Zero tolerance for abusive and slanderous articles and comments
Jeremy Richlin | 26.09.2009 05:25 | Indymedia
A few months ago Indymedia London reported on perceptions of Indymedia from people at the Anarchist Conference. With the increase in personal slander and abuse over this past year, we should take time to heed such a report.
Quoted from the original IMC London article @ 
http://london.indymedia.org/articles/1541:
"While some people thought of Indymedia as a valuable resource, other people let us know that people in their movements basically refused to use it, due to the moderation problems already mentioned and the general craziness of some of the stuff in the open newswires. Their feedback was that if you're trying to organize people who could potentially lose their jobs or their homes due to their involvement in your movement, pointing them to a news source which has conspiracy theories, unmoderated slander, and so forth is not a way to make them more comfortable about the risks they're running.
Moderation problems and also the extremely low quality of comments in general were singled out as a huge turnoff. Groups get slandered on Indymedia with no moderator response and obviously people get extremely pissed off [note: this was in reference to some crazy guy who publishes outrageous articles about people in an international anarchist group on a U.S. Indymedia site and the moderators either don't respond to their complaints or just aren't there]."
IMC UK moderators are to be applauded for their vigilant efforts in hiding articles and removing comments that are abusive and slanderous, particularly towards persons within various allied movements and parties, and sometimes outside of them as well. Likely the biggest problem faced by various IMCs around the globe is the issue of personal slander and attack which harms the growth and legitimacy of IMC as an alternative to the mainstream press. Moderators must also be applauded for their vigilance in removing spam whenever it rears its ugly head.
While it is my opinion that the quality of articles has been on a steady rise and will continue to rise, there has also been a steady rise in local infighting, vicious personal attacks against activists (most notably, the recent slander against Tamsin Omond) and others; eccentric and often insane conspiracy theories; articles about protests without going into proper detail; using IMC as a springboard for abusive behaviour against groups and/or individuals; and many other related problems.
Such low-quality and non-substantive articles and comments not only harm the reputation of IMC UK, but also create unnecessary labour for moderators whose lives are busy enough as they are. They also detract from the genuinely pressing and substantial articles.
Let's hope people start growing up and using IMC UK for what it was intended, not for their own personal insanities and vanities. Cheers!
http://london.indymedia.org/articles/1541: "While some people thought of Indymedia as a valuable resource, other people let us know that people in their movements basically refused to use it, due to the moderation problems already mentioned and the general craziness of some of the stuff in the open newswires. Their feedback was that if you're trying to organize people who could potentially lose their jobs or their homes due to their involvement in your movement, pointing them to a news source which has conspiracy theories, unmoderated slander, and so forth is not a way to make them more comfortable about the risks they're running.
Moderation problems and also the extremely low quality of comments in general were singled out as a huge turnoff. Groups get slandered on Indymedia with no moderator response and obviously people get extremely pissed off [note: this was in reference to some crazy guy who publishes outrageous articles about people in an international anarchist group on a U.S. Indymedia site and the moderators either don't respond to their complaints or just aren't there]."
IMC UK moderators are to be applauded for their vigilant efforts in hiding articles and removing comments that are abusive and slanderous, particularly towards persons within various allied movements and parties, and sometimes outside of them as well. Likely the biggest problem faced by various IMCs around the globe is the issue of personal slander and attack which harms the growth and legitimacy of IMC as an alternative to the mainstream press. Moderators must also be applauded for their vigilance in removing spam whenever it rears its ugly head.
While it is my opinion that the quality of articles has been on a steady rise and will continue to rise, there has also been a steady rise in local infighting, vicious personal attacks against activists (most notably, the recent slander against Tamsin Omond) and others; eccentric and often insane conspiracy theories; articles about protests without going into proper detail; using IMC as a springboard for abusive behaviour against groups and/or individuals; and many other related problems.
Such low-quality and non-substantive articles and comments not only harm the reputation of IMC UK, but also create unnecessary labour for moderators whose lives are busy enough as they are. They also detract from the genuinely pressing and substantial articles.
Let's hope people start growing up and using IMC UK for what it was intended, not for their own personal insanities and vanities. Cheers!
