Comments on Something like a Subscription
Last modified by Administrator on 2023/02/17 01:53
- Manage
- Copy
- Actions
- Export
- Print Preview
- Viewers
- Source
- Children
- Content
- Attachments
- History
- Information
- Likes
Export
Choose the export format from the list below:
$services.rendering.render($uix.execute(), 'html/5.0')
$services.rendering.render($uix.execute(), 'html/5.0')
$services.rendering.render($uix.execute(), 'html/5.0')
- Office Formats (3)
-
Export as Open Document Text (ODT) format using the Office Server
-
Export as Portable Document Format (PDF) using the Web Browser
-
Export as Rich Text Format (RTF) using the Office Server
-
- Other Formats (1)
-
Export as HyperText Markup Language (HTML)
-
Export as
Select the pages to export:
- Legend:
- Created Page
- Modified Extension Page
- Clean Extension Page
Oh c'mon now. That's just malicious. That was a bona fide comment Joe. You're a bad moderator.
No, that was my bad. The page was created by "Unknown User" and initially believed to be nefarious. I then discovered the author and reported the issue to the xwiki folks to understand why a registered user who created content would be listed as "unknown user."
I am looking to try and restore the comment.
Again, my bad - and my apologies.
Patrick
Your comment led to another thought. One of the practical issues with managing a wiki is the threads, specifically the length that threads can grow to and the tendency they have of forking or evolving on to other topics.
One of the practices we'd like to promote is that comments are addressed within the document they are made on. So for example, as each comment is made (good or bad) the wiki/page moderator or any other registered user should incorporate the comment (true to the spirit - but maybe not the tone) in to the page (or other relevant space on the wiki) so that if the commenter returned (or another visitor with the same question/issue) they would see the page addresses their concern(s).
So looking at this page and comments, Joseph should take your comments and include them in the context of the page. This should not mean it is an endorsement, but it should be a fair representation of the comments made. For example, the article should be posted to a "references" section with a brief description, and/or the suggested response to Google deactivating the glasses may be added to the page under a section "consumer response/activism."
This process will allow all comments to be considered and incorporated while reducing the likelihood of anyones ideas to be lost in a long thread, or overshadowed by another subject sparked from a comment.
I've created a page for this at: How This Wiki Works "Comments appreciated"
For other readers, my original comment here was deleted for no obvious reason. There are no stated restrictions on comments here and ironically the topic is about restrictions created by Google pertaining to their glasses-device. I note the comment was deleted about 3 hrs after my post around 9:30 in the history-documentation on this wiki. I expect this comment to be deleted this morning as well (for no good reason again). But before that is done I'll point to this article about google glass that startled me and possibly Joe and others here
Google can deactivate Glass remotely if you lend it to a friend.... !!!? Google may remotely deactivate Glass if you sell it or lend to a friend ...http://www.google.com/url?q=http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2013/04/google-may-remotely-deactivate-glass-if-you-sell-it-or-lend-to-a-friend/&sa=U&ei=rO7wUsq1AcqwygHXkYCQDw&ved=0CCwQFjAD&sig2=4XP0CGYV17koSYRuQ-YBig&usg=AFQjCNGlg2kTVCbuc9wncUk528xUSMAwng
The consumer-retribution for this type of thing should be to boycott google glass and find an alternative wearable computer just as many are now attempting to find alternatives to the search engine google. Connection monopoly should be railed against
so too excessive device restrictionand especially remote control device restriction. By the way, cars can be remotely deactivated by police now.This is a potentially interesting forum but if the restrictions on anonymous comments becomes so hard-boiled as to become impossible to contribute in a creative way, it only contributes to the same restrictions against personal freedom that google is creating. Now... go ahead and delete this entire comment knowing you're doing essentially what google is doing if you do.
Also, you're correct there are no restrictions on commenting/comments, we do want to foster discussions. However, we do have a use policy: see http://osi.xwiki.com/bin/OSI+Operations/Code+of+Conduct+for+OSI+Wiki
Hello Anoymous, I'm seeing this thread for the first time just now. I'm not sure why this instance of x-wiki's not notifying me of comments. I guess I'd better check a setting somewhere.
It appears that OSI General Manager Patrick (i.e. Administrator) has explained that the software tagged your input as coming from "unknown user" which could have been blogspam, which he apologised for. After his explanation, you then responded with genuine blogspam. Can you please explain your purpose? I trust you'll understand when we delete that at some point.
As to your original comment, what's your point? Did the syllabus leave that impression that we supported Google's reported approach? That's hardly the case.
Joseph