Tim (littlebluedog) wrote,


In damnportlanders, a com I co-mod, a user made a post a few days ago griping about the organizers of a local event.

We have a Twitter account set up that automatically tweets some intro text and a link whenever a new public DP post is made.

Yesterday, the publicity director of said event contacted the DP mods via email, asking for the tweet to be removed. Not the DP post, the email specifically explained, just the tweet. The offered rationale was a bit weird; the email conceded that the user had the right to say whatever she wants on DP, but that the "libelous comments [shouldn't be] re-posted by a non-discriminating third party."

I pointed out that the same rationale (about freedom of expression) would apply to Twitter as well, considering the DP users are advised how the Twitter account works. (You can opt-out by making a post members-only.) The organizer seemed mollified by that.

Meanwhile, I'm thinking, really? The publicity director of this event, rather than engage the disgruntled user in conversation, instead wanted to censor the negative feedback. Yeesh.

  • microbloggin'

    Yesterday: 12:48 Just finished first run in "longer-than-10-minute" category in over a year. 15:34 RT @bennomatic: Don't forget to set your…

  • From Twitter 10-26-2009

    08:35:22: Blustery bike ride in this morning, but it was quite considerate for the downpour to have waited until after I arrived. 13:07:50:…

  • From Twitter 10-24-2009

    00:02:38: Today is @thatsassylassie's birthday! Happy one, sweet girl. :) 12:38:43: Cleaning the house for N's birthday. 13:06:26: "I…

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded