Editing on Vive Le Canada

Oh yea, stories added while I was editing: Paul Martin - Silence is appeasement Sat Dec 17 11:48:54 2005 US Intrusion Sat Dec 17 12:17:53 2005 US that Molson soaked tundra to the north Sat Dec 17 13:11:29 2005 canusrelations What is the likelyhood of these stories making the cut, do you think?

Another example of a rejected story: [quote] Gordon Campbell Contributed by: What is your opinion of Gordon Campbell ? [/quote] That's the whole submission. This is a comment, not a story. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/rolleyes.gif' alt='Rolling Eyes'>

I do basically the same when I go through the queue; the only real difference being that I begin by looking for things that are not at all related to vive's mission, or those things that are likely not of interest to our readers at all. Oh, and watching out for duplicate posts or stories that are incredibly similar to those already posted. That one is tough, but generally we do a good job of it. As well, while reading through the 'recent replies', I tend to have a look at the articles and fix any typos /formatting problems that I see (assuming I have time). Dr Caleb, how often are we getting spam in the submission queue? I wasn't aware it was a problem, so hopefully it is rare...

Well, cleaning out the queue took about 3 hours. Some stories will be coming out tomorrow morning, as today is jam packed. Now to check out how everyone is getting along. Part 2, Moderating. This is my other hat. First thing I do is look at the 'recent comments' section. Stories that are 1 - 2 months old, or longer that have a single comment that is new, attracts my attention. Spammers. This is the warning sign for them. Today, I don't see any. Next are popular topics. "US intervention decried" has 57 new comments, and "Iranian President's denial of the Holocaust has 76 new ones. Oh goody. More racism. I'll start at the bottom and work my way up. I search for the date (December 16) which I was last moderating, and look for comments I have not already moderated. I tend to look for posted users that have made comments that could be considered, "Insightful", "Polite" or "Informative". The way the moderation system works, registered users benefit from moderating up more than Anon users. This gives them Karma that they can use to moderate with. I also concentrate on Anon's that post well, and reward them. Alas, most choose to be 'Offtopic' or 'Insulting'. There are exceptions, however. Here's an example of an Anon comment on an old thread: [quote]"If we did, we'd be like Canada -- weak and socialist...."[/quote] So what to do? Nothing. Yes, it's meant to be insulting, but it's only 1 new comment in an old thread, so I leave it. A couple of our regular trolls, 'Doc' and 'Don Quixote' like to go back and pick at old sores. Why waste the point and encourage them? [quote]" This is a very fine re-telling of a very old story, thanks to robertjb. Happy holidays and a jolly Christmas, all. "[/quote] Polite. Definitely deserves a point. Alas, the user posted it twice, so the second one is technically 'redundant', but why penalize them? So, I ignore the second comment. It was an accident anyway. On another thread: [quote]"Canada stands for nothing."[/quote] Offtopic, and insulting. And meant that way, so it gets marked as such. Another Anon comment: [quote]"Where do these releases go? I dont see them in the papers or on tv. I never see them anywhere but here. Do they not get published by the media? Why don't more people know about the party?"[/quote] Definitely insightful. Now we get to the 'holocaust myth' thread. [quote]"Just like a small group of wealthy people can control a whole country."[/quote] I haven't decided about this one, so I haven't voted on it. I'm leaning toward 'Lacking Evidence' though. [quote]"If the holocaust were fact, please present these facts. Any forensic evidence would help. . . ."[/quote] Well, this post starts off as 'Incoherent", lapses into a strawman argument, and finishes off with 'Lacking Evdence'. It's going down! And in a reply to the above post: [quote]"For more forensic evidence, here is a page with transcripts and other documents from the Nuremberg war crimes tribunal."[/quote] With links to the facts. Earns an 'Informative" easily. And then: [quote]"You want "forensic evidence"? Here:"[/quote] Definitely 'Informative'. And in response: [quote]"Now you know how I feel after having to explain Sept 11th over and over again…. "[/quote] Anon has a point, but is offtopic. They weren't insulting, so I'll leave it alone. ---------- And on and on . . . Moderating just the last couple topics took about an hour and a half. I also made a couple comments, as people were asking questions and I felt they deserved responses. Even if they (and I) were offtopic. A point was brought up in the 'Iranian President calls Holocaust a Myth' thread that I'd like to clairify. Why don't we delete those racist posts? The moderators try to be neutral. We'll mark the posts 'racist' and move on, but we'll keep watching. In order to be 'neutral' on a topic like racism, we must refer to an outside source. We use two. First, the criminal code of Canada. It's pretty specific in it's definition of racism. But the poster(s) know how to skirt the definitions under law, and bend the limits. So sometimes, as in those posts, the legal definitions don't work. So we rely on each other, and on the reader. If someone reports the post as 'racist' we will delete it immediately, no questions asked. If no one reports it, then we assume it's our own personal biases that caused us to see the racism, and we leave the comment as is.

