BBO Discussion Forums: Discussion about free speech in bbo forums - BBO Discussion Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Discussion about free speech in bbo forums Split away from another vugraph-related thread

#1 User is offline   USViking 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 222
  • Joined: 2008-April-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greensboro NC USA

Posted 2009-September-08, 11:36

Thanks so much to BBO for the generous and priceless vugraph coverage.

Both display and commentary are highest possible quality.

I did notice in the AM 9/8 coverage that the Democracy of the viewership
favored both Bermuda Bowl semis by about a ten to one margin.

I was therefore a bit suprised to see the Italy-Bulgaria BB semis dropped
from the PM coverage.

Personally I am with the apparent viewership majority who would "vote"
to see Italy-Bulgaria covered from start to finish without interruption.
0

#2 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,807
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2009-September-08, 11:40

USViking, on Sep 8 2009, 08:36 PM, said:

Thanks so much to BBO for the generous and priceless vugraph coverage.

Both display and commentary are highest possible quality.

I did notice in the AM 9/8 coverage that the Democracy of the viewership
favored both Bermuda Bowl semis by about a ten to one margin.

I was therefore a bit suprised to see the Italy-Bulgaria BB semis dropped
from the PM coverage.

Personally I am with the apparent viewership majority who would "vote"
to see Italy-Bulgaria covered from start to finish without interruption.

BAck when I was doing Vugraph at the Junior Championships in Oz, the Vugraph roster was dictated from on high...

The WBF officials decided what shows would be available (and there was very little opportunity to influence their decision)
Alderaan delenda est
0

#3 User is offline   USViking 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 222
  • Joined: 2008-April-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greensboro NC USA

Posted 2009-September-08, 12:33

hrothgar, on Sep 8 2009, 12:40 PM, said:

BAck when I was doing Vugraph at the Junior Championships in Oz, the Vugraph roster was dictated from on high...

The WBF officials decided what shows would be available (and there was very little opportunity to influence their decision)

I considered what you suggest as a possibility, but discounted it.

I should have placed more weight on the inevitable baleful influence
of an international bureaucracy.

I should thank my lucky stars the bureaucracy is even letting Vugraph
in the room! (I seem to recall our esteemed site owner starting a thread
about bureaucratic paranoiac concerns over vugraph coverage)

I would hope the clearcut results of the viewership "Democracy"
would sway even the stodgiest bureaucrat. Even if the bureaucratas
are unswayable they should be appraised of the numbers which
show their dictates to be poorly concieved.
0

#4 User is offline   fred 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,590
  • Joined: 2003-February-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, USA

Posted 2009-September-08, 13:50

I have deleted 2 posts from this thread.

I know it is hard for a few of our members to show even a small amount of common sense so I will spell it out for you:

Please do not use our site to do anything that might be deemed as public promotion of other online bridge sites.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

#5 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,807
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2009-September-09, 05:58

fred, on Sep 8 2009, 10:50 PM, said:

I have deleted 2 posts from this thread.

I know it is hard for a few of our members to show even a small amount of common sense so I will spell it out for you:

Please do not use our site to do anything that might be deemed as public promotion of other online bridge sites.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

BBO is a service industry. It's rasion d'tat should be providing value to its members.

Trying to shut down the free flow of information might help promote lock in, however, this is an intrinsically defensive move. I normally associate this type of behaviour with firms that are afraid of competition.

In all seriousness: Who cares if a few users go to a competitor's site? Do you really believe that any of the competitors offer a product that is comprable to your own? (I've looked at them. I certainly don't) Moreover, if said competitors do offer a better product, the right thing to do is to improve your own offering not playing games trying to prevent your flock from discovering new information.

