Continued from here
Tom DVM – at 22:44
Scribbler just posted this on the media inquiry thread. Thanks.
Does anyone know how many users are on this discussion forum? Just crossed my mind. Does anyone keep track?
See the Site Meter, the little multi-coloured bug at the bottom of the left sidebar.
And thanks to the spam alert crew. It does help.
I think what Tom DVM is asking is how many names are “registered” here on the Forum…basically, the population size. The Site Meter shows how many users are currently logged in, but not total number of users. I’ve wondered the same thing…
Even if I did the math, I couldn’t say for sure since people can change their nicknames at will and often do. And IP addresses are really no indication since some ISPs assign them dynamically, i.e. the user’s IP address can be different during each session.
people can change their nicknames at will and often do
No way!! People don’t do that. Do they?!?
;-) Bronco Bill, I visualized that as:
Sock Puppet1: “People can change their nicknames at will and often do “
Sock Puppet2: “No way!! People don’t do that. Do they?!? “
(Ok; sometimes I do put “spam alert” in the Author box, so pogge can toss whatever flavor spam got ‘botted in.)
LOL!!! :-D
“people can change their nicknames at will and often do
No way!! People don’t do that. Do they?!? “
Yep, we do
Blitz tomorrow night!
Hey, has anyone told you that the “Dr. Woodson’s book says….” thread has a long side scroll?
Not any more.
Hi there .. I made a dreadful faux pas and would love your help to fix it .. The Lookout Post for Australasia etc should have Melonesia read Mel a nesia. Is it possible to fix the heading for me please?
Fixed.
Can you please change the title of Who Level 4. It is not a fact and is very misleading. Causes unnecessary alarm.
Maybe add “Rumors of” to the beginning of the title. But, all in all, the opening post should just be copied over to the “New Rumors” thread…and the Who Level 4 thread closed.
Perhaps I can start a “New Rumors VIII” thread, and open it with that post…
How’s Melanie doing? Any new word on her health?
Can you please change the title of Who Level 4.
Done.
How’s Melanie doing?
I spoke to her on the phone on the weekend when we had the server problem. She’s still not well but recovering. And I got a good laugh out of her at one point when I reminded her that I can’t reboot her the way I can the server.
pogge—if you renamed the WHO Level 4 thread, would you mind editing my links to it in the New Rumors VII and VIII threads? Thanks
Also done.
One last little thing: on the Last 50 Changes page, the WHO Level 4 link isn’t updated to Rumour of WHO Level 4. You’re a gem…and I’m glad you got a laugh out of Melanie. Means she is getting better…
on the Last 50 Changes page, the WHO Level 4 link isn’t updated to Rumour of WHO Level 4
Renaming a thread doesn’t bump it on Last 50 Changes but it does bump it on the Discussion Forum page.
Thank You Pogge. I can hear you talking in your sleep….it goes something like this: “done…..done……also done…….done too” :-)
Sometimes it goes like this: done da done done.
Sorry.
You guys are great! Thanks for the humor—and the update on Miss Melanie.
(Don’t forget to delete the bad Year Round Tomatoes thread)
dun-da-dah-duhn! Daaaaaa!
Didn’t know where to post this…the thread I wanted was closed.
On taking the iodine pills to protect the thyroid from radiation----what if a person has had their thyroid removed ? Are they safe from this kind of radiation contamination ?
Madamspinner-at 6:68, here is a site to learn a little more about Potassium Iodide Tablets and what they do—http://tinyurl.com/ybh7n5
Mitchell – at 08:19
I ran across the discussion on Dr. Dave’s essay “Becoming Self-Sufficient for Six Months”, it sounded very interesting. Is the plan to upload it to the preparedness guides section? Would someone please email a copy to danielkmurphy@comcast.net ?
Thanks in advance, Dan
Dan in MA – at 14:21 I jusr emailed you my copy…..hope it comes through ok
It’s very good!
I’d like a copy too if possible mojorox@bellsouth.net Thanks so much!
Thanks Rose!
I sent it to DemFromCT and he’s looking it over to possibly place on the ftp site. It really is a good read…
mojo – at 14:43 I just emailed you my copy
I am sorry- I did it. I made it side scroll on Not Bird flu but close news thread. Please forgive me. I just haven’s got the hang of shrinking gif’s yet.
Hey Mods---I think the Flu Prep thread is too long??? Thanks for all your work.
Have you guys decided where to put Dr. Dave’s essay? I’d like to refer some people to it online. Thanks.
I’m-workin’-on-it – at 12:29 --- It’s on the FluWiki (Dude’s) singtomeohmuse ftp site. You can get to it from here. Access is at the top of the page.
Can someone please close Mass Fatality Plans 3 and link it to a 4th page, when they have time, please? (- I won’t get back to the wiki for 8 hours or so now) (What’s the idea page length for a thread, anyway?)
crfullmoon – at 13:05 --- Done. You’ll find it here
There really isn’t any “ideal” page length. I just base it on what I’m used to seeing on long threads, then split them.
Taken care of.
Has it been noted that the “editing instructions” box at the bottom of the page says
Long URIs introduce horizontal page scroll instead of
Long URLs introduce horizontal page scroll?
I suppose it could be defended as a clever pun, referring to “long upper respiratory infections” on a avian flu site … but I suspect it is unintentional.
Dennis in Colorado – at 19:53 --- Uniform Resource Identifier
BB: In case you haven’t seen it, you need to check out the post by Oremus at 13:27 on Nov.1 in the “New Rumors X” thread. You’re famous! :)
We have got side-scroll on the News thread for today (November 1) - just happened. Could you please fix it for us please.
Just out of curiosity: Is that picture of the swan on the Fluwiki logo locked down somehow? I would hate to see somebody turn it upside-down as a joke. Would give lots of wikians major heart attacks. Hope I didn’t give anybody any ideas!
sidescroll fixed
For future reference, when copying from Promed, they often have a row of asterisks, which will instantly cause massive sidescroll.
Many Cats – at 21:19 --- That’s AWESOME!! I knew there would be proof someday. Maybe that’s why, at my ripe old age, I feel so young! ;-) And if I drink enough of it? HA! I could live forever!! Bbbwwwwwwaaaaahahhahahahahahahahaha!!!
BB raises a glass of BBRWFK to the test mice
News Nov 2 at 13:02 for length and copywrite reasons, should that article be truncated? (it was also a bit of a duplicate)
Hi Folks.
I have read the explanation that was given at the top of the Chinese thread from last night; in fact I have read it several times.
I frankly do not understand the line that has been drawn and so I assume others may not understand as well.
I would respectfully suggest that the thread be re-opened for comments so that we can sort it out the confusion.
