“Hey Groundviews, keep that censorship button on mate”
Repost This ArticleSo came the earnest appeal by “Ryan”:
Author : Ryan (IP: 60.231.53.136 , CPE-60-231-53-136.qld.bigpond.net.au)
E-mail : ryan@ryan.com
URI :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=60.231.53.136
Hailing from Queensland, Australia, Groundviews received over 30 caustic submissions from “Ryan” today, some of which went as follows:
Sanjana… time for you to suck dick again.
CPA should be hung, drawn and quarted like the turds they are.
Sanjana, you’re a fucking moron mate.
CPA must be flushed down the toilet like the vermins they are.
CPA sucks, Sanjana Hatotuwa sucks dick
Clearly, though “Ryan’s” use of stock phrases, a demonstrably limited imagination and a grossly truncated vocabulary vitiates his / her ability to really insult, it is symptomatic of a larger & growing malaise of online communication, especially on blogs.
As David Pogue, the New York Times’ Tech Columnist avers:
The real shame, though, is that the kneejerk “everyone else is an idiot†tenor is poisoning the potential the Internet once had. People used to dream of a global village, where maybe we can work out our differences, where direct communication might make us realize that we have a lot in common after all, no matter where we live or what our beliefs.
But instead of finding common ground, we’re finding new ways to spit on the other guy, to push them away. The Internet is making it easier to attack, not to embrace.
Maybe as the Internet becomes as predominant as air, somebody will realize that online behavior isn’t just an afterthought. Maybe, along with HTML and how to gauge a Web site’s credibility, schools and colleges will one day realize that there’s something else to teach about the Internet: Civility 101.
An interesting and somewhat related question posed by Tracy here – http://daytripper.wordpress.com/2007/02/02/are-you-on-lauras-side/
Hanging, drawing and quartering turds must surely be a most unpleasant activity which, coupled with a seemingly insatiable preoccupation with fellatio, tells us a lot about Ryan’s mental condition.
I would like to know more about Ryan’s point of view, minus the expletives and abuse of course. So Ryan if you are reading, do consider posting more about why you are so against the CPA etc, minus any personal attacks and filth please.
Des,
I think you place too much faith in the said individual – although we are open of course to an epiphany.
Des,
I know not whether you were a regular on Moju, but those such as Indi (Samarajiva) and David Blaker (author of A Cause Untrue and a very familiar voice in the SL blogosphere) suffered much more at the hands of those who were simply out to vilify them, their parents, their partners, their friends, their work and their lives. It became so bad that Moju, which wasn’t moderated, had to shut down – http://ict4peace.wordpress.com/2007/01/31/the-end-of-moju-but-conversations-go-on/
Many of these miscreants are now attracted to the growing readership of Groundviews.
Currently, Groundviews gets around 500+ pageviews a day, mostly from SL. Clearly, there is a potential for growth, and through syndication of the better content, the space for cross media growth as well, which I will explore later this year and this site matures further.
Take for instance some of the posts to date on Groundviews – e.g. http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/10/between-scylla-and-charybdis-the-hapless-mr-vitharana/#comments – that have fostered a particular timbre of wit and debate I’d love to see elsewhere on the site.
Sorry Des, Sanjana (aka Groundviews) can’t stand anyone talking in civlised tones – when critiquing him or the CPA. Either this comment will not be published or will be deleted. Not only that, Sanjana (aka Groundviews) has already broken his much wanted submission guidelines by publishing this post. One law for the dictator and one law for the other it seems.
Just so that it’s clear to all of us, I’m not Ryan. It’s just not the JaM style to waste my energy spamming a *moderated* blog. I know that Sanjana had spent some time in the Uni of Queensland, and it’s obvious that he’s being singled out by Ryan. I feel it’s just someone with a personal grudge against him.
Ryan,
I actually pulled in your comment from Akismet (the spam filter here) to publish, to address the your grievances. Groundviews is, as JM points out, moderated – there is content we will publish, and there is content we will not publish, based in part on the guidelines here, but also depending on whether, on a case by case basis, comments here are useful to flesh out the issues pointed to by the original author in the post, depending on the subjective assessment of Groundviews.
Groundviews, CPA and myself have a clear, open and long-standing agenda that many in the blogosphere have their own opinions on – hardly a secret, since much of my writing is online, and accordingly, much of what I think about conflict and peace in Sri Lanka in particular.