It's one thing to restrict competitors from posting blatant advertisements on the BBO forums. However, deleting threads because they mention the existence of XYZZY bridge strikes me as profoundly unhealthy...
Alderaan delenda est
0

#6 User is offline   glen 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,608
  • Joined: 2003-May-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ottawa, Canada
  • Interests:Military history, WW II wargames

Posted 2009-September-09, 06:16

fred, on Sep 8 2009, 03:50 PM, said:

... Please do not use our site to do anything that might be deemed as public promotion of other online bridge sites. ...

I think at some point BBO needs to update the 2003 Terms of Service thread:

http://forums.bridge...hp?showtopic=33

Understandably (though imo wrong), you want BBO forums to include these terms of service:

1) "Do not use our site to do anything that might be deemed as public promotion of other online bridge sites."
2) Do not use our site to do anything that would be clearly deemed as running down our online bridge site and/or its services.
3) I'm not sure of what the wording would be, but there is now some sort of rule, or clause so to speak, on BBO forums about linking, or link lots, to external sites.

At this time you are deleting postings (not mine, this is my first and last posting in this thread) that do not cross the terms of service.
'All you are is mean / And a liar, and pathetic, and alone in life / And mean, and mean, and mean, and mean ... And all you're ever gonna be is mean / Why you gotta be so mean?' Taylor Swift
0

#7 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,071
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Getting back into golf after a very long layoff.

Posted 2009-September-09, 08:11

I think both of you guys are seriously confused about the purpose of BBO.

BBO does not have a raison d'etat. It is not a public utility. It has a raison d'etre which is to make a profit as a commercial enterprise, so there are no issues with censorship and free speech here.

If I log onto my yahoo portal to get my mail, do you think I'm going to see ads for MSN?

Perhaps you are right that it 'won't hurt' if a few users drift or even defect over to (other) sites. BBO has massive market share, but it always wasn't the case. I can remember in 2002 / 2003 when several on line bridge startups were trying to get established. The success or failure of a site was perched on the edge of a knife and things could have gone the other way had BBO not reached a critical tipping point.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

#8 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,807
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2009-September-09, 08:41

Phil, on Sep 9 2009, 05:11 PM, said:

I think both of you guys are seriously confused about the purpose of BBO.

BBO does not have a raison d'etat. It is not a public utility. It has a raison d'etre which is to make a profit as a commercial enterprise, so there are no issues with censorship and free speech here.

If I log onto my yahoo portal to get my mail, do you think I'm going to see ads for MSN?

Phil:

Don't get me wrong: I am all in favor of Fred making money off BBO.
I want BBO to be as successful as possible.

Forgive me if I am being naive, however, I think that the way that you succeed as a service organization is by providing high quality service to your customer base. I consider (almost) anything else a distraction.

For what its worth, I never made any claims about censorship or free space. This is a straw man that you introduced. I also specifically differentiated between full blown commercial advertisements and passing comments from well established members of the BBO community.

This is Fred's site. He is obviously welcome to do whatever he damn well pleases. I am simply commenting that I think that I that these types of silly little games are a troublesome sign.
Alderaan delenda est
0

#9 User is offline   fred 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Admin
  • Posts: 4,590
  • Joined: 2003-February-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Las Vegas, USA

Posted 2009-September-09, 08:44

hrothgar, on Sep 9 2009, 11:58 AM, said:

fred, on Sep 8 2009, 10:50 PM, said:

I have deleted 2 posts from this thread.

I know it is hard for a few of our members to show even a small amount of common sense so I will spell it out for you:

Please do not use our site to do anything that might be deemed as public promotion of other online bridge sites.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

BBO is a service industry. It's rasion d'tat should be providing value to its members.

Trying to shut down the free flow of information might help promote lock in, however, this is an intrinsically defensive move. I normally associate this type of behaviour with firms that are afraid of competition.

In all seriousness: Who cares if a few users go to a competitor's site? Do you really believe that any of the competitors offer a product that is comprable to your own? (I've looked at them. I certainly don't) Moreover, if said competitors do offer a better product, the right thing to do is to improve your own offering not playing games trying to prevent your flock from discovering new information.