Thanks
Governments are inept, incompetent, slow to react, etc. and pretty much all on a routine basis. However, I am not interested in opening up discussion on accusations of any government deliberately fostering or “plotting” (that was the word used) deception to hide their role in the onset of a pandemic without hard evidence. It was the basis of the thread. That is way over the top.
Call it a moderator decision. You can discuss it here.
Hi DemFromCt. I have missed our discussions these past few months./;0)
In my opinion, China has been deliberately misleading…it seems to me that is the definition of deception…Okay, I won’t presume to know why they are doing it…but I would surmise that it is to save face, save their (government’s) neck, save the Olympics in 2008 which at this stage I would think is remote at best…and maybe it is also to make money.
I don’t think they are “plotting”…I think they are “acting”.
The point of ethics is that you treat all equally and I think that has been the case.
I am not prepared to give Canada, the United States or China the benefit of the doubt if they are plotting to deliberately mislead and injury my friends and family. In fact, any argument about China could also be made in respect to the World Health Organization…they may be acting with immunity and impunity.
Ethically, I am not willing to appease…too much of that has been going on already for the last nine years…
…we are here to lead not to follow.
As always I appreciate the fact that you and Pogge and Melanie and the Reveres have given me a voice. I will never take that voice for granted.
The bottom line is that I don’t see very much wrong with what Monotreme posted last night.
I would prefer not to use the terms “conspiracy” and “plotting” in a post discussing anyone or anything without proof, let alone governments. There’s plenty to criticize. See this news story, for example. Discussing the topic is not off limits, but I would advise some degree of reasonableness about language.
I would expect that if similar posts appear using similar language, we’d post a disclaimer at the top.
While we’re on the topic, I have no dog in the DG battle, but I’d prefer not to describe candidates so harshly. But that’s just me, and this is not a new observation.
DemFromCt. I hope I have been ethical and fair in my comments but I would have to review those on Dr. Chang to see how close to the line I have been.
I will be happy to give the Chinese Government and the World Health Organization a ‘pat on the back’ when I see something worthy of it…and in the last two years, I have seen nothing of the sort. There is no difference, in my opinion, between them…its all about politics…not science…it’s all about self-interest…not my families interest. Thanks for your comments.
Tom DVM, as always, the windshield’s bigger than the rear view mirror. Let’s look forward and not backward. People’s opinions are their own, particularly in the Forum.
Another btw on a separate topic. While I read the Forum daily and tune/putter/repair the wiki, I am keeping a low profile until after the US election. I want this site to be and remain non-partisan.
What’s the problem, don’t you trust yourself. /;0)
Looking forward then to future discussions. It just hasn’t been the same.
by the way, I hope Melanie is feeling better.
My name itself is, well, not non-partisan. ;-)
Melanie’s working on it.
DemFromCT – at 20:13 --- Until the election’s over, you could always change your handle to simply “VoterFromCT” ;-)
The thread in question is rapidly sinking so, just so everyone knows what’s being discussed, here is a link The Chinese Government’s Plot to Hide Their Role in Causing a Pandemic
Here is the moderator preamble to the thread:
We hold the freedom of speech and access to information very dear. While criticism of any government for pandemic flu related policies are entirely legitimate, appropriate, and useful topics of discussion, we do need to be careful about allegations regarding intent. It‚s one thing to point out wrong or harmful policies, it‚s quite another to suggest any of those policies were put out with the intention of procuring the current negative consequences.
We entirely agree that ineffective vaccines are contributing to our current problems, We also absolutely prefer that international researchers working on the frontline of pandemic research should have access to epidemiologic and virology data and/or samples wherever in the world outbreaks might be occurring. However, different governments have different standards as to what constitutes libelous or seditious language. Therefore, we would prefer that contributors express their opinions in ways that will allow as many people in different countries to access the information as possible.
-The Moderators
Like Tom DVM, I had trouble understanding exactly what was objectionable in the thread. I can certainly understand people not agreeing with what I said or how I said it, but I don’t understand why it was summarily deleted. The discussion amongst the psrticipants was polite and did not violate any of rules of Flu Wiki. I do appreciate the moderator’s decision to restore the thread.
I believe there is ample “hard evidence” to support my thesis and had started to present it. However, it is difficult to make one’s case when the relevant thread is closed. I had planned to provide a great deal more data to support my opinion, but apparently this will not be permitted at Flu Wiki.
I agree with most of the moderators preamble, but there are several lines that trouble me. In particular this sentence:
However, different governments have different standards as to what constitutes libelous or seditious language. Therefore, we would prefer that contributors express their opinions in ways that will allow as many people in different countries to access the information as possible.
Do the moderators mean to say that posts on Flu Wiki will be judged on the basis of Chinese libel and sedition laws? I have trouble believing this is the intent, but that seems to be implied. I would appreciate further clarification on this issue.
Thanks
Is there there a way to search the discussion thread (or whole board) and have the results appear most recent first?
I’d like to know if making the points listed in this document are allowed on Flu Wiki.
Freedom of the Press and the 2002-2003 SARS Outbreak
This is one of the pieces of evidence I had intended to post on the “China Conspiracy” thread. I won’t comment on it because I don’t know if it is allowed.
Monotreme – at 20:58 Tom DVM – at 19:55
I knell to each of you for your wisdom, knowledge and contribution to this site. You are both among the very few great ones here. However; I have read the entire thread in question and I have to agree with the Mods on this one. Monotreme you have spoken nothing but the truth, indeed you had it linked and properly supported as any good scientist would. Tome you memory is like a trap and you are able to bring up and link things long forgotten. Your thesis an data are correct.
However this site if viewed by the common people in China that can read English. If you were to continue, you would get the site banned in China, and we are all about saving as many lives as possible.
You both have been able to get your points across about what is happening in Asia. You have been able to do so with out a direct statement in a thread about any country. Keep up the good work but remember that 1.5 Billion Chinese need to be as informed as the rest of the world.
Monotreme – at 20:58 Tom DVM – at 19:55
I knell to each of you for your wisdom, knowledge and contribution to this site. You are both among the very few great ones here. However; I have read the entire thread in question and I have to agree with the Mods on this one. Monotreme you have spoken nothing but the truth, indeed you had it linked and properly supported as any good scientist would. Tom you memory is like a trap and you are able to bring up and link things long forgotten. Your thesis an data are correct.
However this site if viewed by the common people in China that can read English. If you were to continue, you would get the site banned in China, and we are all about saving as many lives as possible.
You both have been able to get your points across about what is happening in Asia. You have been able to do so with out a direct statement in a thread about any country. Keep up the good work but remember that 1.5 Billion Chinese need to be as informed as the rest of the world.