Groundviews is not independent – it is very much a part of an exercise spearheaded by CPA to see what the potential of Citizens Journalism in Sri Lanka is. Authors who contribute content here know full well my politics, CPA’s politics and the primary intent of Groundviews, which is not just a place for the so-called “peaceniks”, but a place to those who can, in a CIVIL manner, express their dissent.
Groundviews is not me and I am not Groundviews. I don’t necessarily agree with what’s posted here, and have in fact not editing, censored, deleted or changed a single post made by authors not of CPA or from civil society on this site. Groundviews is a collection of voices, that together create, hopefully, a collective identity for this site as one that visitors come to consume intelligent content and engaging debates.
As Che noted earlier, your perception of dictatorship on this website is unfounded and inaccurate. To perceive moderation as dictatorship is entirely your prerogative however, and those such as yourself, who can only articulate yourselves using smatterings of expletives and bad English, will obviously feel shut out from this website which will simply delete your posts as long as you continue to write in a manner contrary to that which is clearly posted here as site guidelines.
I think the word you were looking for in your post was ‘vaunted’, and the fact that you erroneously point out that the site’s own guidelines are broken (as another blogger has as I noted on Kottu) is again incorrect, as it is not mentioned anywhere on the site that the emails and IPs of those who comment will not be logged, and / or published, outside of the comment itself.
Finally, I would be the happiest to be proved wrong to add you to Akismet’s spam list if you can engage with content her in a manner akin to that which Des asks of you.
JustMal,
I don’t think anyone would have mistaken you for Ryan, just because you live in the same State in Oz !
Sanjana
“I actually pulled in your comment from Akismet (the spam filter here) to publish, to address the your grievances. Groundviews is, as JM points out, moderated – there is content we will publish, and there is content we will not publish, based in part on the guidelines here, but also depending on whether, on a case by case basis, comments here are useful to flesh out the issues pointed to by the original author in the post, depending on the subjective assessment of Groundviews.”
Sorry Sanjana, you have already broken your own guidlines by publishing personal information. This can also be construed as a personal attack. What have you to say about that? I ask this because you seem to have a penchant for deleting other people’s posts on your own whim, and when they question you, you simply point to the guidelines and say “read.” Clearly there is one rule for others, and another for you.
Why do you claim to be democratic and encourage divergent views when you treat people with utmost disdain, in a dictatorial capacity, if they do not agree with you or point out fallacies in your arguments? I will wait until you reply to this before writing anymore, because I do not know whether you will resort to deleting this post as well, if it doesn’t agree with you.
Why did you delete my post in the BMICH thread questioning your claim of supporting divergent views?
Also I do not believe you when you say “I don’t necessarily agree with what’s posted here, and have in fact not editing, censored, deleted or changed a single post made by authors not of CPA or from civil society on this site”
The user “Sanjana” and the user “Groundviews” are the one and the same. Why pretend otherwise? Take a look at this link posted by “Groundviews”:
http://www.groundviews.org/2007/01/23/the-promise-of-citizen-journalism-article-on-madrid11/
It says “Madrid11 features an article I wrote on Groundviews, where I explore the potential of citizen journalism to support & strengthen peacebuilding in Sri Lanka.”
And when you click on the link, lo and behold it is you Sanjana.
So what’s with the deception?
Ryan,
Had to pull you out of the Akismet junk again. The attempt for a moral high ground after 30+ comments of pure filth is admirable, but doesn’t fly.
I have answered your other pointed comments and do not wish to reiterate my points ad nauseum, ad infinitum.
Your comment on the BMICH post was “Groundviews – please be honest, like you will publish ANYTHING that doesn’t support the CPA’s point of view. You have deleted posts and replies in the past, so please do not act is if you do not have an agenda.”
It is one that I deleted because it was written in clear ignorance of the nature of the content on this site, and had nothing to do with the post / original content. As I have repeatedly said, this site will continue to delete comments that do not engage with the content posted by authors.
Trying to now paint yourself as an suave, intelligent interlocutor will I fear take some more effort – but do keep writing into Groundviews. There is something here that obviously makes you come back to read the content, and we can only hope that in future, you engage more with the issues instead of the author’s sexual preferences or the karmic fate as you would wish it, of the organisations they work in.
Ryan,
That which seems to have escaped you – that Groundviews was my idea, that I developed along with CPA and InfoShare, which I oversee and is not the first initiative I’ve launched to explore the potential of ICT for Peacebuilding, – is actually in the public domain.
