Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

WARNING - Thread contains rants...

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • WARNING - Thread contains rants...

    I figured that instead of highjacking other threads to convey how we feel about the latest censorship of our opinions in regards to news of local security companies, I'd start a thread for all to express their opinions. As I have expressed in another thread, when you provide a service to the public, you open yourself up to public scrutiny. Members of this forum, do not just talk smack about security companies. They also give credit, where credit is due. I for one, thought this forum was a place where opinions could be expressed, and information shared. Apparently, this is only the case if we are all shiny happy people holding hands. Anyone else have thoughts? Rant away!
    Last edited by sgtnewby; 05-16-2010, 09:06 AM.
    Apparently a HUGE cop wannabe...

  • #2
    Originally posted by sgtnewby View Post
    I figured that instead of highjacking other threads to convey how we feel about the latest censorship of our opinions in regards to news of local security companies, I'd start a thread for all to express their opinions. As I have expressed in another thread, when you provide a service to the public, you open yourself up to public scrutiny. Members of this forum, do not just talk smack about security companies. They also give credit, where credit is due. I for one, thought this forum was a place where opinions could be expressed, and information shared. Apparently, this is only the case if we are all shiny happy people holding hands. Anyone else have thoughts? Rant away!
    While I don't really have a "dog in this fight" so to speak, I do think that censorship in any form is bad. I believe that the free flow of ideas and opinions make us all better for it.

    I do understand however, that forums are private in nature and therefore the owners or moderators can make up rules governing the use of such.

    I would hope that censorship would only be used for topics that are of no relevance to the forum or to police rude and or unprofessional behavior.

    My 1 1/2 cents.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by talon View Post
      While I don't really have a "dog in this fight" so to speak, I do think that censorship in any form is bad. I believe that the free flow of ideas and opinions make us all better for it.

      I do understand however, that forums are private in nature and therefore the owners or moderators can make up rules governing the use of such.

      I would hope that censorship would only be used for topics that are of no relevance to the forum or to police rude and or unprofessional behavior.

      My 1 1/2 cents.
      I understand this as well. However, it is a security forum. Some security companies that have been discussed lately are local to MN, which I find interesting being that is where I live. There are security companies here with good reputations, and some with bad reputations. I just don't think we should be restricted to discussing only good companies and what makes them good. And as far as I'm concerned, you have as much a "dog in this fight" as anyone else does. You're a member here, and your opinion counts.
      Apparently a HUGE cop wannabe...

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by sgtnewby View Post
        I understand this as well. However, it is a security forum. Some security companies that have been discussed lately are local to MN, which I find interesting being that is where I live. There are security companies here with good reputations, and some with bad reputations. I just don't think we should be restricted to discussing only good companies and what makes them good. And as far as I'm concerned, you have as much a "dog in this fight" as anyone else does. You're a member here, and your opinion counts.
        But we know what makes a security company bad. I would say that most security companies in the entire world are bad, not just where you live. So why pinpoint which are bad? I think we should give props to the good ones instead.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Nauticus View Post
          But we know what makes a security company bad. I would say that most security companies in the entire world are bad, not just where you live. So why pinpoint which are bad? I think we should give props to the good ones instead.
          Exactly. Especially with the company/person in question here. I am fairly certain that everyone on the planet knows what people in MN think of this company and its owner/mgr/whatever. So...posting multiple threads (30 counts as multiple) is just ridiculous, childish, and beyond unprofessional.

          As far as the constant foot-stamping and tantrum throwing about "censorship" goes, this is a private forum with private ownership. They can make rules as they see fit. This is especially important when it comes to beating a dead horse. It is beyond obvious that some members, despite having nothing to gain, continue to attack one company/owner relentlessly. Yes, it appears to be a hack job operation, but the constant barrage of criticism smacks of vendetta. The comments have no professional value as they appear. They are personal. Yea, it is under the veil of "this guy is making the industry a joke," but the underlying truth is that someone cannot survive the day without bringing up more drama about an already known fact.

