Tuesday, January 12, 2010
8 comments:
-
Butch Larroche said...
-
As many of us who have tried to defend the idea of keeping Sharp Park Golf Course open with comments on Riptide, we have found out that John Maybury is opposed to this idea. He has continually rejected, edited or deleted my comments and those of many who are pro golf.
Maybury first said he is not a journalist but just today says his journalistic reputation is at stake and needs to moderate his so called blog, or slog as I now call it. For someone who I'm sure hates Fox News for it's so called right bias, he does the same thing at Riptide but to the left.
He continues to hide behind the mantra of what he calls hate speech and slander and his need to protect us from it. I feel that if you know someone is telling lies, why can't you call them a liar? He says this is slander.
He allowed the post of the water at Sharp Park being contaminated with ecoli and other pollutants without so much as a source or any facts to back this claim up.
Maybury and his slog are just not relevant any longer and he knows it. Riptide seems to be clinging to life and is a few beats away from the ice cold slab of the internet morgue.
I'm convinced if Riptide was a daily paper it would lining the bottom of most birdcages here in town. -
January 12, 2010 at 1:24 PM
-
Kathleen Rogan said...
-
He did the same to Pacifica Tribune, ruined it with his hate speech. Not everyone in Pacifica believes like he does. He , I believe, considers himself an elitist. Above everyone. I never paid attention to his propaganda before, but I am paying attention now.
-
January 12, 2010 at 4:19 PM
-
Anonymous said...
-
He did the same to Pacifica Tribune, ruined it with his hate speech WTF???
Hate speech is speech perceived to disparage a person or group of people based on their social or ethnic group,[1] such as race, gender, age, ethnicity, nationality, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, language ability, ideology, social class, occupation, appearance (height, weight, skin color, etc.), mental capacity, and any other distinction that might be considered by some as a liability. The term covers written as well as oral communication and some forms of behaviors in a public setting.
Is this opposite day or what?
John Maybury is a really nice man. A peacemaker and a man of integrity.
Definitely not an elitist. Have you ever met John or talked to him? Where does your opinion come from? Personal knowledge?
I'm appalled at the ignorance you've shown by your comment and suggest that you open your mind and research some of these statements before posting. -
January 12, 2010 at 5:24 PM
-
Steve Sinai said...
-
I won't fault John for his policy of refusing to publish anything uncivil or that includes an accusation of lying. My problem with Riptide is more about the perfectly civil submissions I've seen that were rejected because they don't conform to John's political or environmental views.
John is an extremely nice guy, and I love talking about politics and city issues with him. But as I've said before, it's almost impossible for someone who's a strong advocate for a certain position to be fair to opposing viewpoints. That one-sidedness is hurting Riptide.
BTW - I really get embarrassed at the way some people here need to demonize anyone they disagree with. -
January 12, 2010 at 6:08 PM
-
Zombie Rockaway Sue said...
-
He still reserves the right to "edit" comments. That is the real problem. He doesn't edit for clarity or grammar. He edits to change the meaning of the comment.
-
January 13, 2010 at 9:45 AM
-
Kathleen Rogan said...
-
I remember his hate speech, sorry you can't seem too. Not my fault you have selected memory. I stand by what I said.
-
January 13, 2010 at 11:21 AM
-
Scotty said...
-
I prefer not to have my comments censored by Maybury, and won't comment there. He's probably a good enough guy, but he doesn't seem to realize that he's every bit the partisan fanatic that our resident Fox News people are.
The comment above about hate speech is a perfect example. Both John and Kathy Jana label pretty much any comments by those with whom they disagree as "hate speech", even when those comments don't come anywhere near the definition provided above. -
January 13, 2010 at 12:12 PM
-
Kathy Meeh said...
-
Zombie, that's exactly what Maybury did on at least one of my Riptide comment posts, thus with or without intent changed the comment understanding (not exactly what I said). Confirmation of that occurred with a copy of one post I saved, because a few other posts were slightly modified.
Suggestion, if you post comments there, keep a copy, and if your comment is rejected post it here.
Of course, John was kind enough to fix a couple of typos...here we live with them. As Steve also mentioned, John also seems to be a "nice guy" and lives by a certain code of decency, even though he shares the "nothing for Pacifica" political reality in this city. -
January 13, 2010 at 3:41 PM
For those of you who don't read Riptide or haven't looked at it recently, the news is that Riptide is going to forgo its policy of only allowing people to post under real names, and for one-month, try returning to its old policy of allowing fake names in the hope that it will generate more "heat" and bring people back.
This is probably an experiment worth trying. It's obvious to anyone who reads Riptide that its excitement-level rivals the Weekly Shopper, with the majority of its space being devoted to things like ads listing who's playing at local bars, or notices about environmental grant-writing classes.
The thing is, I don't think allowing people to post under fake names is going to do much to generate any interesting discussion or "heat" over there. The problem with Riptide lies in the fact that viewpoints that diverge too much from those of Riptide's editor don't see the light of day...and it's awfully difficult to generate a debate when only one side is allowed a voice.
I know firsthand how hard it was to get anything opposed to Measure D (the Pacifica sales tax) posted on Riptide, because the editor was in favor of D. Eventually, I gave up. Likewise, items and comments in favor of keeping the golf course were rejected at Riptide because its editor took the opposite position. In defending this kind of censorship, Riptide is claiming it was done in the name of "quality" and "reputation," although anyone who pressed Riptide's editor on the issue was inevitably met with something along the lines of, "It's my blog, I'll post what I want, and if you don't like it, start your own blog."
So we did. And we made it a policy to publish all viewpoints. To date, every submission and comment has been published. None has been blocked on the basis of ideological and/or political differences with the editors or majority of the blog's readers.
Until Riptide starts posting divergent viewpoints, there won't be anything to debate about, nor anybody to debate with.
Steve Sinai