I point you to my blog – http://ict4peace.wordpress.com – for more details on the evolution of Groundviews and other ideas for peacebuilding that I’m in the process of developing.
Sanjana
I was remiss in not mentioning another source of inspiration at the time I was thinking of starting Groundviews – Lirneasia’s pathbreaking Webhamuva project and the lessons identified in the final report – http://www.lirneasia.net/2006/10/webhamuva/
Sanjana thanks for outlining the difficulties faced with comments such as what happened on Moju. I did pop in recently to see that a large number of comments had fallen to low personal attacks. Still, a bit sad to see that moju has been closed.
Do consider a moderated version of Moju, and maybe some ways of introducing self regulation or part-time volunteer moderators to get involved.
Ryan, glad to see you posting here and without the expletives. Looking forward to your posts and comments. Sanjana or any moderator is ofcourse within his rights to delete posts that contain expletives or don’t meet guidelines if submission guidelines have been drawn up.
fact is groundviews engages in censorship of even relevant comments with a different point of view. anybody may judge for themselves by reading several of my comments that they censored. ‘curiously’ they never give those as examples for justifying censorship here, choosing ones from one ‘ryan’. who btw by posting such comments plays rights into their hands.
as with all censorship this one is also highly arbitrary and subjective.
as for who really engaged in posting of spoof and scurrilous comments in moju and against whom, please read that blog ( if you can find it in an internet cache). and judge for yourself. read the thread on ‘call for immediate action on trincomalee situation’ in particular and esp the admin’s and sanjana hattotuwa’s responses to such comments.
Sittingnut,
As someone who has created your very own blog entry for those who have been censored from Groundviews, by the sentiments in your blog and earlier on Moju that overwhelmingly bored to death your readers but also denigrate InfoShare, CPA, myself and other authors, your confounded farrago of doubts and fears regarding the “spoofing” incident on Moju for which you still hold me erroneously responsible and your inability to actually fully comprehend that which is posted online (as those of us who have read you for over 1 1/2 years know full well) do not work in your favour when you post comments on Groundviews that only seek to further a parochial agenda on a website that was set up for more constructive, progressive dialogue.
Accordingly, while you do not go into Akismet by default, I assure you that I will only publish your comments that engage in more than a passing manner with the content in the original author’s post.
On the rare occasion on Moju, as I recall, you came up with a brilliant turn of phrase, a question or insight that changed the course of the debate. I look forward to more of that and less of your tired tirades.
Des,
I know InfoShare’s planning something for to restart Moju, even if it’s not going to be called by that name again. Moderation takes up much more time than you anticipate, and it is a thankless job.
Part time volunteer moderators are hard to come by frankly – I know that The Lanka Academic forums rely on a few moderators who do have day job, but speaking to one of them in the early days of setting up the forum, I found that they had grossly underestimated the time it would eat up, and indeed, the levels of insanity they would be dealing with.
Indi’s post today is an interesting one in light of the discussions here – http://www.indi.ca/2007/02/ethic-of-comment-moderation/
Sanjana
A related article from Ars Technica : What constitutes cyberbullying? A case study from the trenches
My two cents on this issue:
I don’t agree with CPA. I don’t agree with Sanjana on a lot of things. The content is (naturally) skewed towards CPA politcal positions since CPA-types are the majority of contributors.
There is no such thing as an unmoderated forum. All public spaces come with rules and minders. However, this is a decent enough public space (for now) and the best way that those who disagree vehemently with the CPA and Sanjana and anyone else here can subvert them all is to USE this space.
My contention is that the CPA represents a flawed political line which has lost out in the larger political domain but is still an irritant thanks to privileged positioning in society and of course it’s edge in English. If the CPA provides access to its territory to its detractors, if those who are against the CPA possess the weapons that the CPA uses and if these can be used effectively within the rules that the CPA sets for combat then by all means we should fight the good fight.
If and when the CPA closes shop to dissenting views, the CPA will indict itself as a hypocritical outfit.
Either way, it is, to my mind, a win-win situation to those who do not subscribe to the CPA’s views.
So, thanks CPA and Sanjana and whoever else runs this show. I appreciate.
Malinda,
Of course you wouldnt agree with the CPA. You agree with Nalin de Silva, Weerawansa, Ranawaka and Gamanpila. Would Goebels ever agree with Orwell?
To expect the CPA to publish your views as recommendations for a fair and just Sri Lanka is like expecting your newspaper Daily News, to publish any views that are at odds with the Rajapakse Chinthanaya.