Useful tool

[oliverson]

I don't disagree it's got flaws.

Didn't spot that other thread. Oops.

I missed the other thread as well. Actually that's a lie, as having referred to it I saw endless bickering and so it turned me right off. In fact there's a lot of bickering on a lot of threads these days. Makes one wonder why one bothers coming on here anymore.

[wattaj]

Because everything on this forum, LN, FB, twitter, and all other social sites is all fact-checked before being shared by users?

I'm really at a loss why a small cohort of CUK forum users are so persistently hostile to other users here.

Incorrect advice on here is corrected by other, more knowledgeable users and the moderators keep everyone within the law. Twitter, LinkedIn, and Facebook users can be pursued for deformation. What makes you special?

We're trying to help you. Though I am reminded of primary school life saving lessons: one can't save a man who does not want to be saved. Let the ****er drown, then drag the body ashore if safe to do so.

[SimonMac]

Because everything on this forum, LN, FB, twitter, and all other social sites is all fact-checked before being shared by users?

I'm really at a loss why a small cohort of CUK forum users are so persistently hostile to other users here.

It's the Wikipedia approach, open source knowledge and if it's wrong someone will correct it

[inniAccounts]

It's the Wikipedia approach, open source knowledge and if it's wrong someone will correct it

Thank you Simon. Yes, you can post to correct. There's clear contact details for correction. I've contacted media teams at organisations with contentious feedback. I feel I'm taking reasonable measures.

Plus, IMHO, the negative impact of sending a under a small business who's trying to do good by other small businesses would quickly outweigh the negative impact of a comment from a site user.

And I feel like this is cause worth sticking one's neck out for.

But's lets agree to disagree on this, and move on?

[eek]

It's the Wikipedia approach, open source knowledge and if it's wrong someone will correct it

Wikipedia only works as an excuse if there is no person in between.

Going back to an e-mint legal conference on forums back in the early 2000's a forum where posts are manually checked before posting has a very different set of requirements to one where posts are automatically posted. Equally applying any editoral control afterwards on what is written and posted could open you to problems later.

This is one of those areas where the minutia of how the site works could be very important - blanket statements that it's like Wikipedia only work if it works exactly like that - and there are enough comments here that show that isn't the case.

[ladymuck]

I thought the likes of Facebook / Twitter said that they were platform providers and had no control over the content thus getting away with hosting anything people may take objection to.

I suspect the same model could be used here?

[eek]

I thought the likes of Facebook / Twitter said that they were platform providers and had no control over the content thus getting away with hosting anything people may take objection to.

I suspect the same model could be used here?

Nope, see my comment above, you are only a platform if it's fully automated.. Even then if an option was manually created by the editorial team, you could pin the blame on the owner of the site.

And I will repeat this once again, it's not a criticism of the site - it's trying to protect you from upsetting someone who will bankrupt you out of spite or just accidentally.

[inniAccounts]

eek, appreciated (genuinely) - that's given us a few things to look into.

We don't edit/curate content, so feels closer to wikipedia than el reg. We've just whiteboarded next round of changes - including some community flagging / voting features - perhaps like reddit.

[Paralytic]

We don't edit/curate content, so feels closer to wikipedia than el reg. We've just whiteboarded next round of changes - including some community flagging / voting features - perhaps like reddit.

Do you log any information about who submits the information, in case an authority comes requesting? Do people need to register details in order to add details?

[JohntheBike]

Because everything on this forum, LN, FB, twitter, and all other social sites is all fact-checked before being shared by users?

I'm really at a loss why a small cohort of CUK forum users are so persistently hostile to other users here.

criticism doesn't need to be hostile. But you are correct, there is a small number of posters here who are both critical (accepted) and abusive (not accepted). However flawed, those posters who clearly have good intentions, shouldn't be vilified if their opinions aren't shared by others.