NAFPS & people's reputations

[Moma_porcupine]

It comes up from time to time that people are concerned that someones reputation could be unfairly damaged by someone posting a rumor or outright lie about them .

It seems most people posting here get their information off the peoples own websites and what is discussed is almost always the unlikely things people claim about themselves. From what I have seen , not many people post reporting personal experiences.

Posting a personal experience that can't be easily proven is risky because if it really happened the experience will likely identify the person posting it, and if the person reported here is abusive they will likely retaliate. If it didn't happen , people can be sued for defamation. Fear of retaliation probably means that only a small percentage of the problems and abuse people see gets reported here, and not vic a versa. This is certainly true for myself.

It seems if people don't live in a Native community , and they don't have this to provide referrences , they need to be skeptical and ask questions and except for allegations of serious criminal behavior , I really doubt anyone with a good reputation in their community would be affected by something someone said on a message board in cyberspace.

I suppose there is also political situations where an effort is made to discredit a person who is already somewhat controversial - and these people may be affected by what is said in cyberspace, but to expect any message board to be unaffected by people engaging in political manouvering is probably unrealistic

But I can see that on the rare occasions when someone posts a serious allegation of criminal behavior, there is a danger that people could wrongly hurt someones reputation by posting a personal experience that never happened , or a rumor they heard about someone. When I see people doing that I always feel a bit concerned about that possibility.

I'm not saying I think this happens very often and compared to things I regularly see posted on other message boards, this message board tends to be well moderated and cautious about protecting people from being wrongly accused. And I think the damage prevented by this message board probably vastly outweighs the damage that might be done by someone posting a outright lie.

But I'm wondering if it might be an improvement if the moderators made a note that "research is needed" on the occasional post that make a serious but unverifiable claim of a bad personal experience?

I know this is often done but I have seen a couple instances where it hasn't been.

It seems that would reduce the possibility of someones reputation being wrongly hurt, without reducing the ability of NAFPS to warn people when there is a problem...

I suppose another possibility might be if the moderators who don't have a signiture line , carried a similar warning - I'm not sure how it could be worded - but maybe something like

"All claims made in cyberspace are questionable and should be researched and verified"

But maybe that would be overdoing it ... ?

I don't know if this would be an improvement or not, but it would be good if nobodies reputation was ever unfairly damaged by anything posted on this message board - and though that is probably impossible to achieve on any message board , there may be room for improvement.

I put it out there for people to consider.

(edited for rambling disorderly wording)

[Cat]

Hi Moma,
This is Cat - I am new to the board in that I have used it as a reference site for a while now and have really never posted except something on Hank Niesse a whiiile ago....

I think this is a real good site for people to go to and have always liked it and referred people to it...

Yet I dont see anything that can be done about people who might come in with a personal vendeta on someone that is not based on fact..... but the proof and reality comes out sooner or later....

You can ask people to do some sort of research before they bring something to the board.... but you cannot control anothers actions.....

What are some ideas you may have???And that question is out there for others on this board also...

I myself know personally of a huge fraud.... but wont post on it as it is only my word with no real evidence to back it up..... a person would have to go there and see for themselves in order to know what i say is true...

Well, thats my 2 cents for what they are worth:)
Have a good one!!!

Cat

[glendadeer]

Hello all...Like Cat, I have come to this board as well for reference...and just recently joined...

Mama..very good question...

[frederica]

It is a good question, I've thought about it more recently in the last couple of months. One that that was already accomplished about a month ago was that only the Administration could move or open a thread to Frauds. It had to be started  in the catagory of Research Needed. You would think that would be clear. But it seems several have had personal agenda to begin with. I think we had a family feud not long ago also, plus a couple more.  What happens several people, including NAFPS ends up being used to accomplish their goals.  Unfortunately, you can almost see it coming, but with these machines you have to wait for it to happen. It like all these pre-everthing they do for schools, jobs, they have never panned out to be that reliable. It going to depend on what the person has in their head and heart as to what they are going to do. I not sure it controlable. But, if anyone can think of anything, put it up.

[Moma_porcupine]

It's also difficult because implying that a real victim of abuse might not be believable can be enough to push someone right over the edge ... Probably that is more true in real life, than in cyberspace, but someone without support in real life could be very vulnerable.

I suppose if it was a general policy to post a warning that "research is needed", with all unverifiable allegations of a personal bad experience, people would not be so inclined to feel they specifically were not being believed.

I don't think doing this would take away from the warning these reports provide, and if anything I think people can be more open to considering something if they feel they are being encouraged to think about something from all angles , and not that one idea is being forced on them.

I think being a moderator with regards to some of the situations that come up on this board must be a really difficult job..... 

[earthw7]

I want to thank all the people who help with this board because it is a hard job.
Personal dislike are a problem and how to deal with them is hard.
That is why i like the research area so that people can look into if this person
who is claiming fraud is correct or just has personal issues with another person.

[frederica]

That's an idea Moma P. It's kinda like what is done with school papers to cover all the bases so to speak. In case something was overlooked and/or not conclusive. Do you think the orginial poster should do this, or should this be done on the follow up post? What I recall has happen over the last several months is it start off ok, then takes off in another direction.  How do you anticipiate this? That's what I not sure we can control. From what I hear there an increase of this type of fighting or flaming going on now over the internet. What you say about victim abuse is true also. Our problem is we do not know people's motives when they come here.  Nothing to do with the subject, but on the news this morning 6 teenage girls are under arrest for assult and comspiracy for an attack on a  peer who posted something on MYSPACE.  They filmed it and were going to show the assult vidio on UTUBE.  This is becoming a game to some,  I think the Feds passed a law July 2007 about cyper stalking and bulling, but it has changed much, or hasn't been used much yet.