[QUOTE BY= jesse] I do basically the same when I go through the queue; the only real difference being that I begin by looking for things that are not at all related to vive's mission, or those things that are likely not of interest to our readers at all. Oh, and watching out for duplicate posts or stories that are incredibly similar to those already posted. That one is tough, but generally we do a good job of it.[/quote] Yea, I forgot to mention that is another reason a story is rejected - more than one submission. I'll try to give credit for the deleted stories, and include the extra links, but it boils down to whoever submitted it first is who's story gets posted. [QUOTE BY= jesse] Dr Caleb, how often are we getting spam in the submission queue? I wasn't aware it was a problem, so hopefully it is rare...[/QUOTE] It is fairly rare. It's only been happening the last couple months or so, perhaps 1 a week. Usually the 'perfume' or 'phone card' spammers, or as you see, Nike shoes. Occassionally a Nigerian 419'er type. The Nike shoes one just happend at a convinient time to be made an example of.

And, finally, the forumns. These are pretty easy. I start that the beginning, and go section by section, looking for any post that are new since my last moderating session. There is no voting system here. I just read all the new posts, looking for to make sure everyone is playing nicely together. If anyone's post is blank, then I edit their post and repair the missing 'quote' tag they forgot. Then I let them know, and tell them the reason their post was blank, and admonish them to use 'preview' in the future <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'> I hope this has given someone some amusement, or at least a little insight.

[QUOTE]Next: Klein Endorses Jack Layton. I though it would be Calumny again. But it's reality![/QUOTE] Ah, the old 'truth is stranger than fiction thing' Gives me an idea, though... [QUOTE]"Duceppe Resigns" another one from Calumny.[/QUOTE] My hand hovered over the submit key for awhile on that one. Hopefully, no one takes offence...just meant in fun. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif' alt='Big Grin'>

[QUOTE BY= Calumny] [QUOTE]"Duceppe Resigns" another one from Calumny.[/QUOTE] My hand hovered over the submit key for awhile on that one. Hopefully, no one takes offence...just meant in fun. <img align="absmiddle" src='images/smilies/biggrin.gif'> [/QUOTE] Liberals, Conservatives, and then the Bloc's / NDPs turn. You covered the spectrum. It's only fair. <img align=absmiddle src='images/smilies/smile.gif' alt='Smile'>

[QUOTE BY= Calumny] [QUOTE]"Duceppe Resigns" another one from Calumny.[/QUOTE] My hand hovered over the submit key for awhile on that one. Hopefully, no one takes offence...just meant in fun. [/QUOTE] Just meant in fun... I could say the same about my response to it but I will refrain. I guess some of us have a 'distinct' sense of humor others just don't get. The alarming rate of FHQ's assimilation could be another idea for a fun piece of writing. I presume gaulois would find the appropriate hilarious response to that one.

Thanks for providing some insight to what goes on behind the curtain, Dr Caleb — and thanks also to BC Mary for suggesting it. The stagger strategy is interesting. I count myself lucky if I can visit here daily, but I find the articles no less fresh for my relatively infrequent sampling. (Though I had thought myself as being rather behind the times when I first read the Duceppe Resigns headline …) The large space behind the table seems to have been caused by a legion of <code> </code> elements interspersed between the components of the table. My guess is that perhaps you’d copied the list of articles in the queue from another HTML document, and that document used the <code> </code> elements for line formatting — but when it was copied verbatim into the forum’s <code><table></code> element, all of those line breaks were rendered before the table itself was rendered, creating a gaping maw of whitespace.

[QUOTE BY= Brother Jonathan](Though I had thought myself as being rather behind the times when I first read the Duceppe Resigns headline …) [/QUOTE] since moved to the new "humour" section. [QUOTE] The large space behind the table seems to have been caused by a legion of <code> </code> elements interspersed between the components of the table. [/QUOTE] Nope, those were somehow being added at display time. No clue how or why.