          Also, this is obviously not "censorship," since the request to stop demeaning one particular company has been ignored and whined about by a select few on this forum. If they were truly censoring, the crybabies would have been banned by now.
          A wise son hears his father's instruction,but a scoffer does not listen to rebuke. Proverbs 13:1

          "My “Black-Ops” history ensures that you will never know about the missions I accepted in my younger days, and Vietnam still shudders when it hears the name of a an assasin so skillful and deadly, he is remembered decades later. " G-45

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by CTEXSEC1 View Post
            ... this is a private forum with private ownership. They can make rules as they see fit.
            Not only can they make rules, but they are responsible for making and requiring adherance to certain rules.

            In other words, the owner(s) of this forum can and will be held liable for what we say. I repeat: What we say can bite them in the a$$.

            Its called FCC, among other things.

            So whether Geoff, Curtis, or Nathan agree with the rules of conduct as laid down to us or not, they're there for the forum's protection.
            Last edited by 5423; 05-16-2010, 05:25 PM.
            "I'll defend with my life your right to disagree with me" - anonymous

            Comment


            • #7
              I also agree that we should have the right to offer negatives in addition to any positives in regards to a particular company. But, I believe it should only extend to first-hand knowledge and definitely should stop when the negatives border on slanderous. If there's negative info, no one should name names but, needs to be as specific as possible. Unfortuantely, that doesn't happen as threads tend to get out of hand and become venting sessions of info of friends of friends.

              BTW CTEXSEC1...nice avatar
              ‎"If you can't tolerate humor directed at you, you do not deserve to be taken seriously"

              Comment


              • #8
                I don't think the FCC has any interest in regulating what is said on the internet about a local security company and more then they care what a traveler says about their stay at a Holiday Inn Express. Good, bad, or ugly.
                ATTN. SPECOPS AND GECKO45 my secret username is CIDDECEP and I am your S2. My authorization code is Six Wun Quebec Oscar Fife. Your presence here is tactically dangerous and compromises our overall mission parameter. Cease and desist all activity on this board. Our “enemies” are deft at computer hacking and may trace you back to our primary locale. You have forced me to compromise my situation to protect your vulnerable flank. This issue will be addressed later.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Taktiq View Post
                  I also agree that we should have the right to offer negatives in addition to any positives in regards to a particular company. But, I believe it should only extend to first-hand knowledge and definitely should stop when the negatives border on slanderous. If there's negative info, no one should name names but, needs to be as specific as possible. Unfortuantely, that doesn't happen as threads tend to get out of hand and become venting sessions of info of friends of friends.

                  BTW CTEXSEC1...nice avatar
                  That would be the mature thing to do, wouldn't it?

                  Thanks, btw. I wasn't sure where I had seen that before. Now I know.

                  Originally posted by Minneapolis Security View Post
                  I don't think the FCC has any interest in regulating what is said on the internet about a local security company and more then they care what a traveler says about their stay at a Holiday Inn Express. Good, bad, or ugly.

                  Probably not the FCC, but a suit could easily be started over the constant slander of a company. What it boils down to is quite simple: we get it. Build a bridge.
                  A wise son hears his father's instruction,but a scoffer does not listen to rebuke. Proverbs 13:1

                  "My “Black-Ops” history ensures that you will never know about the missions I accepted in my younger days, and Vietnam still shudders when it hears the name of a an assasin so skillful and deadly, he is remembered decades later. " G-45

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    The board can do what they want. I think that saying that nothing negative can be said about ANY company goes to far. But, that is my own opinion and with it and 25 cents you could not get a cup of coffee.

                    The new policy limits an already struggling board's revelence. Say I am interested in people's experiences with the new C-Cure 9000 suite of products? Why would I ask here when people can only say good things about it?

                    Say I have been thinking about getting a new pair of Bates boots, why would I ask here?

