Gee that's nice bob,"quoted in WSJ" but where is that quoted or referenced or mentioned on SI. It there a link somewhere on SI that a reasonable person would be expected to see. Stupidity of administration is being cryptic. Any rationale and informed person knows that stupid people are always there and dealing with them in a clear and fair way is the best way and in the long run the most effective manner.
Being cryptic is usually the result of being lazy or stupid or a misguided attempt to avoid liability. I wonder do the really incompetent think that being ambiguous will create some fear that will restrain stupid people. Stupid people by definition just don't get it. Stupid people in an emotional hissyfit will not remember it. Duhhhh... whatever it is. Clarity is the method of the informed mind. Honest people like clarity. Cheaters like the obtuse.
Using my past experience or observations I'd guess you suspended GZ for some time for that post. And I see no violation of the TOU. Being incorrect in a statement about what is in the TOU is a quite dubious as a violation. And even the material in post, the supposed solicitation or offer of employment is not SPAM even if posted publicly on a thread one time where one has participated for many months. "Silicon Investor is largely a self-policing discussion site"
And as you know as I had to point it out to you that MKTBUZZ has stated that any an all topics can be discussed on this thread. MKTBUZZ based upon his judgement would be the really fair arbiter of the obtuse question of a SPAM qualified violation. And a public message directed to a member publicly or to the thread about an issue like work would not be SPAM. GZ is a friend and has several other friends on this thread.
"Use Silicon Investor for illegal purposes or for the transmission of material that is unlawful, harassing, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, abusive, threatening, harmful, vulgar, obscene, tortuous, improper or otherwise objectionable."
Posts to some anonymous handle seldom if directed at that handle become unlawful, harassing, libelous.
I've seem several posts directed not at my handle but directed at me using my real name. Posts suggesting a personal knowledge of me and personal activities that veiled in innuendo and overtly suggest personal knowledge of me are unlawful, harassing, libelous.
I will state publicly that I have never met any member of SI to my knowledge. And any person who had suggested in a post that that is the case is engaging in unlawful, harassing, libelous actions when veiled innuendo of whatever is posted with the suggestion of personal private knowledge.
I would like to know what is this SI policy about deleting unlawful, harassing, libelous posts.
And if such a policy is as obtuse as the current meaning of the TOU based upon who knows what arbitrary rules of interpretation. I would find it useful to have information about the address and contact point for legal discussions of Customary, and reasonable prevention and protection and negligent and contributing to unlawful, harassing, libelous posts.
THANK YOU. |