Jeremy Richlin
Comments
Hide 7 hidden comments or hide all comments
Disinfo Trolls and the Information War
26.09.2009 08:54
Chris
Against censorship
26.09.2009 09:28
Take the postings about Calais for example. They attracted some pretty far-right scum-bag comments but these were shown up for the pathetically weak arguments and downright lies that they are. The thing is, even among fairly sympathetic observers, some of those nationalistic thoughts (or worries about population, resources etc) will have rung a bell to many less nutty, and to have these things discussed and myths exploded is really important. People can make up their own minds and don't need censorship by others making decisions on what is and isn't acceptable.
(And I think Tamsin Ormond is a self-serving, attention-seeking distraction from the massive importance of climate chaos)
Anarchist
IM Contributor.
26.09.2009 10:43
Do they not understand that anybody can arrive at IM for any reason and when they arrive it is very important that they see an adult and mature place. IM does some very good work. Discord is not good.
But of course there are others who have no interest in IM and are just here to cause discord because they are paid to. Or incorrectly think they are performing some public service and sow that discord voluntarily. In the end, they will have nothing to be proud of.
But in a way its very helpful that these trolls do post. Lets face it, for the most part they are just very stupid people and coherent argument is not really their strong point. Others here have come along and have made short work of them.
Its a difficult one. On the one hand the trolls are annoying, but on the other hand, without them posting, we would have no way of making them stupid...for all the world to see.
Anonymous.
"the recent slander against Tamsin"
26.09.2009 11:06
reada
too late!
26.09.2009 11:32
theres' loads of problems with this site, not least that it isn't run by a collective. just ask any of the moderators if you can see the minutes of their last meeting, I think that will prove the point, there aren't any open collective meetings
being run by a collective and openness are part of what you have to do to call yourself indymedia, therefore THIS IS NOT INDYMEDIA
sorry to be breaking the news to you but everyone who's already realised this has left and are now using imc-london, imc-northern and imc-bristol becuase they ARE run by collectives. you should join them there.
@ntifascist
it's that late it's almost early
26.09.2009 14:36
yet it appears that this shit's serious enough for you to make comment
usilly forker
More disinformation
26.09.2009 17:14
I'd urge people to compare the sites that @ntififascist points to and see if his claims that people have left to go to those sites ring true. Then read their lists and count how many people are in the collectives.
antif@scist
Splat.
26.09.2009 18:29
We always read it. It makes us feel all fluffy inside.
So see you on the streets guys. I'm the pretty girl with nice legs. x
Time.
we are open to all comers...
26.09.2009 19:41
I find it sad that people above don't see our collective as something they can get involved in, that is open. We try really hard to make it so, publishing our minutes and upcoming meetings openly, and these can be seen by anyone who wants to at
we are always welcoming of newcomers and try to take our meetings to them where they are to make it easier to get involved. Anyone in the north who would like to host one or get involved is welcome to join our mailing list and drop us a line. I'm not sure if there is a minimum of people who make something collectively run, but we always have a reasonable attendence from active members, and often have new people too, having made the decision to base the project on face to face interaction rather than relying on the internet which can be a barrier to some.
It's obvious that indymedia needs to change if it is to continue to provide a place that people choose to come to, and what that change is should be discussed by the most important people in the project, the users of the various indymedia sites. We need to look at how the citizen journalism services now found all over the internet, in places like twitter, facebook and blogs have changed what we need to provide as an open and inclusive alternative to these proprietary and, from an activists point of view, dangerous sites.
The uk site that functioned amazingly in its heyday, through the hard work of a huge collective group over the last 10 years, needs to be looked at to see if it needs to offer something new. This goes from the site you see and how it works, right down to the process behind it. This needs huge discussion not just from those currently involved in running the sites, but from those who read and write the stories and comments and would like to get more involved, but aren't sure how.
I've previously made no secret of my own frustration with how the uk site currently works, as chris pointedly demonstrated with the link above, but i've learned that the only way to make positive change is to be positive at every stage. For example, as imc northern england, one of the ways we are trying to do this is by going out to events and demos with equipment that people can read and write their news with, and most importantly talking lots and lots with the groups we meet. It isn't perfect and won't please everyone if we turn up at glastonbury or climate camp, but we are trying to reach out and get people involved.
