If someone posted "seller X IS a lier and a cheat", well then maybe there would be some cause for worry, but simply saying "seller X charges more than anybody else on eBay" is a legitimate statement of fact and speculating why that might be is no more slander than wondering if Steve Jobs is really sick and will soon leave Apple rudderless.

Plus, most posts included a link to the auction in question! It isn't like anyone here made up an auction to discredit someone. Unlike most Wikipedia articles, we cited our sources and posted our opinions about the facts we saw (e.g. whether a price was too high or the description was wrong). I distinctly remember that some members tried to get sellers to correct erroneous statements, and posted commentary when that was not the case.

A key element to establishing a successful free market is providing information to buyers and sellers about pricing. Sellers trying to make out hand over fist on an old Plus, might get upset about that, and might make all the threats in the world. For me, the solution is not to remove the 'offending' information, but then again, I am not the administrator of this forum. But this is key... I am NOT the administrator.

If you read the rules...

The moderators of this forum have the right to remove, edit, move or close any topic at any time should they see fit. All decisions are final and should, under no circumstances, be the subject of open debate on the forums. If you have a problem with the actions of a moderator, please PM either the moderator in question, one of the administrators or e-mail admin@68kmla.org

... Tom was within his rights to delete the thread in question. So in terms of a first amendment violation, I don't really see how that applies, as we're all free to express our opinions in this space that we don't pay for, and we do so, knowing full well that some moderators can delete our posts on a whim, without any recourse. That's tough, and if you don't like that policy, take it up with a moderator or start your own community. Since the moderators / owners are the ones who can face financial / legal consequences for what happens on these forums, I can understand why they've reserved that right for themselves.

If a moderator systematically prohibited you from posting based on your political, religious, or Microsoft views, then maybe that would be more of a freedom of speech 'violation'. In any case, 68kmla forums are not the government, and none of us have any guaranteed freedoms on these boards, unless the operators choose to grant us some.

Seriously, if you want to start your own community that places restrictions on the abilities of moderators, I'd be the first to join. But until then, I'm happy to give someone else the ability to delete threads in exchange for providing this discussion board.

[EDIT: poor grammar]

 

[JDW]

istar1018, than you for quoting us the rules.

~tl, I sincerely apologize for having broken the forum rules by posting my query above in this thread. I neglected to read the rules which clearly ban such questioning of moderators in a public forum. Apologies to all others on this site as well who have been offended by my questioning of authority in this particular thread. My thanks go out to the administrators for providing us this fine medium to discuss our love -- classic Macs.

 

[Bunsen]

JDW, unless a post of yours above has been deleted and I missed it, your sarcastic post is somewhat pointless.

 

[JDW]

Bunsen, I had expected most everyone reading my words above and accept them at face value and understand that I was being 100% sincere. As such, your accusation is tantamount to a digital slap in my face. Even so, it is an wicked world in which we live, so I can understand why you would not expect me to be apologetic. But please know it is not my intention to break forum rules and thereby initiate the wrath of our moderators. With that in mind, I posted my apology above. And no, it is not my intention to "kiss up" to anyone either. I was sincere in apologizing, nothing more.

For what it's worth, you will note that my apologies above do not extend to the EBAY sellers in question. (I had hoped someone would notice that without my expressing saying it.) Any information discussed in our now-defunct thread was well researched and factual. If anything, it served to inform and even "protect" our classic Mac community rather than mercilessly go after "innocent" profiteers on EBAY. But what is done is done, and I have nothing further to say about it.

 

[Morrick]

Just a quick remark en passant.

I've been thinking, and what happened behind the scenes must have been something unexpected and unusual. I've been around here enough time to notice that this is usually a well-balanced place, where moderators rarely have to enforce rules, and generally the atmosphere is friendly and collaborative. The proof lies in the very existence of this thread which, strictly according to the Rules, could have been entirely suppressed before even growing.

So, what happened with the eBay-related thread must have been unusual. In any case, I hope the moderators/administrators will be able to sort things out.

Cheers,

Rick