Ok now I get it thanks Anon 451
DemFromCT – at 20:13 My name itself is, well, not non-partisan. ;-)
You could just use Anonymous and blend right in for a few days! Seriously I, a Reagan Republican, appreciate your ethics—you go out of your way to always be fair.
Anon_451 – at 21:10
I appreciate your kind words but I can’t agree with you on this one. If you check, you will note that almost no-one in China reads Flu Wiki. I don’t know if it’s banned or not, but it wouldn’t make much difference it was. Personal prepping can’t happen there, and community prepping won’t either. The only thing of value we can provide them is the truth about what their government is doing. If the site is banned there, information may still reach them through underground sources. If we are afraid to tell the truth about what is going on in China, then the people there have no hope.
There are many types of censorship, but the worst type is self-censorship. If we worry about whether what we say gives offense to oppressive regimes, then we have agreed to be their slaves. I, for one, am not willing to do this. It is a matter of principle.
In the thread, I gave specific recommedations on what I think needs to be done to save lives. I may be wrong about the possibility of success, but I believe what I wrote.
I apologize for writing in generalities, but I don’t know how to write about this more specifically without violating the new guidelines.
Let’s not discuss particular government’s hiding of information for their own benefit or purposes, let’s discuss how to find a government that IS NOT!
As far as getting as many people as possible in as many countries as possible to read this thread, I would be curious to know—since we have done a fair bit of “China-bashing” on this forum prior to this latest thread—is there some way to know if we ARE being read in China or has the wiki already been filtered out as “Capitalist filth unacceptable for the eyes of the virtuous people of China”? That last part in quotes was not meant to sound offensive, but that is the kind of speech that I have seen when reading some translated Chinese news blogs. There was quite a bit of discussion on those sites regarding the little policeman and policewoman icons the government was going to post on chat sites to remind people that the “wholesomeness” of the internet was everyone’s job to protect (as in watch what you say). Mods can erase this post if it, too, is deemed too inflammatory, but this entire issue should give everyone a greater appreciation for the daring of those young bloggers actually IN China who post the news as they see fit, “wholesome” or not.
Monotreme – at 21:39 I Hear you dear friend. It is a very hard line the Mods must walk. We have learned a long time ago that Freedom is not Free. We have paid for it dearly in blood. (Some of it mine) I do not disagree with what you have said, and in the US I would defend you with my life to say even that which I may disagree with. I am not an overly wise man, perhaps it would be best if we were banned in China as it would make the site more attractive to some, but we must remember that at least one of our number must travel to the country in question from time to time and we may be placing her at risk for her personal safety. I do not know that as a fact mearly what I have seen in the past. I do not trust them with anything. I understand that that is what you are trying to say and that they have done far more harm then anyone can imagine. Your points are well taken and I wish I knew of a way to “Get them out” It is something which needs to be said as they are placing the entire world at risk due to stupid mistakes and then trying to cover them up.
Anon_451: As far as any of “ours” on the wiki travelling to China, nothing would happen. If something did happen, it would only draw attention to that individual’s afflilation with the wiki. There is an old marketing saying that bad publicity is better than no publicity. They would insure that she (in this particular case) came and went with as little fanfare as possible.
Monotreme – at 21:39
Self-censorship is not the worst type, it is the best type. When one censors themselves they are showing self restraint, which is strength. It is when one bows to censorship out of fear that one has allowed themselves to be a slave. You have nothing to fear from the moderators. They are attempting to apply a form of self restraint to the flu wiki community. This is a strength when applied judiciously. Good government is not one that allows unrestrained freedom, but rather one that allows freedom to pursue as much and many actions as possible, but without causing harm to others.
I know, and appreciate, that your purpose for starting the China thread is to ultimately protect and not harm. I’m sure the moderators know this too. But going on the attack will not sway the powers that be in China. Nor will inflammatory rhetoric motivate other powers to action.
The evening before last I happened to check the sitemeter map. Low and behold there was a reader from Beijing. Just one. But I had to wonder what that one was up to and why they were reading the fluwiki forum. Were they a decision maker? I will never know. Will reading the fluwiki effect them in some way? Don’t know that either. What I do know is going on the attack will turn them off immediately. It would me.
In full disclosure, I wrote this set of questions in the November 1 News thread:
Is it biological warfare if you work to protect your own population, while allowing other nations to flounder in ignorance, which ultimately kills millions of their citizens? Passive warfare? Is that an oxymoron?
China is playing a dangerous game.
I’m hacked at China too. But I chose to go at it in an oblique manner utilizing questions. But, maybe I’m a bit over the top too. If we are going to sway the powers that be to bring pressure upon China and others that with hold data we have to approach the matter in a circumspect and comprehensive manner with the all the supporting data to back up our supposition. Impassioned rhetoric will not change things, firm data and information will. I know you were beginning to gather that data and I appreciate the effort. May another thread be started to begin the compilation of all things H5N1 - China related? I would like to see such a thread started, but minus the heat. Cold hard data and news sources.
Monotreme, I appreciate the work you do on this site and would like to see you continue. Thank you for all the hard work you have put into this.
Monotreme. Check out the most recent post on Nepal by Snifflest. It really does support what you are saying and beleive me I have seen what you have seen. If anyone has not seen it, they have chosen not to see it.
Anon_451 – at 22:18
I am constrained in my ability to respond, for various reasons. Suffice it to say that I am aware of all the things you have reported, and I still chose to say what I said in that thread. When considering why people say and do the things that they say and do, it is important to consider all the possibilties.
I know you have a good heart and want the best.
Okieman – at 22:29
I make a distinction between self-ccontrol and self-censorship. I assure you, my rhetoric was not only heart-felt, but deliberate. My old buddy Tom DVM will recall the Worm of Weybridge thread. If ever a thread was over-the-top, that one was. I may be wrong, but I think that thread and others like it had a positive effect, but not by directly convincing the person involved to change their behaviour. Instead, I think pressure was brought to bear on that individual by others. My intention in the thread under discussion here was the same. Other strategies, notably appeasement, have been attempted for years. They have failed misereably, as a check of the news threads will show.
The evening before last I happened to check the sitemeter map. Low and behold there was a reader from Beijing.
Yes, I know about that visitor. I also know how to “invite” them to Flu Wiki ;-)
I would not feel comfortable making the comment that you made on November 1 under the current circumstances. I believe the moderators have the absolute right to set any conditions or rules they wish. It is their site. However, it is important to be clear as to what those rules are so that potential participants can decide if they can live with them. I am no longer sure what the rules are. In particular, I am concerned by this statement:
However, different governments have different standards as to what constitutes libelous or seditious language. Therefore, we would prefer that contributors express their opinions in ways that will allow as many people in different countries to access the information as possible.