[QUOTE] I guess some of us have a 'distinct' sense of humor others just don't get. [/QUOTE] And there's the rub. It's quite true that many have a 'distinct' sense of humour, the 'distinction' generally being whether we perceive the humour to be directed towards someone else or directed at us and/or our particular sacred cows. Basically you're left with a choice of going through life making generic, some might say 'insipid, conversation that can not possibly offend anyone or actually trying to say, whether seriously or in an (attempted) humorous way, 'something' that most likely will offend someone. And as far as the Duceppe article (which can be read in different ways) goes, I did hesitate submitting it because I thought it might cause some anger in some quarters, as opposed to the safer 'Conservative/Liberal' topics which generally wouldn't get a negative response on Vive. In the end, I decided that a world where you're afraid to speak because someone might choose to let your comment piss them off isn't really a place I want to be. Sorry to all however, in terms of Canada, and humanity in general, it seems to me that a person is pretty much left with the choice of crying or laughing. I'd prefer to laugh. Nothing anyone writes on a web forum will change Canada's future or be of any greater importance in the greater scheme of human history than the thousands of other, mostly forgotten' 'causes' or 'beliefs' humans have killed and died for throughout history. If some choose to believe their 'cause', whether spreading religion, democracy or whatever else to the world or whatever other 'sacred cow' they choose to create or golden calf choose to cast, is unique in this regard, well good kuck to you. In the end the one 'cause' that might be worth fighting for and could have an actual impact for the future is the right of every person to a decent, reasonably secure life lived in a manner that suits them best and causes no harm to others. However, we've known that for millenia and done nothing about it, because apparently most feel, or are willing to follow our 'leaders' in this regard, that it's of fundamental importantance that others think as we think and do what we do, or is good for us, and that, this be forced upon those others if not accepted willingly. Anyway, as there's apparently little hope of change, I figure those who wish might as well have a laugh at the whole damn thing as we go down the tubes. If others don't feel that way well, fortunately we live in a 'democracy'. While I'm not going to get into any Quebec discussions, I'll note that my view remains the same as always and that if most Quebecois feel their destiny is better met outside of Canada than within, I wish them the best and still don't buy the 'doom and gloom' end of Canada if Quebec leaves scenario that some in the ROC may fear. Forcing unhappy people to remain in a relationship or parting in an acrimonous manner generally has a much less desirable outcome than people agreeing to disagree and going their own way on good terms.

Well Calumny... even though many readers would prefer to believe that michou's comment to Duceppe's resignation" was an expression of defensiveness, I truly took it as it was meant to be and written, a personal satire and take on Canadian politics. Because I do enjoy imagining readers gritting their teeth when reading my words and thoughts, I decided to bring it to another level, something called dark humor. Obviously, such a thing is considered to be a 'bad' thing here on Vive, thus my comment about 'distinct' humor and how, to my great amusement, some just can't get it. In any humor or satiric composition, there is always a piece of truth to be found and because of this, I disagree that it can only be meant as fun. Humor and satire are not always humorous or hilarious. In this case, I would say that the truth I have found in your composition is that Canada IS a good place to live in this day and age but, and from my own response to it, it would also be suicide for the survival of French communities in North America should Québécers stop the fight for their independence. In truth, I couldn't give a rat's ass about what others make of what or how I decide to express my own truths and I am glad you feel the same way about your own. To each his own perception of truth and as you have written, no one will change the world through a few postings on discussion forums. This is certainly not where the real action is. Maybe in another time it will be, but we are not there yet. So please, don't ever hesitate to press the submit button and as always, if required, it will be my pleasure to disagree with you.

[QUOTE BY= michou] I could say the same about my response to it but I will refrain. I guess some of us have a 'distinct' sense of humor others just don't get.[/QUOTE] Unfortunately this happens , but I find this site much more open to ideas and debate than others. I was at a site called Babble and if you think there are stuffed shirts around here, you should see how trigger happy they are. I commented on MacLeans using the words "Svend & packing" in the same headline and was immediately banned. I have a gay uncle and gay friends, they are not without a sense of humour about it and in fact the gay community here makes a sport of poking fun at each other and accepting that progressive people do so as well. Anyways, I managed to correct a distortion on a BLOC member which was my reason for going there in the first place, but what a bunch of sectarians.

I came up with the same conclusion on Rabble. Vive remains an excellent forum and I really enjoy the variety of perspectives we get on it. I of course relate very well with Calumny's dark humour. I will dare ask Samuel if he finds Politiquebec as "open" as Vive? Or am I falling into delusion? I personally now much enjoy the ameriquefrancaise forum perhaps 'cause I can express myself in my own language with some others trying to survive as minorities without being bought out by our federal system (that part greatly irritates me as a sovereign mind).