|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
I received a PM stating:
"This is an automated courtesy notice that your thread "Muslims barred from picture at Obama event" has been moved. Do Not Reply as noone will see it.
If no reason was specified, the most likely reason is simply that the thread was started in the wrong forum.
If you disagree with it being moved or are unsure as to why it was moved, read The Rules of the Pound.
If after reading the rules you still have questions about why it was moved, feel free to post a question in the Fan Feedback area.
Reason for move: No Reason Specified. "
I don't see where it has been moved to. Also curious if I was in error in where I posted it.
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.) ![[Linked Image from i87.photobucket.com]](http://i87.photobucket.com/albums/k155/brownsfan4173/NFL-Football.jpg)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 504
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 504 |
I noticed it was gone as well and I don't know where else it would go besides the tailgate which it was already in. I noticed it this morning and thought it was weird.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961 |
It was a blog and blogs are generally not allowed to be posted.
There was nothing on the internet other than this blog substantiating the claims within the blog, which is the exact reason that blogs aren't generally allowed-anyone can write whatever they want on a blog site and make it look legit.
Other credible sites such as cleveland.com as well as browns.com have gone to blog style articles from their writers, but these are credible and legitimate writers.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
Oh, ok. Didn't realize it was a blog, it looked like a news article to me. It's all good, just wanted to know what happened, thanks.
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
May I repost it from USAToday?
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961 |
Quote:
May I repost it from USAToday?
No, because both the USAToday article and the CBSNews hit are both based upon the blog from the "author" in question. Nothing else. If this had been an actual occurrence (and I'm not saying that it wasn't) it would be all over the news, not just hitting on a USAToday/CBS linking based solely upon this blog.
Make sense?
If not, ask away and I'll try to break it down better.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
No, I think I got what your saying. My only confusion lies with isn't the USAToday and CBS creditable sources?
I'm not arguing here if you think I am. I guess this is sort a gray area and understand the line has to be drawn somewhere as it should be. just don't know where the line is drawn.
I will abide by what you say and agree with it in principle, just confused as I said above as to where the line is drawn.
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961 |
Quote:
My only confusion lies with isn't the USAToday and CBS creditable sources?
Because THEIR only source is this blog itself. It's odd that those two sites ran the story with it being solely based upon a blogger's report. They didn't have someone there covering the event, they used this blog as the reporting tool.
As I told the other mods yesterday- I'm not saying this event did not take place just as this blogger wrote about it. However, it just seems very odd that something like this would happen and it not be reported by other news outlets. This blogger wasn't the only person covering the event where this allegedly took place, I'm pretty confident of that.
Quote:
I'm not arguing here if you think I am.
This isn't being perceived as arguing, no.
Quote:
I guess this is sort a gray area and understand the line has to be drawn somewhere as it should be.
It is a gray area, very much so. We have kicked it around a few times trying to come to some easy consensus on how to handle blogs, but there is no easy one. During the days of the old board, no blogs were allowed, period. We did this to prevent rumors from popping up because a blogger can write pretty much anything he/she wishes to write.
In the not so recent past, many sites as I mentioned before went to blog type articles by some of their scribes. Grossi may post something up at 2:30 in the morning.
There is a blogger on Yahoo named "MJD" that oftentimes has blogs posted on here by posters that I have removed numerous times, because it is a fan based blog. It's not to say that MJD is not a good writer, nor is it saying that MJD is blogging false info, but it can't be verified and it's gotta go.
By the same token, someone posted a blog a few months ago that had an excellent defensive scheme breakdown. We allowed it to remain because it led to good discussion and really didn't have any stuff in it that could be made up.
Quote:
just don't know where the line is drawn.
It's not an easily seen line. I had no problem with your thread remaining once I saw it was picked up by USAToday and CBSNews, but once I saw that the only reason they had the story online was due to this blog then I had to wonder how credible it was-and when in doubt we yank it out.
If this event happened I would imagine that the GOP would be all over it and a search would reveal many hits, but that wasn't the case.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747
Dawg Talker
|
|
OP
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,747 |
[b]USNavyDawg (Ret.)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961
Administrator
|
|
Administrator
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 961 |
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Fan Feedback Forum Thread question
|
|