I am trying to understand what this means. It seems to imply posts on Flu Wiki must comply with Chinese censorship and libel laws. I am hoping that the Mods mean something else, but only they can clarify what they mean.
Okieman - at 22:29 -
>--Self-censorship is not the worst type, it is the best type. When one censors themselves they are showing self restraint, which is strength.
In some instances self-censorship might be a wise course of action. But this case is not really about self-censorship—as in an individual choosing not to give voice to their own thoughts—but censorship imposed—initially without discussion, just dumping a thread—on one by another who is asking that we all watch what we say lest our conversation not make it through the filters of a harsh and repressive regime.
If we at Flu Wiki have to limit what we say to that which would be acceptable to the Chinese government, then not only are we compromising our own search for the truth, but we stand in tacit approval of a system many find to be morally repugnant.
“It seems to imply posts on Flu Wiki must comply with Chinese censorship and libel laws. I am hoping that the Mods mean something else, but only they can clarify what they mean.”
That would suck big time! Because then very little could be said. I feel so sorry for the individuals of this world who are not allowed the basic freedom of saying whats on their minds, of confronting laws, rules and causing change for the better. Sometime calling it as it is instead of pussy footing around is the only way to create positive change.
Ahh, I meant China, not the mods!
Was this thread really closed because of it’s content? If so, shame on whoever decided that. I say no to censorship. We should be free to act in this community as responsible people who build up their reputations over time by what they say and how they say it. The only shade of censorship I think is worthy of us is when we collectively, pick on the facts, arguments, tone or data and find them lacking. We then “censor” the original poster for not keeping to our standards. To place any Flu topic off limits, no matter how offensive to any world government or organization is to be less than what my definition of free speech is about. You are flat wrong in your wish to appease China for the sake of dialogue or data. We are NOT the government. We ARE the people…don’t forget that. I personally will continue to say on these forums whatever I wish regarding pandemic flu and the role I see China taking in this regard. I will NOT be silenced by anyone in this regard. If you wish to ban me for this, then do so.
The following is from a Chinese News source, China View:
Chinese harmony and American democracy in 21st century
From the perspective of harmony, Fung examined three major movements of human civilization: religion, democracy and harmony. “As the world is in great disharmony with religion conflicts, international inequity, and the disparity between North and South,” Fung stressed, “we must look beyond religion and democracy to harmony.”
Then after comparing with religion and democracy, Fung asked, “Will harmony bring a more moderate future world?” His answer is yes.
Finally Fung stressed that democracy — American style — is challenged by Chinese harmony as the leading global philosophy in the 21st century, because harmony is a basic human longing.
Fung concluded his paper “Teaching harmony in U.S. is paramount.”
Self-censorship is a good thing…Self-censorship is a good thing…Self-censorship is a good thing…Self-censorship is a good thing…Self-censorship is a good thing…Self-censorship is a good thing…Self-censorship is a good thing…Self-censorship is a good thing…
…Self-censorship is a very good theory that is difficult to adhere to.
If there was one person on flu wiki you can bet that person is a member of the Communist Government of China.
The Chinese Government knows all about harmony…1988.
Monotreme – and Tom DVM, (and KimT; there sure would be little that could be said) I agree, that would be an unusefully low common denominator for the purpose of The Flu Wiki. I’m going to try and go back to sleep for now.
If we at Flu Wiki have to limit what we say to that which would be acceptable to the Chinese government, then not only are we compromising our own search for the truth, but we stand in tacit approval of a system many find to be morally repugnant.
I’m not trying to take sides here, so please don’t flame me. Yet. My two cents are that we’re trying to reach the citizens of China, and in order to do that, we have to somehow obey China’s “rules”. One of their rules is that no one is to make any disparaging remarks about the government of China, or finger-point at that government that it might be doing something wrong. We’re not here to point out to the Chinese people whether or not their government is corrupt…we’re here to get them some information about the possibility of a pandemic and how to prepare for it.
In that sense, we must word our comments to be able to make it thru the ‘net filters that their government has put in place and not say or write anything that would raise a red flag to the possibility of blocking FluWiki from the people. And any disparaging remarks against the Chinese government will cause a filter to be put in place.
Monotreme – at 23:28
I am constrained in my ability to respond, for various reasons.
Don’t you think other people might also be constrained?
You stay anonymous and go on the attack, while others have gone public with their real names, and gone miles to do good for others. I don’t know anything beyond what is written on this forum, but we must protect those who either travel to or have family in China.
I think it is hypocritical to attack others for prudence when you are not the one who has to pay, if TSHTF. And I don’t mean when a pandemic happens.
If you want to say things the way you want, use your real name. Take the same risks, then maybe you will have earned right to dictate what risks others take.
Write what you want, as BB said, just word your comments carefully, is all that the mods are asking.
“Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has.” Margaret Mead
IMHO no matter how this is decided some innocent people will be negatively affected, either by not getting the information or by having the Chinese government react badly. There is no clear cut “right action” here, similar to the position TPTB are. There is a spectrum of actions that could be taken from “off the res” to conspiring to withhold vital information.
Bowing to pressure to not upset the Chinese government, or any government, is a slippery slope. However to radical an approach does needless damage. I don’t feel Monotreme’s post went to far, it needed to be said. Peoples varied reaction to it is probably a sign that the right tone was struck. She was only stating what was there to be said.
When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. C. P. Snow (1905 - 1980)
I think this is a debate that has been going on since we invented fire. The answer isn’t clear, but the result we want is crystal.
Sorry to trouble you but could someone put line breaks or bullets between my links to improve readability?Case for Early School Closure thread Nov 3. Thanks.
Bronco Bill – at 06:12
My two cents are that we’re trying to reach the citizens of China, and in order to do that, we have to somehow obey China’s “rules”.
I understand your point of view, but I don’t agree. I suspect the only people from mainland China who visit here are the spammers. And they will continue to deliver their “input” whether Flu Wiki is banned or not. As I said before, it is far more important to figure out what is going on in China than to provide them with recipes for beans and rice. If we are able to understand what happened in China, we may reach people there with common purpose.
I will not obey China’s “rules”, period. If this is a precondition for participation at Flu Wiki, count me out. I am still waiting for clarification by the Moderators on this point.
anonymous for this post – at 06:42
We have had this discussion many times, privately. I do not believe you.
anonymous for this post – at 06:42
Monotreme – at 23:28
I am constrained in my ability to respond, for various reasons.
Don’t you think other people might also be constrained?
You stay anonymous and go on the attack, while others have gone public with their real names, and gone miles to do good for others. I don’t know anything beyond what is written on this forum, but we must protect those who either travel to or have family in China.
comment: Anonymity here is the norm, so no one should be criticized for what they say because they don’t use their real name. Ironically, “anonymous for this post” uses anonymity him or herself while “going on the attack” and even adds one extra layer to his or her usual anonymity.
Also, many here, including Monotreme, have “gone miles to do good for others,” anonymity notwithstanding.
Protecting those who travel to or have family in China is a noble goal—not that censorship here would accomplish that anyway—but even if it could, I think protecting the entire human race from pandemic in general, and China’s contributions to it specifically, should be given greater weight.
I think it is hypocritical to attack others for prudence when you are not the one who has to pay, if TSHTF. And I don’t mean when a pandemic happens.
comment: I think the above remark is flawed for two reasons. First, the mods are not being “attacked” for “prudence.” “Prudence” may be their rationale for imposing censorship, but the criticisms are for the censorship itself, censorship designed to comply with Chinese government desires.
If you want to say things the way you want, use your real name. Take the same risks, then maybe you will have earned right to dictate what risks others take.
comment: And you?
Write what you want…just word your comments carefully, is all that the mods are asking.
comment: So…..we are all Chinese?
I must be missing something here. Every Chinese dissident that leaves China has said things far worse then the miniscule comments that have been made on the thread in question…
…brave dissidents within China have made clearly far worse statements then we have made here.
Not only that but the Chinese Government has repeatedly put in print that ‘democratic Governments’ are corrupt and have been doing so for longer than my lifetime.
What’s good for the goose…is good for the gander!!
We have seen appeasement in the past…it was not pretty or productive.
China is my misguided friend…and I tell my friends the truth or as close as I can get to it.
My problem is not with the country or its citizens…but with a ‘blank’ Government that I have been in disharmony with on food issues since Sept 1998.
Dr. Tom Gastle. DVM BSc Agr(Crop Science)
Would the benefits of discussing, what China is or isn’t up to, outweight the damage that arguing about NOT discussing China is generating? That applies to both sides of the argument.
Goodness. I was away on business for a couple of days and came back to find controversies brewing in every online community I’m involved in. Can’t we all just get along? (Hides under desk)
I haven’t read the thread in question yet and I’m not going to until I can sit and read it carefully but I already have a comment based on what I’ve read here. I see the term censorship being tossed around and I think it’s being use a little too loosely (though self-censorship can apply).
The term censorship is generally used when the power of the state is brought to bear to shut down dissent or suppress information or opinion. The people who run this site don’t have that kind of power nor do we want it. We can’t censor anyone in the sense that we can’t prevent anyone from expressing an opinion in any other venue. We can only make decisions about what’s published on this site.
I say this because it’s suggested here that the use of language is part of the problem and that a more careful use of language might help solve it. We make editorial decisions all the time and we try to make them in the context of the original mandate for the site. That doesn’t mean we can’t make bad decisions and that there isn’t room to question and review them. But we’re not deciding what is or isn’t an acceptable opinion in any context. We’re trying to decide on the best course of action in a specific context: what we want this site to accomplish.
I’ll come back later and look at the thread that started this but I have a few more fires to put out.
From Dictionary.com -
censor –verb (used with object) 6. to examine and act upon as a censor. 7. to delete (a word or passage of text) in one’s capacity as a censor.
pogge, welcome back ;-)
The language in the thread in question is no worse than in many other threads, imo.
You state: The term censorship is generally used when the power of the state is brought to bear to shut down dissent or suppress information or opinion.
I agree. I think this is happening in China. Do you agree?
My specific concern is the language in the preamble, signed, the Mods:
However, different governments have different standards as to what constitutes libelous or seditious language. Therefore, we would prefer that contributors express their opinions in ways that will allow as many people in different countries to access the information as possible.
I have repreatedly asked the following question, but have yet to receive and answer from the Mods:
I am trying to understand what this means. It seems to imply posts on Flu Wiki must comply with Chinese censorship and libel laws. I am hoping that the Mods mean something else, but only they can clarify what they mean.
China does impose severe censorship on it’s citizens, imo. If we have to abide by the same “rules” on Flu Wiki, then, for all practical purposes, China has successfully extended it’s censorship laws to Flu Wiki - which may be their intent.
Scaredy Cat, thanks.
Tom DVM – at 09:24
You are right on target.
Every dissident I have ever met wants the West to shine as bright a light as possible on what’s going on in their repressive countries. Dissidents, never, ever request that people in West hold back on criticism of their governments. Quite the reverse, in fact. It is not hard to distinguish between a true dissident and someone who seeks to advance the party line, no matter how subtle their approach.
I realize this is not a political site and I agree that our focus should be on pandemic flu. I think the thread in question was directly on target. This link: Freedom of the Press and the 2002-2003 SARS Outbreak bears directly on why it is important for there to be someone who tries to report the truth about what has been happening in China.
Great site, great thread, great people. Or should that be in reverse order?
If Western Civilization doesn’t believe in itself enough to voice opinions that may offend dictatorships halfway across the world, then We in the West will be shortly CONSUMED.
We have to regain our mental toughness. There are HUNGRY, unprincipled actors out there on the world stage. And they see weakness, vacillation, and foremost an erosion of the West’s support for its own Democratic heritage.
Any backtracking on calling “a spade a spade” in regards to China’s complicity in this developing panflu crisis only throws fuel to the fire.
I’m going to make a statement on this. I may or may not respond to individual questions, depending on whether those questions are already covered in this statement. Please read this carefully before making comments.
I believe it is important to uphold free speech and open access to information. That’s the reason for the existence of Fluwiki, and the reason why I choose to make myself clear here.
I believe based on scientific data that the use of bad vaccines may be contributing to the emergence of a new strain.
I believe that it is in the interest of all humanity that international researchers on the frontline of research on pandemic flu should have timely access to epidemiological and virology data and/or samples, wherever in the world outbreaks are occurring.
I agree with Webster el al that systematic virological surveillance in geographical areas where new strains tend to emerge is an important step towards improving our understanding of the evolution of H5N1 and possible emergence of the next pandemic virus.
I believe that governments everywhere must share part of the responsibility to make the world safer for the next generation; it is an obligation that comes automatically with membership of a decent international society.
I believe that writing on public forums is not free lunch, that it carries a responsibility to remember the power of words to do harm as well as good. As a physician, the no 1 rule of ethics is ‘Do no harm’. I believe this rule should also apply to public speech.
I believe that citizens can do a lot of good by their actions, and those actions do not necessarily have to be antagonistic to TPTB. Witness what I have been doing with assisting authorities and citizens to come together to build community resilience in the US, which btw is not even my country and therefore carries no direct benefit to myself.
It is each person’s individual choice how they approach this. I only ask that you make this choice with care and in good conscience.