It's one thing to restrict competitors from posting blatant advertisements on the BBO forums. However, deleting threads because they mention the existence of XYZZY bridge strikes me as profoundly unhealthy...

Richard,

I don't really care if you find my request to be "profoundly unhealthy" or "intrinsically defensive" or if you think that you know better than I do what BBO's "rasion d'tat should be".

If you reread your own last paragraph, reread the request I made, and turn on your brain for just a few seconds, I suspect you will be able to figure out the reason for my request.

But if that is too much to hope for, perhaps you will understand this: when you have your own online bridge site I will respect the policies that you prefer. If I find such policies to be highly objectionable, I will either leave your site or I will let you know via some sort of private communication so that I don't force you into an "intrinsically defensive" position.

I don't think it is too much to ask for you to do the same for me.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

#10 User is offline   Phil 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 10,071
  • Joined: 2008-December-11
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North Texas, USA
  • Interests:Getting back into golf after a very long layoff.

Posted 2009-September-09, 08:54

hrothgar, on Sep 9 2009, 09:41 AM, said:

For what its worth, I never made any claims about censorship or free space. This is a straw man that you introduced.

You mentioned the 'shutting down the free flow of information',

If this isn't about censorship (or free space - assumed you meant speech), I think you should clarify your above statement before you accuse me of bringing the straw man into the debate.
Hi y'all!

Winner - BBO Challenge bracket #6 - February, 2017.
0

#11 User is offline   NickRW 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 1,948
  • Joined: 2008-April-30
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sussex, England

Posted 2009-September-09, 09:14

fred, on Sep 9 2009, 02:44 PM, said:

But if that is too much to hope for, perhaps you will understand this: when you have your own online bridge site I will respect the policies that you prefer. If I find such policies to be highly objectionable, I will either leave your site or I will let you know via some sort of private communication so that I don't force you into an "intrinsically defensive" position.

I don't think it is too much to ask for you to do the same for me.

Fred Gitelman
Bridge Base Inc.
www.bridgebase.com

Yes, of course.

The one thing I would suggest is that by removing a post and saying that you have done so does more to promote other sites than simply doing nothing. It makes people wonder what it was that someone else decided they couldn't see.

I learnt that in matters of marketing and sales, simply do not do anything which draws attention to the competition is the best strategy.
"Pass is your friend" - my brother in law - who likes to bid a lot.
0

#12 User is offline   USViking 

  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Full Members
  • Posts: 222
  • Joined: 2008-April-20
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greensboro NC USA

Posted 2009-September-09, 09:56

I regret having given offence, but I have seen so many references
to competing bridge sites on this board that I believe I was justified
in assuming that ownership here would regard my own reference
as innocuous.


The following edited version of glen's post expresses other feelings
of mine:

glen, on Sep 9 2009, 07:16 AM, said:

I think at some point BBO needs to update the 2003 Terms of Service thread:

...BBO (should) include these terms of service:

..."Do not use our site to do anything that might be deemed as public promotion of other online bridge sites."

...you are deleting postings...that do not (violate) the terms of service. 


Of course terms of service are not meant to be exhaustive,
and certainly ownership is entitled to promote its interests
as it sees fit regardless.

However, I did read the terms of service when I joined here,
and if such a clause had been included in them I might have
remembered it, and not posted the offending comments.
0

#13 User is offline   hrothgar 

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Advanced Members
  • Posts: 13,807
  • Joined: 2003-February-13
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Natick, MA
  • Interests:Travel
    Cooking
    Brewing
    Hiking

Posted 2009-September-09, 14:02

NickRW, on Sep 9 2009, 06:14 PM, said:

I learnt that in matters of marketing and sales, simply do not do anything which draws attention to the competition is the best strategy.

I was told "It depends"

I suspect that the folks working on both the Mac and the Microsoft TV campaigns were told the same thing.
Alderaan delenda est
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users