                    In my opinion the new policy is throwing out the baby with the bath water.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Would be really nice to have state by state sub forums, that way people are not bothered by people asking questions about security companies 1000 miles away.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by caguard View Post
                        Would be really nice to have state by state sub forums, that way people are not bothered by people asking questions about security companies 1000 miles away.
                        There are few enough people here already with the way it is. With the new policy, it effectively eliminates anyone from anywhere asking for opinions on any company, product, or service.

                        So, people should not be asking about any company, product, or service whether it is in their own state or "1000 miles away".

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by CorpSec View Post
                          There are few enough people here already with the way it is. With the new policy, it effectively eliminates anyone from anywhere asking for opinions on any company, product, or service.

                          So, people should not be asking about any company, product, or service whether it is in their own state or "1000 miles away".
                          Good points.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I honestly don't think that the new policy truely restricts our ability to say something negative about a company completely, it only does so in a public fashion. As I have stated in another thread and have yet to be told by management that it can't be done. If you disagree with or have a negative view you could do the following;

                            A thread gets started asking about YourHomeTown Security Co. You can reply with, I worked for them, didn't like the experience if you want to know more PM or E-Mail me.

                            or you can reply with "Yeah I worked for YourHomeTown Security Co. in '04 at a Hospital in Philadelphia. If you want to know more about my experiences with the company PM or E-mail me."

                            The above IMHO says nothing negative about the listed company, because it doesn't say WHY you didn't like the experience. Perhaps you like armed work and the company in question doesn't do armed work, or allow you wear a gold plated desert eagle .50 pistol on your duty belt. Perhaps you are a complete warmbody who is useless and the named company wants only HSLD types regardless of post or assignment. So you don't like their above average standards.

                            Yes the new policy does to some degree restrict your ability to list your points off view, but it does so in a way to protect the forum. I belong to another forum and they have had this policy in place since probably the begining of their forum. I am not surprised that this has come to head, especially since a thread about a MN company had a link to an offsite news webpage. On that page was one comment directing people to SIW to find out about the negatives of said company. That sort of behaviour does throw a negative light upon this forum because now the whole world can truely see what is said on SIW not just people researching a specific company or security issues in general.

                            Anyways, its late and I am sorry if none of this makes sense, in short while I do not agree with the policy I understand the need for it and won't cry over any spilled milk.
                            Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong. - 1 Corinthians 16:13

                            The cleanliness of our hearts, The strength of our limbs, and commitment to our promise.

                            My military contract is up and over. However, I never needed to affirm that I would defend the constitution, our freedoms, our way of life from enemies both domestic and foreign. Do not think that since I am no longer in the military, I will not pick up a weapon to defend my family, my home or my country. - Me!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Let's put it another way. It's an abuse of privileges on a public forum like this to play whup-ass on a particular company or individual and it isn't fair to members who need the board for legitimate purposes because it puts the whole thing at risk. Better to observe some proprieties than to have the board shut down, no?

                              And of course there's nothing stopping anyone who wants to start their own Crap-on-Avalon forum, or blog maybe, and it doesn't even have to cost you a dime. When it's your own personal sandbox you can crap in it or do whatever blows your skirt up - and at your own personal risk. Just don't do it in someone else's sandbox where the rest of us have to deal with it. I don't want to come to SIW someday and get a "404 - Page Not Found" message - and don't think it can't happen.
                              Last edited by SecTrainer; 05-17-2010, 09:46 AM.
                              "Every betrayal begins with trust." - Brian Jacques

                              "I can't predict the future, but I know that it'll be very weird." - Anonymous

                              "There is nothing new under the sun." - Ecclesiastes 1:9

                              "History, with all its volumes vast, hath but one page." - Lord Byron

                              Comment

                              300x250

                              Collapse

                              Mid 300x250

                              Collapse

                              Taboola

                              Collapse

                              Super Leaderboard

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X