- 4 Oct 2012
- 2,427
- 316
To be honest I want to completely dissect Japan Today and lay bare all its ugly inner-workings for all to see. The site is more harm than good in my opinion. It needs to be disinfected with light....lots and lots of light.
I get the impression there were a lot of people who absolutely hated the way that the comments section was run. For a bit, there was a guy posting on the Rocket News/Sora News Japan site with the name 'Japan Today moderators have issues' and there was a Facebook page of the same name. There was (is?) a site of long-term foreign Japan residents called 'F****ed Japan' and they were often writing posts with awed horror about just how anal the moderators are. And of course, there were often absolutely furious posts on the Japan Today site directed toward the moderators themselves that got very quickly deleted.I had debated with myself whether to start this thread. I am glad I started it, seeing the replies. Thank you.
Lothor, your first post gave me a little more faith in humanity. I saw much the same things you did and its all so very disgusting. That you also saw it is what gives me that little more faith. To answer your question of why it is like it is, well I think the site still gets a ton of hits.
TGI-ECT, as a former moderator I imagine there is a wagon load of behind-the-scenes details you could tell us. But am I correct in thinking you want to hold back? To be honest I want to completely dissect Japan Today and lay bare all its ugly inner-workings for all to see. The site is more harm than good in my opinion. It needs to be disinfected with light....lots and lots of light.
Please do keep us updated, Zorro, but don't turn JREF into a bridgehead for that crusade.
I really felt there was something badly wrong somewhere that I couldn't put my finger on.
============ Copy ends ============One: we are being asked to exercise censorship on an issue that is already in the public domain. According to the instructions we are being asked to delete stories that may not be directly critical of WaiWai itself. Just stories that were started by WaiWai.
Second: let us say that the Japan Times wrote a story they based upon a WaiWai initiated column and one of our members started a thread about the Japan Times story. We are being asked to delete that, also. We are being asked to censor a third company's story. I think we have a legal problem there.
Third: I am absolutely sure this request defies the rule of freedom of the press. I cannot be a party to that, and I cannot suppress that story, either.
But that is just my opinion, of course.
I will, though, ask for legal advice concerning the laws covering freedom of the press.
Whatever happens, I am sure my days at Japan Today are numbered -- probably I'll be gone before the end of today.
I cannot be a party to that, and I cannot suppress that story, either.
Once in a bit we even had private correspondence with government folks because of the troubles.
That was a very interesting post. Not knowing what third-wave feminism is (I've just read about it on Wikipedia), I didn't notice any bias or otherwise (I'd be supportive of it anyway!), but the idea that much of the behaviour of the site was a fanatical desire to get hits at all costs that went way beyond normal clickbait tactics is one that I didn't think of but makes a lot of sense.Same here. What I felt was a bias toward third wave feminism combined with a near cultish adoration of authority, including police, the military and yes, the ruling LDP. But also a simple desire to get hits and users no matter what it took, including annoying members to a small degree while not turning the comments into massive brawls.
Its also important to note that headlines often mismatch articles, or, important details are missing from articles. I believe both were merely intentional methods to spark discussion (ie hits) as members try to fill in the blanks or ramble on in confusion.
Also quite annoying that the moderators are now in the shadows without even aliases to identify them.
Not knowing what third-wave feminism is (I've just read about it on Wikipedia), I didn't notice any bias or otherwise (I'd be supportive of it anyway!),
who revelled in the small amount of power that they had been given to delete posts, send chiding little emails to people, and ban people who answered back. I'm convinced they enjoyed what they were doing.
Also, I've been a moderator in the past and you develop a traffic lights mentality with most posts being green, a small number being red that you have to remove and a small number being yellow that you don't remove but keep an eye on how the thread develops
I'll watch your video another time but thanks for posting. I don't like the word censorship in this context - it's too emotive and there's a clear difference between an organisation that actively prevents opposing views and criticisms from being expressed and a site owner not wanting their sites full of abuse, p**n, spam, and so forth, though perhaps the boundary is less clear with what constitutes abuse. Anyway, good to hear your views.I absolutely hate that because my general experience is that there are far too few humans who can handle the power. My view is that only private information published without consent of the person its about should be removed. Basically, the internet should never be censored to the point that anything is removed, but users and posts should simply be flagged and users should have filters they can use where other users flagged as trolls will be blocked and posts marked as vulgar will be screened, things like that. Its all pixels on a screen and might as well be thoughts in a brain. Policing that is insanity.
I'll watch your video another time but thanks for posting.
a site owner not wanting their sites full of abuse, p**n, spam, and so forth, though perhaps the boundary is less clear with what constitutes abuse. Anyway, good to hear your views.
No idea what you're talking about mate.Was anyone here on the former Gaijinpot forums? Now that was a lot of poo-flinging fun!