Maybe it might be useful if this thread gets used as a place for people to offer suggestions for how indymedia in the uk could change for the better?
jimdog
e-mail:
imc-northern@lists.indymedia.org
Homepage:
http://northern-indymedia.org
Hardly zero tolerance
26.09.2009 22:40
You permit openly sexist and racist war propaganda from 'Realist' -
You allow a self-confessed girl-beater with admitted links to SAS and MI5 to post mysogynist crap here using socket +and+ meat puppets :
Slightly better than [removed]
If any of this is libellous then please refer any legal threats to me, instead of pretending your censorship is your own self-protection. And please stop allowing paedos, grasses, girl-beaters and racists to post here.
To the extent this site has been ruined - and that is a ruse - it has been burnished by admins hiding some posts by people they personally don't like while protecting posts and behaviour that obviously breach both the guidelines and the spirit of the guidelines.
Now I fully expect to be hidden for naming one man a paedo and another a girl beater. The fact this is true and I can prove this is true is easy to hide, but the more that you hide it, the worse this place becomes. My provable allegations will be construed as me disrupting this place by racist, sexist, willing-idiots like Realist, but anyone who cares to search the archive for themselves indepth will see I am correct.
There is human scum in every movement, some infiltrated and some just diseased. They are not challenged, hidden or even investigated by the admins here. Despite that, this place is currently the best of its type on offer, and most of the criticism is state agents, but things are deterioriating and do need to be addressed.
Danny Prior
who knows, not me
26.09.2009 23:54
i read that this comment was posted on 09.02.2006, almost a year after the initial story of 17.03.2005
are moderators alerted when ever and where ever a comment is made
question
Our future community
27.09.2009 02:19
Anarchist
Disruption and frustration.
27.09.2009 10:12
I also think that some people are trying to post personal agenda and trying to pass it off as news. I also think that IM is currently in the thick of a political onslaught to try to destroy it from within.
The alterego Danny Prior and @narchist are examples of this. I recently had a conversation with Danny on an environmental issue and posted a perfectly valid point about environmental activism. He didn't like what I was saying as he clearly realised it to be an important point. I kept on engaging him and when it became clear that it had got away from him a curious thing started happening.
A third poster showed up and started posting conspiracy theory nonsense. Some rubblish that came across as a little bit loony and deranged. I stopped posting at this point but, interestingly, the conversation continued...with Danny in tow.
IM is and always will be disrupted. This isn't something to be negative about. It is simply an insight into how effective IM is now. A truly democratic open forum for the reporting of news that the powers that be DO NOT want reported. Personally, I take the view that the best way to deal with this is to let it go on. There are long-term implications that the disruptors are not aware of but which can, if used properly, yield excellent results.
People are not stupid, They can see through this quite easily. And that, in the end, can pay dividends.
In the interim, it doesn't really matter of course. All involved in this arduous task know that there is no substitute for face to face and lip to lip interaction. I personally work with highly trusted individuals.
IM can never be a substitute for personal interaction so when it comes to reading the 'sit at home' Danny Priors of this world...understand that the only people who will be disrupted by him, are the 'sit at home' slackers who wouldn't achieve a great deal in the real world anyway.
The only other option is to turn the comment structure off, or remove it from being adjacent to the story reported. No comment, no disruption.
Onwards and upwards.
IM/CONTRIBUTOR
IM Contributor.
@Contributor!?
27.09.2009 12:04
I have never posted under the name @narchist nor do I know anything about them beyond their posts here, which are noticably different from mine. I guess @narchist has also annoyed you and so you've conflated us, and while I don't mind, you should probably apologise to @narchist.
"I recently had a conversation with Danny on an environmental issue and posted a perfectly valid point about environmental activism. He didn't like what I was saying as he clearly realised it to be an important point. I kept on engaging him and when it became clear that it had got away from him a curious thing started happening. A third poster showed up and started posting conspiracy theory nonsense. Some rubblish that came across as a little bit loony and deranged. I stopped posting at this point but, interestingly, the conversation continued...with Danny in tow."
I think that is called 'conversation'. Why don't you link to it rather than describe it though so people can judge for themselves? Is everyone who disagrees with you disruptive.
