Open for RMR Opinions... bring 'em on

I sent a note on the EMRR Announcement List and then posted the following:

Wow! Interesting feedback I got on my last note, so I thought I'd open it up for discussion. I'm also going to post on RMR and TRF, so you can reply privately or openly to either of those sites.

I said in my last post about someone pointing out a swear word in a flight log.

"It is my desire to ensure that the site says kid-friendly. I will remove the reported one as soon as I get home. I will also do a check on all other site content. I will add "word" replacers in the scripts as well (simple to do, don't know why I have never done it in the past)."

Now my intent was NOT gross censorship, however, I did want to eliminate the "S" and "F" words from the content of EMRR. I've done that search and found only (4) incidents in the entire site!

However, my note brought interesting charges against EMRR (me) in the following area (my paraphrasing):

1) Who do you think you are to censor, you have no right?

2) Articles submissions are over edited; there are people who don't review anymore because of that

3) Articles are over formatted; your censors substitute entire phrases that reviewers never said

What are your comments on these charges? Also is anyone aware of a review being "over edited" or "over formatted" or "substitued phrases". Please advise.

It's my customer service gene that has me asking.

Regards, Nick

Reply to
EMRR
Loading thread data ...

No right? It's "your" website, you can do anything you want to do.

Reply to
Tweak

I don't see anything wrong with editing out the 4-letter words to keep it a 'kid-friendly' site. But how could we comment on the 'over-editing' or 'over formatting' since we never see the original submission?

Eldred

Reply to
EldredP

Nick,

This is the standard knee-jerk over-reaction. It's your website. Ultimately, the content is your responsibility.

It's your website. You can do whatever you want with it, and users, who pay...let's see here...all of ZERO to use it don't really have much say in the matter.

You did what you thought was the right thing to do. Nobody was killed or injured by it. Nothing to sweat but the boos of the from the cheap seats where the talkers talk which watching the doers do.

Doug

Reply to
Doug Sams

That would be the site-owner. You have right to put whatever content you feel appropriate.

choices:

1) edit article 2) replace offensive words with [...] 3) don't accept article.

See above.

Reply to
Janine and Mike

Hello,

Your site, your rules.

If some knee-jerk reactionary's knee jerks ... sucks to be him.

You do a wonderfull job by the way :o)

Reply to
Yves

I always enjoyed the content on your website as is. Thanks for asking.

Layne

Reply to
L&K

One option is to not edit the article yourself, rather make clear your objections to the author and ask them to make the changes. If they won't, then don't post it.

-JT

EMRR wrote:

Reply to
Jeff Taylor

EMRR,

You provide a fantastic website and I hope you continue to do so for a long time. It's obvious you put a lot of time and effort into keeping it up to date and first rate and I appreciate it.

Thank you very much,

Andrew

Reply to
Andrew Grippo

You have never edited any of my EMRR submissions. Not that I would mind. It's your site, Nick. Run it as you see fit. There's lots of great info on your site, and I thank you for all your hard work on it.

Reply to
J.A. Michel

Some vendors support him with their hard dollars. Support them by buying their products at their regular price.

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

Nick,

You have an outstanding rocketry site and you perform a great service to the hobby. The site is, and has been, very useful and informative.

It's a good site because it's a reflection of YOUR ideas and attitudes.

Don't second guess yourself; keep EMRR the way YOU want it.

If you have the time and are concerned about a submission, ask the author to re-word it, but don't change your standards.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Reply to
Gary

1) As an American (not that it matters in terms of the Internet) I live with an expectation of Free Speech, that I can express myself and curse and swear to my heart's content.

The problem is respect of one's environment and neighbors goes out the window when the Right is exercised but the Respect is not around.

There is a obligation to avoid harm to others, else you should remove yourself from other's presence.

2) If the replaced word is marked as such (like with [] type brackets) so it is evident that a replacement has happened then I see no problem with it.

Keep in mind. Is the site you are given to shepherding a nationally, state, or local government funded site? If not, and it's 'reason for being' is plainly spelled out, there is no implied promise of cursing support. Swear words don't need to hang around your head like a word balloon in the comic strips.

I swear quite a bit. And at times I restrain myself.

TBerk

Reply to
T

Um, hello? The owner of the website?

That should be easily rectified by telling people that submissions will be edited.

Of course, editing can be done with a heavy hand, or with a light touch.

IF that's happening, that implies a heavy hand in the editing process. Ideally, you fix gramatically problems, but leave the author's intent intact.

-Kevin

Reply to
Kevin Trojanowski

Nick,

You have, and run, a great site. It's one of our favorites and has been since the first day we found it. Keep it clean for all of us, including the kids, and don't apologize to anyone for doing it! We're all subjected to enough of the garbage floating around as it is.

Thanks for what you do and provide to the hobby!

Verna & Randy DeArman

Reply to
Randy

Of course, you can contract for a clearly political article, offer to pay for it, then kill it so not only is the author never paid for his work, but the word doesn't get out by the deadline.

Bob "ER sucks too" Kaplow NAR # 18L TRA # "Impeach the TRA BoD" >>> To reply, remove the TRABoD!

Reply to
Bob Kaplow

Or publish whatever unrealistic claims your "outside" publisher makes, and his long winded rants too.

Was 4 of 9 Then was 4 of 12 Is back to 4 of 9.

Get it?

4

Jerry

Reply to
Jerry Irvine

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.