The free software journalism club

[JEM_staff]

After I posted yesterday's call for stories (http://www.thejemreport.com/mambo/content/view/359/) from or about people who claim to have had comment posts deleted from Groklaw, I received an email from Pamela Jones asking me why I was "doing this." Since such a question presumes a certain level of conspiracy, I replied that the call for stories is self-explanatory -- if what people have said is true (http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/arc...-Deletion.html), this is a significantly interesting story for my readers, many of whom (perhaps wrongly) consider Groklaw an impartial source. The next email I got on the subject was from Ziff Davis Enterprise (http://www.ziffdavisenterprise.com/) editor Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols, accusing me of attacking Jones in a public forum (The Jem Report) via my call for stories, and advising me that this is not tolerable on his Internet Press Guild (http://www.netpress.org/) mailing list, of which I have been an active member for a few months. He then kicked me off the IPG list. It seems you aren't allowed to write about Steven J Vaughan-Nichols' friends, or question the operational practices of Web sites friendly to free software ideals, and remain an IPG member. This is a sad day for me, not because I am now an outcast -- on the contrary, that's the best part! -- but because a writer I'd held a great deal of professional respect for sacked me because -- I know this is bizarre -- I was being too much of a journalist. I am sad because I thought SJVN was a pillar of professional journalism, the sort of guy who would encourage a hard charger like me to chase important stories like this one. That Vaughan-Nichols would kick me from an unofficial online journalism group to pressure me into killing a story and to show support for his friend Pamela Jones is, to me,...

The free software journalism club

[runbei]

Jem, did you go to Pamela Jones first and ask her to comment / state Groklaw's policy on monitoring comments? And did you truly investigate the kinds of comments that were deleted? You don't mention doing this in today's article; yet, if you didn't, it sort of changes the atmosphere, because it means you're pursuing an article, if not a scandal, without first giving the accused a chance to respond. The mere fact of your calling for stories from people who've allegedly been treated badly on Groklaw, without first talking to Jones, is in effect a declaration of war. So - if all this is true - why are you surprised that she scurried to ZD, and Stephen kicked you out of his little club?

[Valour]

Asking for stories is an effort to determine if there is anything to write about. If the only people I talk to admit that they posted inflammatory things, or were working for a marketing agency, then that might make an interesting story in itself, but it would have a totally different meaning.

I didn't go to PJ because I had nothing to ask yet. My plan is/was to go to her when I have people on record with copies of their original posts. Then I can ask her about policy and practice.

There is already plenty of both anecdotal and on-record evidence to suggest that Groklaw deletes posts. Here's a bunch right here: http://linux-blog.org/index.php?/arc...-Deletion.html

So in effect I know it's happening, but I need to know the details behind more of the deletions. That is specifically what I asked for in the call for stories.

[The Mad Hatter]

Guess you've just proved your humanity <GRIN>.

OK, so you think there may be some deep, dark, secret over at Groklaw. Like maybe PJ really is a team of IBM lawyers out to nuke TSCOG/Caldera for their temerity. Me, I think you are out to lunch on this one.

Background - I've run discussion boards before. One thing I can tell you is that there is NO way to keep everyone happy. And there's no way everyone will follow the rules. How many people have you had to censor/delete for posting stuff of a sexual or other offensive nature? More than one, and less than a million, right?

I've also been a part time software developer for 30 years. I can remember the C wars - when everyone who wasn't programming in C was in idiot who couldn't program their way out of a wet paper bag. Funny, most of those guys are doing PHP or Perl now. I'm still programming in Basic. In fact I'm still working on some of the same programs, though they are now somewhat enhanced.

Lastly - I'm a believer in Free Software, not Open Source. There are very strong religious reasons for Free Software. Not sure that Stallman would understand that, but hey if he doesn't that's his problem.

OK - so there's my opening salvo - as I said I love to argue. Let's get to it.

Wayne

[devnet]

Originally Posted by runbei

Jem, did you go to Pamela Jones first and ask her to comment / state Groklaw's policy on monitoring comments? And did you truly investigate the kinds of comments that were deleted? You don't mention doing this in today's article; yet, if you didn't, it sort of changes the atmosphere, because it means you're pursuing an article, if not a scandal, without first giving the accused a chance to respond. The mere fact of your calling for stories from people who've allegedly been treated badly on Groklaw, without first talking to Jones, is in effect a declaration of war. So - if all this is true - why are you surprised that she scurried to ZD, and Stephen kicked you out of his little club?

That's not needed runbei. Groklaw has a published policy on comments.

http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/i...04030120301285

Investigation he was speaking of was MINE. I did a blog post on this a few years ago and interviewed multiple people who found their accounts disabled or their posts visible only to them and not to everyone else.

This is NOT a declaration of war...it's an investigation. If PJ doesn't censor, Jem will find nothing and there will be no story. If he finds cause for a story, one will be written...and if he's like me, he'll attempt to get PJ to comment on things for 'her side' of the story. And if PJ is still the same, she'll turn down that request for comments and not say a word.

[devnet]

Quick comment to Mad Hatter...

I don't like many comments that are made to my blog linux-blog.org...but I leave them. The only edits i do are for vulgarity. When you put your opinion out there in blog form you open yourself up to good feedback and bad feedback. It can't always be roses and diamonds...sometimes you're called out. I've had to eat humble pie many times when I was mistaken.

I suggest you read the article Valour linked you to...it's a good read and I can tell you right now that the article is 100% what I got from the person I interviewed who had no stake in seeing groklaw discredited...they just wanted the truth out.

[J.F.]