I believe that it is misguided to assume the rest of the world believe and act the way you do, that just because something is right by your standards, those standards will be accepted or honoured by others.
As the only publicly identified frequent poster and mod of Chinese ethnicity, I refuse to submit to the assumption that Americans have a better understanding of what constitutes ‘harm’ or risk to others (or their family and friends) not living in their world.
I believe it is possible to say everything that Monotreme is trying to say without accusations implying deliberate intent to harm, which is what the word ‘conspiracy’ means in the Chinese language. If this was a mistake of understanding, then I will respectfully ask you to use a different way of expressing your ideas.
If it was your intention to say that the Chinese government took actions with the intention of harming the rest of the world, I will exercise my prerogative as a moderator to ask you to withdraw this accusation unless you have evidence.
I also want to add that I have emailed a few people on this forum with explanations on this matter. While some of them have had the decency and courtesy to at least engage in correspondence with me in an attempt to resolve our differences, I am very disappointed not to have received any reply whatsoever from Monotreme. And this is not the first time that he has not responded to my attempt at communication.
I’m ready to step down as moderator if this issue is not resolved. I only request that you judge my integrity by examining my track record, before you come to any conclusions.
Hi Monotreme Thanks.
Interesting article but incorrect on one assertion.
The SARS outbreak did not start in Dec 2002 but had been going on most certainly for several months…if not years at that point.
anon_22-If Russia was the country in question instead of China would that make a difference to you?
I think it would.
You need to fully throw off your cloak of ethnicity and become full a citizen of the West, one that is imbued with democratic principles. In the United States most of us have done that.
I don’t care what race of people populates the future United States only that they have the benefit of our current form of government and the freedoms that are protected therein. I want to keep that dream alive. That will make me a happy man when I die.
As far harmony is concerned, national and international, enduring ideas and systems that promote freedom and creativity trump skin color or ethnicity each and every time.
I am sorry if I have offended you with any of the above. I have greatly appreciated your input, logic, and good-natured presence. But I believe you are caught between two worlds. Sometime in the future you will have to choose.
MM,
anon_22-If Russia was the country in question instead of China would that make a difference to you?
If one of the mods have family in Russia, yes.
I’m ready to trade a small fraction of my freedom to maintain larger freedom for others, even if I don’t know them.
MM, you need to read my statement carefully again.
This forum is not American, nor is it for Americans only. Please keep that in mind.
Monotreme – at 09:57 --- I’m not disagreeing with what you’ve said. In fact, I do agree with what you stated on your original thread. My only concern is that if the Chinese gov’t decides that FW is “seditious” or “inflammatory” in any way, they will block Internet access from their citizens. They don’t care if their people can or cannot read various websites.
If we want to reach the people, then we need to choose our words carefully to keep the censors from blocking this site inside of China’s borders. The whole premise of FluWiki is to enlighten ordinary people about the possibility of a flu pandemic and make them aware of the ramifications of not preparing for it.
Tom DVM --- The dissidents inside of China… We usually only hear from them once or twice, and then their voices go silent. The dissidents who have left before making their comments? We don’t know for sure if the people still there have heard their words or not…every medium in China, whether it’s the Internet, television, or hard-copy news, is censored by the gov’t in such a way as to make sure the people are happy in their place. The majority of those people know only what is told to them by their “leaders”…
Monotreme --- If this is a precondition for participation at Flu Wiki, count me out. I hope that you will rethink that statement. You’ve given way too much to this site to simply walk away…and the same goes for you, Anon_22.
MM,
But I believe you are caught between two worlds. Sometime in the future you will have to choose.
Actually, you are right, but not in the way that you meant.
I will not be moderator of a site that allows unsubstantiated accusations against governments that will have repercussions for individuals, particularly after the matter has been explicitly pointed out to me.
Whether those individuals are Russians or Chinese, its the same.
I am sorry if I have offended you with any of the above.
You’ve offended me. Think about that.
and that is the real point of flu wiki…direct political pressure
You could have fooled me and I’ve been around since the beginning. I’m not saying that exerting political pressure is a bad thing, just that I didn’t think it was our sole reason for being.
anon_22 at 10:57-Are you saying that members of your family still in China are at some risk if you are part of any site that engages in “China bashing” whether substantiated or not?
If that is the case, I am sorry that I have pressed this matter.
If that is the case, we here at fluwiki will have to try to work around the problem. You are a valuable contributor. I think of you more in that respect than as a moderator.
pogge. You are right. The real point of flu wiki is to assist in community prepping etc. I knew it was wrong when I wrote…
…I guess I will have to plead insanity…that, and a ‘brain cramp’. /:0)
Thanks.
…temporary insanity!!
MM,
I’m saying that I will not be moderator of a site that allows unsubstantiated accusations of intent to do harm. Criticism, analysis, opinions, news, even rumours, are welcome. When it comes to allegations or accusations, just be circumspect. Is all I’m saying.
I need to make a small but important correction to my 10:24 post. I was mistaken to say Monotreme did not reply to my email. There was an initial short reply which did not respond to the contents of my email. I apologize sincerely for Monotreme for that oversight.
to Monotreme.
Duh!
Ahhheemmm….
I’m going to step in & mention something to the great minds at work here. This week is the national championship for the PBR (Professional Bull Riders). I love to watch bull riding. I’ve never come close to actually being near a bull….but that doesn’t mean that I can’t appreciate the power and the danger they represent and I wouldn’t stand outside the pen yelling at the big beasts just because they might not be able to get to me to retaliate. I’d be afraid that I’d make ‘em mad and they’d take it out on the next brave bull rider that strapped himself on his back for the longest 8 second ride in his life.
My point is, to use a bull rider’s vocabulary, we’re here to ‘git our bulls rode’. Yes, for those who don’t read ‘cowboy’, that’s bad English, but by golly it gets the point across.
We’ve each got our bull (our passion, our politics or whatever) that we feel we need to challenge and conquer proudly and we’re not going to be able to do it in 8 seconds. We’ve got a LOT of bulls to ride in this flu competition before we can get to the finals & running off other bull riders isn’t gonna help because the final score is based on what WE do with ourselves and our talent for other people around the world, separate and apart from our race or our politics.
In all the time I’ve watched bull riders, they NEVER have done anything to endanger another bull rider’s life, but instead they’ve done everything they could to support and encourage other riders. Even though they’re competing against each other, their attitude and their approach is to be inclusive to the benefit of all, not to be exclusive because they have the right to make that choice.
Boys and Girls, ‘git your bulls rode’ safely enough that we ALL benefit, even if it means “shuttin’ yer mouth” a little bit and considering the other guy.
I’ll return you to your ‘discussion’ now.
