8/6/2008 2:11:00 PM

From an Admin stand point I usually encourage people to use the report feature when they see someone violating our Terms of Service.

One thing I have found is that the anonymity of the Internet fosters hotheadedness. Therefore, one never knows how terribly the recipient of a warning will respond. This is not to say that Mr. Silva has a tendency to that sort of behavior. (However, his response certainly does seem to indicate that it is in the realm of possibility that it would be so.)

We provide a service with a Terms of Service to which everyone agrees to abide by. Outlined in that service is how we will deal with violations of our Terms of Service. Rather than our members having to deal with this sort of unpleasantness we offer to deal with the situation privately.

In my opinion, a person does the right thing when he/she reports what is perceived to be a violation of our rules so that the situation can be reviewed and the appropriate action taken.

I doubt that the service provider in this case lost any sleep over any perceived threats of a law suit from Mr. Abanes. Such a suit standing up in court would be near impossible.

I believe, rather, that they did much the same thing I do. Look at the content and determine if it violated their rules. They found that it indeed did break their rules and sent a notice to Mr. Silva requesting that the content be removed for violations of the Terms of Service. (This is actually more than what we do in that we remove the content ourselves and notify the offender of the action taken.)

In this Admin's view Mr. Abanes did the right thing.

On the other hand...

As a public person myself with my very own hate site devoted to all things evil about moi, I echo the sentiments of earthless. I feel it is a waste of time to hunt after individuals intent on using the Internet as a vehicle to smear public individuals/ministries. If a public individual is unable to endure the criticism, no matter how inaccurate, of such actions then it may be wise to consider another form of activity.

We live in a Web 2.0 world. The people traveling the Information Highway no longer are content with reading the billboards they pass along the road. Instead they are using article comments, blogs, video, mico-blogging and other forms of communication to engage on the topics that they are passionate about. It would be better for a public person/ministry to engage the people on the highway than to seek to have the message of those with whom they disagree removed. It won't stay removed. It will just pop up in some other vehicle traveling the road.

I have no doubt that Mr. Abanes has learned from this entire situation. He may even be able to recognize, if not now perhaps later, that he has himself made some mistakes in dealing with this issue and will strive to apply it to future situations on the Internet.

In either case, I welcome his participation in our community and look forward to him sharing the wealth of his wisdom with us in the realm of apologetics and the dangers facing the modern church.

Lastly, Mr. Silva should have reviewed the Terms of Service and determined if they were rules by which he wished to be governed. The World Wide Web is a big place. Judging by all the hacker sites that exist, it isn't hard to find a Internet service with rules suited to a individual's message and/or style.

When asked to remove the content for violations of the Terms of Service Mr. Silva should have complied as per his agreement and then considered finding a site more suitable for his style.

There's my less than 2 cents.

Fritz
Senior Manager of Social Media
fritz@salemwebnetwork.com

* * * * * *