Well, PJ DOES censor, and rightly so. It's her blog, and it attracts all kinds of trolls and shills and assorted fruitcakes. If she DIDN'T censor the blog, it would be a real mess.

I've actually had a grand total of TWO posts deleted. One was a post responding to someone who responded to a troll. When the troll was deleted, so were all the responses to it. No biggy. The second was a post I made (in humor) about Bill Gates stealing ideas on his "thought work days" he takes periodically. It was funny, but in poor taste, and was deleted. I don't really blame PJ - since it IS her private blog, she is somewhat responsible for the content. People making comments like the one I did could cause her trouble.

I do think Jem should continue his investigation, I just don't think there's much to it.

[Valour]

Originally Posted by The Mad Hatter

Guess you've just proved your humanity <GRIN>.

OK, so you think there may be some deep, dark, secret over at Groklaw. Like maybe PJ really is a team of IBM lawyers out to nuke TSCOG/Caldera for their temerity. Me, I think you are out to lunch on this one.

Background - I've run discussion boards before. One thing I can tell you is that there is NO way to keep everyone happy. And there's no way everyone will follow the rules. How many people have you had to censor/delete for posting stuff of a sexual or other offensive nature? More than one, and less than a million, right?

I've also been a part time software developer for 30 years. I can remember the C wars - when everyone who wasn't programming in C was in idiot who couldn't program their way out of a wet paper bag. Funny, most of those guys are doing PHP or Perl now. I'm still programming in Basic. In fact I'm still working on some of the same programs, though they are now somewhat enhanced.

Lastly - I'm a believer in Free Software, not Open Source. There are very strong religious reasons for Free Software. Not sure that Stallman would understand that, but hey if he doesn't that's his problem.

OK - so there's my opening salvo - as I said I love to argue. Let's get to it.

Wayne

I've moderated this particular forum for several years. It's seen higher and lower traffic days in the past, but it evens out at around 10-20 posts per day.

I like to think that discussions on my forum are more civil than the average technology forum because the people who post most frequently are civil in their disagreements. I also tend not to write stupid things in my articles, so people who are inclined to disagree must do so eloquently in order to feel like they are making a difference.

Anyway, a while ago I created a forum section here called Jem, You Suck! specifically to contain posts from people who wanted to flame me. I think it works out pretty well -- it doesn't derail any of the primary discussion threads, and lets people express themselves publically if they're upset with my work. So we don't need to do as much post-editing and deleting these days as we used to, mostly because we have found interesting ways to deal with flame posts.

What I'm asking for from Groklaw participants isn't a recounting of flame wars, though. If someone comes here to TJRForum and presents a well-reasoned or at least intelligently argued point, I *like* that -- I'm always interested in reading about something that I have not considered before. On Groklaw, though, it seems to be different. If you post something that the moderators there deem too pro-SCO, Microsoft, OOXML, software patents, or anything else that PJ thinks is bad, your post may end up disappearing or becoming visible only to you (presumably so that you will not easily discover that it has been removed from public view).

If I remove a post here, it is because it is spam, or because one member has attacked another -- and usually I edit those to take out the attacks, if there is a reasonable argument in there somewhere. If you take out the attacks, the discussion continues. If you remove posts that express dissenting opinions, however, then you have something else entirely -- you have not an edited discussion, but an edited view of reality.

Groklaw publishes in chorus with a community of readers, which is relies on to correct errors and research facts. But if you cut out the facts and corrections that you find personally objectionable, then you are left with half a story. I am not necessarily saying that this is wrong -- it's a free Web, anyway -- but I do think that if I can tell some people's stories of what was removed from Groklaw, that a lot of current and potential Groklaw readers can be better educated as to what they are reading.

[Valour]

Originally Posted by J.F.

Well, PJ DOES censor, and rightly so. It's her blog, and it attracts all kinds of trolls and shills and assorted fruitcakes. If she DIDN'T censor the blog, it would be a real mess.

I've actually had a grand total of TWO posts deleted. One was a post responding to someone who responded to a troll. When the troll was deleted, so were all the responses to it. No biggy. The second was a post I made (in humor) about Bill Gates stealing ideas on his "thought work days" he takes periodically. It was funny, but in poor taste, and was deleted. I don't really blame PJ - since it IS her private blog, she is somewhat responsible for the content. People making comments like the one I did could cause her trouble.

I do think Jem should continue his investigation, I just don't think there's much to it.

You're absolutely right -- it's a free Web, and PJ can publish what she wants. There is some confusion, though, among readers as to what she is publishing. Groklaw is presented in its mission statement as first and foremost a "journalistic enterprise," which, it is listed in its secondary goal, is "applying open-source principles to research to the extent that they apply."

So we have community journalism? That's good -- great, in fact. But if you're going to do that, you can't pick and choose the sides you're going to take on issues. What disturbs me about the stories I have read of Groklaw deletions is that they are offering valid corrections of things like OOXML specification analysis. It's these stories that I'm after, because if they exist in any significant number, then that's a story worth telling.

So far I've only seen a few stories, none of which I can use right now. Maybe the whole thing will fizzle out and have to wait for another day.

I'm particularly bothered at PJ's revenge tactics with the Internet Press Guild. I'm *extremely* bothered that SJVN kowtowed to her. There really are no great minds in technology journalism -- just cardboard facades like Robin Miller and Steven J Vaughan-Nichols. I don't have anyone to look up to anymore.

[J.F.]

Yes, that is a bit of a issue. She wavers between whether it's a personal blog or a journalistic endeavor. It's a bit of both, and she's trying to take the best of both with none of the bad. That's where this problem lies.