Please consider that what is developing on this thread is a mircocosm of what will happen innumerable times during and after a Pandemic. All conflict is caused by scarce resources be they tangible or intangible. The group cannot afford personal issues (sacred cows) to cause loss by seperation. Human beings by nature create meaning in order to gain understanding, the error is in cloaking the result in the veil of “truth” (small t). We are all guilty of it.
Discussion and debate is healthy. Discord leading to divorce is a form of death. To quote Ben Franklin “We can hang together or we can hang seperately.”
Sometimes I think everyone on the wiki should read “Lord of the Flies” and ask themselves which character are they and what is wrong with the picture.
We need everyone to continue to contribute.
We all censor everyday in our personal lives…at least I hope you don’t say or do everything that crosses your mind. We self censor for very good reasons.
This whole China thing is curious - who needs to be told what China is doing? I doubt anyone on the wiki. Will China change because of what is said here? I doubt it. Is any of this a surprise? no. Do TPTB not know what is going on? I doubt that too. So what is the purpose - it feels good to rail against China? It might feel good to rail at you boss, your spouse, children, neighbor. You may even be right but it may not be wise and it solves nothing.
All of you, this discussion has gone on too long and is going too far. People are going to quit posting and serving the higher purpose of helping each other prepare for the (if/not when) pandemic. You all have much to contribute.
Observer. Thanks for your astute observations. I hope you can contribute more in the future…we can most surely use the help.
I appreciate every commment that has been made here…pro and con…
…and that is the bottom line for me…I like democracy….no, I love democracy.
I am Canadian (United Empire Loyalist) , not American and I may be plagerizing New Hampshires state saying but…
…I would rather live free or die trying…
I don’t like censorship when the other side is, from this distance, psychopathic in that they feel no remorse or empathy for anything or anyone…but that is just my opinion and many have died so that I can speak the truth as I know it…
…in making this statement, they are welcome to return the favour…afterall, that is democracy.
I respectfully submit the following quote from John Stuart Mill’s treatise “On Liberty”. My apologies for the length of the quote, but it is worth the read.
Chapter IV: Of the Limits to the Authority of Society over the Individual
WHAT, then, is the rightful limit to the sovereignty of the individual over himself? Where does the authority of society begin? How much of human life should be assigned to individuality, and how much to society? Each will receive its proper share, if each has that which more particularly concerns it. To individuality should belong the part of life in which it is chiefly the individual that is interested; to society, the part which chiefly interests society. Though society is not founded on a contract, and though no good purpose is answered by inventing a contract in order to deduce social obligations from it, every one who receives the protection of society owes a return for the benefit, and the fact of living in society renders it indispensable that each should be bound to observe a certain line of conduct towards the rest. This conduct consists first, in not injuring the interests of one another; or rather certain interests, which, either by express legal provision or by tacit understanding, ought to be considered as rights; and secondly, in each person’s bearing his share (to be fixed on some equitable principle) of the labours and sacrifices incurred for defending the society or its members from injury and molestation. These conditions society is justified in enforcing at all costs to those who endeavour to withhold fulfilment. Nor is this all that society may do. The acts of an individual may be hurtful to others, or wanting in due consideration for their welfare, without going the length of violating any of their constituted rights. The offender may then be justly punished by opinion, though not by law. As soon as any part of a person’s conduct affects prejudicially the interests of others, society has jurisdiction over it, and the question whether the general welfare will or will not be promoted by interfering with it, becomes open to discussion. But there is no room for entertaining any such question when a person’s conduct affects the interests of no persons besides himself, or needs not affect them unless they like (all the persons concerned being of full age, and the ordinary amount of understanding). In all such cases there should be perfect freedom, legal and social, to do the action and stand the consequences.
It would be a great misunderstanding of this doctrine to suppose that it is one of selfish indifference, which pretends that human beings have no business with each other’s conduct in life, and that they should not concern themselves about the well-doing or well-being of one another, unless their own interest is involved. Instead of any diminution, there is need of a great increase of disinterested exertion to promote the good of others. But disinterested benevolence can find other instruments to persuade people to their good, than whips and scourges, either of the literal or the metaphorical sort.
<snip>
http://www.bartleby.com/130/4.html
Comment:
Much of what we have been discussing here is ground that has been trod time and again. We have freedoms, and we should excercise and defend those freedoms. But there are times when the exercise of our freedoms can be the cause of harm to others, who also have the freedom to not be harmed by another. Each individual has the moral obligation to excercise their freedoms, but with the potential impact of those freedoms upon their fellow man’s welfare.
Let us excercise our freedom of speech to protect and improve life for all men, but with circumspection towards the political realities in the world.
Correction:
“but with the potential impact in mind of those freedoms upon their fellow man’s welfare.”
Friends, please. I plead with you. Take some time for a cup of coffee or a glass of wine, relax, sleep over it, and come back tomorrow with the will to compromise. I could say things too but I need to work them out calmly in my head. Your sparring tears my heart because I can see both sides of the argument and its a terrible dilemma to propose one way or another. Please, please, will you agree to disagree for a few hours? And then, perhaps there will be light for all? Thank you.
FrenchieGirl – at 12:30
You are absolutely right. The discussion is useful and good; it’s a feature and not a bug. And things do not have to be decided immediately.
There’s plenty of room for compromise. This is a group site, with moderators. There are some important principles here, but there’s also many different ways to get to the same place.
The topic of mistakes and consequences of those mistakes made by our government and any other (including WHO) is open for discussion here as it pertains to flu, at least. Consider the excellent points made about wishing to work with the people in each country we can reach.
Our words can have unintended consequences. The approach of “I don’t agree with you and in any case I don’t think it’s a big deal” is not a helpful frame. As moderators and editors, we do believe it to some extent and we do think it’s a big deal, and since we are responsible for the site, we will act accordingly (if reluctantly). I strongly disagreed with my friend Monotreme, for example, that the “Worm of Weybridge” thread was in the least helpful yet the pressure that Monotreme spearheaded in multiple other threads was. I was not the only person to suggest different language, publicly and privately. I’m not especially happy, as stated, with the tone of the “Worm” post in question, but that’s a personal observation fwiw.
We did not intend for this latest post to disappear forever and it’s been restored with not a comma modified. What to do? In this instance, we advise write what you want, and try to keep the most inflammatory language out of the premise of the post and the title. Let the logic lead you to where it leads you. A post titled “Questions About…” would likely not have led to this controversy. But when someone deliberately tries to be as inflammatory as possible, or as inflammatory as the mods will allow, because that is their intended goal, well, what happens happens. The mods will say “that’s not a great idea” and do what mods do, which is to protect the site integrity while simultaneously keeping it viewed by as many people in the world (literally) as we can.
