Editing, "shedded light" and more
I was going to try and make this just a comment to my previous blog, but there's too much info here. First of all, Read44, you're right. The report abuse button was added for people to let us know when something violated the Terms of Service or Privacy Policy, not for when you disagree with a particular topic. Ok, on to the questions. Topic #1 - The ability to edit. Any user has the ability to edit his/her own content, whether a blog, comment or event. If you are the originator of some content and signed on to the site, you will see an Edit button next to what you've created, and it will look something like this: for blogs -
for comments - When you click "edit" you will return to a page that looks exactly like the original page when you created the content. Once you have edited to your heart's content, click "submit" and your changes will have been made. I had a good question from somebody the other day and let me address that too: If you were to edit one of your comments or blogs from two weeks ago, the time stamp would remain the same - that is, editing content does not change the original creation date. Topic #2 - moving the "Report Abuse" button. I'll ask our developer about that and let you guys know. Topic #3 - about the "Report Abuse" button. When somebody clicks that button it does not automatically take down the flagged piece of content. Of course, as was proved this weekend, if one piece of content is flagged often enough, the system will pull it down until we put it back up. Also, we do not require somebody to tell us why they reported a piece of content, but we do track who clicked, how often they have clicked and there are limits to how many times you can click the button. Topic #4 - Rich's "Shedded light" comment. Rich, I'm not sure why, but that phrase makes me crave tacos. Topic #5 - Rich's idea about having an abuse button for the abuse button. That is more of a philosophical question, but it would be interesting to see a whole string of redundant buttons, each reporting abuse from the others. Did I miss anything? If so, ask away. Oh, and Mike - thanks for the kind words about MCS.com. We all appreciate you guys being here on this site more than you know. The truth is, you guys have turned this site into something much more exciting and meaningful than we ever imagined. Related: JonathanBennett's blog | login or register to post comments | printer friendly version | Tags: awesome | editing | how-to
Submitted by SoloVoce on Tue, 07/01/2008 - 12:25pm.
Jonathon, Thanks for taking the time to explain these things. It always helps when we know why something was done. If I mentioned this before I apologise, but who actually makes the determination of what might be called abuse? It might help if we bloggers were given an idea so that even by accident, we wouldn't fall in the abuse category in our writings. Once again, thanks for 'splaining this to us. RichK Submitted by read44 on Fri, 07/04/2008 - 10:17am.
There seems to be another blog that has gone away. I don't know which one but when I click on I ONLY HANG MY HAT ON MY BALD HEAD, it says Access Denied. I can't imagine what was said after that one that caused the blog to be pulled. Is there some way that you, Jonathan and team, can keep the whole blog from being pulled when just one comment had the Report Abuse option excercised? Winn, at least you received an explanation as to what happened to your blog, I have not. I can only guess. Submitted by pioneer on Fri, 07/04/2008 - 10:28am.
Read, Same is true if you click "investment". Access denied.
Hmmm....
Submitted by FredCatchpole on Fri, 07/04/2008 - 10:38am.
Fred Catchpole Office 904-771-6852 Cell 904-708-5541 Jonathan, It appears that some individual readers do not like forthright discussion on issues pertinent to the future of Clay County. The removal of Baxleys blog on DRI's and the recent removal of similar blogs does not appear to be a coincidence but premeditated to thwart the ordinary citizen from becoming aware of the problems and analysis of these issues. The sensitive nature of the discussions may be considered only offensive by those bigots who have something to hide or something to gain, and, or those who wish to protect the bigots in charge. Fred Catchpole Submitted by read44 on Fri, 07/04/2008 - 10:43am.
Yes it does. I had already read the BALD submission before and there was nothing wrong with it. Can't imagine anything titled Investment that would have been abusive. Did anyone see it before it disappeared? Funny how something being removed makes it that much more interesting. If I ever remove my own blog I think I will tell everyone and tell them why so that people don't have to wonder so.
Submitted by Walt on Fri, 07/04/2008 - 10:55am.
Fred, it has become blatantly clear that we who are sans the flowing tresses of youth are now to be the objects of discrimination. Alas, we must unite together and wear our BALD HEADS with pride. By standing together, we shall overcome. Submitted by read44 on Fri, 07/04/2008 - 11:12am.
This is a part of the Terms of Service for Myclaysun: MyClaysun.com may remove content at any time for any reason or no reason and is in no way responsible for storage or continued availability of content. That says it all then. If that is the case and we now know that the author of a blog can also remove it, then I would like to have an Access Denied code system implemented. A number system that will identify the explanation for why something was removed or some sort of written explanation along with the Access Denied notice. I still say that it is not necessary to remove an entire blog for one comment. At the moment when you receive an Access Denied notice it makes it appear that you may be receiving the notice because you are not signed in, that is not the case. Content can normally be read when you are not signed in. We can't learn from our mistakes if Myclaysun does not identify the reason for removal. If we knew the reason then we would not have to waste space talking about the whys. Submitted by SoloVoce on Fri, 07/04/2008 - 2:02pm.
I don't know the process for pulling a blog because some one hit the "report abuse" button, but I think it would be helpful if they provide a reason for hitting the button. this might eliminate abuse of the abuse button. RichK People are talking about ...Here are the recent blog postings with the most comments. |
Who's online
There are currently 4 users and 299 guests online.
Online usersRecent comments |
Ok, I think I do see how to remove an entire blog now.
During this check of my previous blogs I have noticed that the Congratulations blog to Karen Lake was removed. Wow, how could that have been abuse? Posting the news articles? They were online anyway. It's not like I was posting secret documents here. It was good-news information wasn't it? I don't remember anything terrible (if you use other postings that were not removed as a guideline) being written after the blog posted. It was mostly a conversation about the air field.