[Moma_porcupine]

I don't know ... it is tricky

I know much of the stuff that is really questionable just gets edited out and discussed privately till it is sorted out, and often there is probably things known behind the scenes, that lead to some allegations being left in public veiw.

Maybe if a serious allegation is made, but it isn't clear if it is true or not, a standard statement could be added to that particular post, as a reply or an edit, and also a sticky could explain that this will be done to all serious unverifiable allegations.

I guess a moderator could insert or reply to these allegations with a standard phrase something like ;

"Allegations made in
cyberspace maybe false.
Use your common sense
in evaluating this statement."


I am mainly thinking of the really serious allegations - stuff the police would be interested in - I guess allegations of sexual misconduct are also something that could hurt someone seriously enough that if there is any doubt about an allegation, something to bring attention to this uncertainty could accompany the allegation.

I'm not so much thinking of people who object to seeing themselves discussed in research needed. If people are a part of public life, as long as what is said about them is true, I don't see why they should have any objection to having what they do for the public discussed.

I wasn't thinking any of the moderators should be able to anticipate where something was going - or stop people from bickering before it starts - LOL - You may have to start calling one of the many phsycics we have listed here to get predictions. The moderators already seem to do really well at discouraging communication which is pointless. I was just thinking of this for when people say somebody did something seriously wrong, and nobody is sure if it's true or not.

The moderators probably have a better idea of what is behind some of these posts, and are in a better position to judge how best to deal with this sort of situation. I just know it's something that occasionally makes me wonder.

[frederica]

I don't know ... it is tricky

I know much of the stuff that is really questionable just gets edited out and discussed privately till it is sorted out, and often there is probably things known behind the scenes, that lead to some allegations being left in public veiw.

Maybe if a serious allegation is made, but it isn't clear if it is true or not, a standard statement could be added to that particular post, as a reply or an edit, and also a sticky could explain that this will be done to all serious unverifiable allegations.

I guess a moderator could insert or reply to these allegations with a standard phrase something like ;

"Allegations made in
cyberspace maybe false.
Use your common sense
in evaluating this statement."


I am mainly thinking of the really serious allegations - stuff the police would be interested in - I guess allegations of sexual misconduct are also something that could hurt someone seriously enough that if there is any doubt about an allegation, something to bring attention to this uncertainty could accompany the allegation.

Fortunately, we haven't had any of the very serious ones involving sexual misconduct. Only one I remember is the rather vague 2nd hand statement on the Burnside group. If  I recall the County Sheriff was notified. They later disappeared, resurfaced briefly, then disappeared again.  There were several things involved in that.  Mostly what we seen over the past few months if someone being angry with somone else. At least we lucky there. But your ideas are good, and something to consider.

[Moma_porcupine]

Your right , stuff like that rarely gets posted and when it does someone usually asks enough questions the message is the same as the disclaimer I suggested .

The last situation I remember that made me feel a bit concerned was this one.

http://www.newagefraud.org/smf/index.php?topic=574.msg7549#msg7549

Not that I agree with anyone selling Ceremony, and that is proven by his advertisements - but just because he does this, doesn't mean Carla's allegations are true.

But that post happened back in August 2007. ( Maybe one of the moderators knew more than was posted and this is why it was left without being questioned )

I guess if people have other concerns they can point them out.

[frederica]

I forgot about that one, the person make the allegation, then never posted again to verify or explain the statement, and it was never addressed. But that is a good example of what can happen. It was completely off the subject being discussed. It was personal and never explained. There is a DISCLAIMER:All new persons must read available were it states New Members Start Here.  taken as a whole it states people that post should verify their information prior to posting, they are responsible for what they post and what they post is not necessarily the view of NAFPS. Of course I am not sure how many people actually read it.

[matt e]

create a section at the very top with the disclaimer in it, with a single post going into more detail, then lock it.

also edit the text on the sign up page to include the disclaimer. this way you make it available to visitors, and those posting have to directly agree to it. and someone breaking it can then be grounds for legal action, by the board or the one targeted for misuse of the board and possible damages to the reputation of the board and/or the person being attacked without proof.

Most of the people listed, the questions come directly from websites, with information available to the public, with links so anyone can verify for themselves. The posts I have seen that seem to be based on personal issues with someone, the staff is always very quick to jump in with "where's your proof?" (as well as many regular members). they do a good job of jumping on a situation before it gets too out of hand. being an administrator or moderator on a forum is no easy task(I used to be both an admin, and a mod on a couple other forums, because the owners were friends and asked me to help them out-never again), and being one on this forum has got to be a headache sometimes. Good job guys.   

[Barnaby_McEwan]

create a section at the very top with the disclaimer in it, with a single post going into more detail, then lock it.

also edit the text on the sign up page to include the disclaimer. this way you make it available to visitors, and those posting have to directly agree to it.

You had to check a box when joining the forum indicating that you had read and agreed to the disclaimer. You did read it, didn't you?

The posts I have seen that seem to be based on personal issues with someone, the staff is always very quick to jump in with "where's your proof?" (as well as many regular members). they do a good job of jumping on a situation before it gets too out of hand.

I am sorry not to have been quick enough this time.

being one on this forum has got to be a headache sometimes. Good job guys.

Thank you - and thanks also to everyone else who's written similar things recently.

[matt e]

yeah i did read it. i wasn't very clear on what i meant, it is usually around 2-3 am when i am here, sorry.

what i meant was, there is a code that forces people to scroll to the end of a text box(thus implying they have read what the box says), before the agree check box appears. what I meant to say was put the disclaimer on the sign up page, then they have to scroll through it before the sign up form appears.