So here’s another conundrum. We want to help everyone prepare, and we do it ourselves because governments aren’t. Do we want to be partners or do we want to be independent antagonists. Skip Asian countries for the moment… what of we’re talking about the US, or what if we’re talking about WHO or whatif we’re talking about local governments? How should we comport ourselves if we really want a voice?
Again, FrenchieGirl is right. This does not require an immediate answer.
“Do we want to be partners or do we want to be independent antagonists.”
I want to be a partner but they leave me no choice but to be an antagonist. /:0)
I will be the first to compliment China and its ‘blank’ the World Health Organization when they change their ways…
…In the 1930′s there was one voice in the wilderness…Winston Churchill…he was considered a heretic and slightly ‘mad’…
…and we all know how that story turned out.
We are now talking about a threat to potentially many multiples of the second world war…a threat that can reach in our homes and take our loved ones…
…I think the criticism I heap on those most responsible, the Communist Government of China and the World Health Organization, a minor issue when considering the overal scene laid out before us!!
DemfromCt
Since joining this Flu Wiki, I have learned to think (at least a little bit) like:
and now it sounds like you are asking me to think like — a diplomat?
When does it stop?
Average Concerned Mom 14:27
plus you can multi-task! LOL! You may need to change to “Super Mom”
I assume the (at least a little bit) was in reference to the “Average Public Health Official.” :)
Average Concerned Mom – at 14:27 a survivalist, a virologist, an epidemiologist, a public health official, and now a diplomat? When does it stop?
I’m just glad we’re not being asked to fill in for pogge fixing all of our mistakes and getting the server working again after it goes down.
Or maybe that will be next week.
…”I believe it is important to uphold free speech and open access to information. That’s the reason for the existence of Fluwiki, and the reason why I choose to make myself clear here.”…
I believe it is paramount to uphold free speech and open access to information in a Democracy like the United States. You can’t allow for the context of the Communist Chinese Government on the one hand and forget the context of a Democracy with free speech on the other hand simply because the Chinese context does not allow the other to exist.
…”I believe that writing on public forums is not free lunch, that it carries a responsibility to remember the power of words to do harm as well as good. As a physician, the no 1 rule of ethics is ‘Do no harm’. I believe this rule should also apply to public speech.”
In science, in order to come to a conclusion, one must first sate a hypothesis and then test that assumption. We can’t know if we are right until we gather data, arrange our facts, draw our conclusions, rework our assumptions and get peer review. While the wiki is not a scientific exercise, it proceeds in much the same way. Look at many of the treads. Any person can use their freedom of speech to start a thread, present their case, draw their conclusions, choose their language and tone. The others in the wiki respond to the totality of what is said and how it is said. This wonderful process allows us to challenge the facts, make an opposing argument, attack the assumptions, and challenge the tone and debate.
When I was a nationally recognized antiwar activist while on active duty in the military, I had to submit every speech I made to the base information officer. It had to be cleared by them, before I was allowed to say anything to an audience I was to address. In this context, my free speech was not a “free lunch.” This made sense in this context and I did fully comply with this request.
In our context here, it makes no sense to me to be cutoff from the exercise of free speech before all the words, data, conclusions, information, arguments have been made by all of us and we force Montreme to “eat his words or tone” or “agree with him on every point.” Neither extreme is likely here. So, the action of closing a thread may just be justified and the thread may even be scrapped as having no redeeming social value, but never as soon as it was done in this context.
“…I believe that citizens can do a lot of good by their actions, and those actions do not necessarily have to be antagonistic to TPTB…”
Yes, I agree. It takes work and care. I must add that speaking truth to power also does put you in an antagonistic position no matter how you turn a phrase. Western civilization in its best form requires that the individual be able to express ideas contrary to the agenda of the nation state. It is the only way that its citizens can talk among themselves to come to the truth of a matter. Getting at the truth by the process is the key; having every truth clearly stated and documented at first is an insurmountable task that would bring discussion to a grinding halt. We certainly can learn to phrase our suppositions so as to do no harm, I strongly agree with that, but we must also allow the process of coming to our collective conclusions.
I am going to sleep on all this.
A thought just came to me. While we are sitting here discussing the finer interpretation of ethics in a global context, China Flu maybe just about to break out in Nepal.
What is going on here? I’m going to print this out to read when I have the time. The wiki must consider China in every post, so as not to offend?That means every casual anonymous statement must be read and allowed to run by the mods. Are you actually going to kow tow?
diana – at 15:54 --- Based on previous, similar, discussions, I don’t believe so. In fact, the act of censorship on FluWiki is what caused this series of threads to be created in the first place.
I know the Mods are not censoring anyone…only trying to make sure that as many people as possible are able to have access to the site. If a government finds the wiki/forum offensive to their ideals, and they block their citizens from having access to this information, then at some point something was said/entered/posted here that offended them. I think that is what the Mods are trying to avoid…
Tom, just to illustrate a point, HIV was first diagnosed in the US in gay people. Should we have called it the American Gay Virus?
Or, to ask the question in a different way, are we here to save lives, or are we here to create more conflict? I’m referring to Tom’s China flu comment.
diana – at 15:54
Nope. That’s not what was said. Please reread my post at at 13:21. The Chinese government hasn’t contacted me and I have no idea what they are thinking. But if I may be so bold, more important than my post is the one by Average Concerned Mom – at 14:27.
As to “every casual anonymous statement”, it’s one thing to start a provocative post with a provocative title, and another to make a casual statement. When mods feel that the site is going off in a direction that is needing correction, correction (be it a closed thread or the extremely rare thread pulling, and putting back with a disclaimer) is going to occur. That’s the role of the mods. It doesn’t mean every decision will be the right one, and some wrong ones can be adjusted later - the “least harm” approach will be taken. That’s not up for debate, and has been discussed before.
As a matter of policy, it would be helpful to avoid calling things Malaysian flu or China flu, for example. That’s a good way to offend someone, and was actually a problem when “Hong Kong flu” was used in a previous context.
All I can say is over the last year, I would have learned far less if you all agreed all the time.
That being said, I would encourage everyone to step back from the conversation and think- not decide.
There is always some tiny patch of middle ground- somewhere. Even if it means that eveyone draws their line, stands on it, and then reaches out with one hand.
Dude, and everyone else, This thread has gotten long so it easy to miss what the point of all this is. May I respectfully suggest that you read carefully all of my previous comments to find out where I draw the line.
Speaking of how long this thread has gotten, I just opened a new new one. Closing this.
lauralou – at 16:58
FrenchieGirl said the same, and you’re both right.
Is the wiki runnin’ a bit slow, or is it all just on “my end”?