You've just posted your own false 'conspiracy theory nonsense' about me using a sockpuppet (@anarchist) and meat-puppets ('a third poster') and that is understandable since both sockpuppets and meatpuppets have been used here. If IM allowed registered logins for people who wish to post unanonymously that would reduce, but not eliminate, that abuse so it is something you are just going to have to live with it. It would stop another type of abuse, where people post damaging crap under someone elses identity to discredit them, which happens too often to notice let alone correct.
"IM can never be a substitute for personal interaction so when it comes to reading the 'sit at home' Danny Priors of this world...understand that the only people who will be disrupted by him, are the 'sit at home' slackers who wouldn't achieve a great deal in the real world anyway"
I'm afraid your personal dislike of me - presumably for disagreeing with you on some environmental issue - has led to jump to another false conclusion.
I certainly haven't achieved anything. The wars go on, Blair lives without fear of prosecution etc. However to blame me for not trying to change these things is simple vitriol and to demean me for doing nothing is easily disproved by having a quick search through the archive. If you want to list your achievements and contributions then I'll follow suit, maybe you have done more good than me, lot's of people here have, but so far we only have your word for that.
Danny Prior
Hardly zero tolerance
27.09.2009 12:58
Out of laziness or lack of resources you don't even enforce your own guidelines or sift your volunteers.
You permit openly sexist and racist war propaganda from 'Realist' -
[self censored]
To the extent this site has been ruined - and that is a ruse - it has been burnished by admins hiding some posts by people they personally don't like while protecting posts and behaviour that obviously breach both the guidelines and the spirit of the guidelines.
[self censored]
There is human scum in every movement, some infiltrated and some just diseased. They are not challenged, hidden or even investigated by the admins here. Despite that, this place is currently the best of its type on offer, and most of the criticism is state agents, but things are deterioriating and do need to be addressed.
Danny
The hypocrisy of Danny Prior
27.09.2009 13:17
To the Danny Priors who infest IMC, go watch some more football and leave the activism to those who are actually serious.
The Voice of Sanity
Today it is a couch, faker
27.09.2009 14:00
At the very least your tongue should be cut out. At the very least.
Danny
That.
28.09.2009 12:34
Got there in the end?
(hint, you'll have to look at the hidden 'view all posts' editorial link to see it)
Me
Comments are usually more interesting than the stories
29.09.2009 19:47
A problem with totally uncensored posting though is that Indymedia is supposed to be an alternative to the mainstream hierarchical press. So if you say absolutely anything goes, it can easily descend into just another outlet for mainstream ideas. Ideally though if the majority of people here are anarchist/anti-authoritarian they should be able to moderate the site themselves in a decentralised fashion. It could only be "taken over" if trolls and the right wing manage to become a majority here.
How is Indymedia funded anyway? Servers and connectivity don't grow on trees. I am guessing by a secretive weathy donor, which isn't good for the general idea of decentralisation.
anon
destroying Indymedia UK
30.09.2009 15:32
An intelligent article is posted, to then see mindless purile drivel posted in the comments, which at best indicates those posting the childish drivel. They are of the mindset of those who in the past would have chalked up abuse on the wall in the Gents in a pub or engaged in mindless vandalism. Or is it worse, they are there to create dissent.
Comments should be there to add more information, point to where more information may be found, correct inaccuracies and errors, and yes, to air genuine differences of opinion.
But this is not what is happening. The low point has been the use of Indymedia UK as a platform to launch vicious personal attacks on Tamsin Omond.
All what this is achieving is to devalue Indymedia UK as an independent, radical source of information. But then maybe that is the intention.
I raised my concerns on this with Indymedia UK a couple of years ago.
How to resolve this I do not know. If it is Open Publishing, then it has to be open to all, then you let in the scum who seem determined to destroy Indymedia UK. If it is moderated, then it begs the accusation of censorship and it is no longer Open Publishing.
Not an easy circle to square, but something has to be done, otherwise Indymedia UK loses all credibility as a responsible independent source of information.
About the only good thing that has come out of the abuse of Tamsin Omond is that it has forced this shit that was bubbling away up to the surface and it is not a pretty sight.
Keith
funding
30.09.2009 15:34
Always a good selection. About the only reason worth attending.
Keith
Hide 7 hidden comments or hide all comments