HomeFactopediaBrainoffsRankingsCommunityLog In
You know 0 facts





Mon 23 Feb 15 #1 
shaunt
Contributor


Today there was a brainoff on Gary Glitter who is a convicted paedophile.  Please can all references to him (or Paul Gadd) be removed from the site?




Knows 58506 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Tue 24 Feb 15 #2 
JMK
Editor

Now that poses a problem in that the subjects where he is removed will have gaps. And who else would need to be removed. I have removed him and Rolf Harris from all the subjects where it doesn't matter. At the moment they are both still in UK Number Ones as this would leave gaps in the subject. So I am asking do I remove them altogether or leave them in that subject but add a note about their convictions. What do the members think?




Knows 47700 facts
like | send message


Wed 25 Feb 15 #3 
kevg
The Grumpinator

Note about convictions will do for me as their records are part of history. I can think of loads of people I wouldn't like in real life but whose records I've bought. Wasn't Lady Gaga good at the Oscars ?




Knows 40110 facts
like | send message


Wed 25 Feb 15 #4 
sally906
Contributor

Add a note about their convictions - History is strewn with no good people and we still answer questions about them.

 

Doesn't mean we approve or condone their behaviour.




Knows 27432 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Wed 25 Feb 15 #5 
shaunt
Contributor

Thanks JMK... this really got to me, apologies if I caused you any extra work.




Knows 58506 facts
like | send message


Wed 25 Feb 15 #6 
JMK
Editor

No worries. Have added a note in the extra info for them.




Knows 47700 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #7 
jmaxg
Contributor

The Rolf Harris thing is still weird to me. Not that I have properly checked out all court transcripts because:

  1. I hadn't heard of this until a little while ago, and
  2. It's hard to get a hold of court transcipts anyway.

But assuming everyone who is baying for Rolf's blood is right, can someone give me a summary?




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #8 
jmaxg
Contributor

As for removing facts related to convicted people......common sense should tell you that is not practical.  Neither should it be warranted.

Adding notes to additional info is fine.  Removing references to them entirely from the Factopedia is an idiotic request.

I am of the belief that we don't "burn books" here.  Well good, because removing Gary Glitter from the Factopedia is the same thing.

Annotating him is fine.  Removing him is not.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #9 
shaunt
Contributor

"Idiotic"?  How rude.




Knows 58506 facts
like | send message
3 people like this post


Fri 27 Feb 15 #10 
jmaxg
Contributor

Sorry mate, but what you propose is difficult from an ex-editors point of view.

The idea of extracting "Gary Glitter" from every known reference in the Factopedia is hard because of one very solid principal........facts are added to, not subtracted from.

What you have to remember mate, is that the Factopedia was built to handle "facts", not perceived truth.

It may be a fact that "Gary Glitter" was "top of the pops" sometime in the 1970s.  If so, and that fact is there, I don't think Factacular is in a place to remove it.  For a very good reason.  Factacular cannot and will not change history.

We can, however, annotate those facts in place.  And, I believe the editors, including the boss, have said they will seek to do that.

Given the circumstances, and how Factacular works, I believe that is all that can be expected.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #11 
sally906
Contributor

You've only just heard of the Rolf Harris trial? I heard rumours you lived under a rock but didn't realise it was true :)

In summary: 

Aussie icon Rolf Harris was tried and convicted of 12 counts of indecent assault to 4 children between the late 60s and 80s the youngest of whom was 7 when he started. One of them was his daughter's best friend.

Other women came forward and reported him but were not included in the trial because the offences didn't take place in England.  He did appeal, but the appeal was withdrawn.

 




Knows 27432 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #12 
jmaxg
Contributor

I guess "Jake, the Peg" and his "extra leg" are now explained.

You said he appealed but that the appeal was withdrawn?  By Rolf?




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #13 
jmaxg
Contributor

I ask that not because I am Rolf's side.  I just wanna know if he was the one that ordered the appeal withdrawn.

In this country, we have the whole "Bill Cosby" thing.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #14 
shaunt
Contributor

Here is another fact for you; Gadd got a 16 year sentence today:

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-31657929




Knows 58506 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Fri 27 Feb 15 #15 
jmaxg
Contributor

Ok....read it....he's a bastard....got it.

What would you have Factacular.com do now?

If it's "remove his pedophelic arse from the Factopedia entirely" then I, as a member would say "no" to that.  I don't care how many "likes" I see against your post.

Annotate his entries up the ying yang, if that's what the Boss agrees to.

But Factacular should not remove facts.  By definition, facts cannot be removed.

It may be hurtful to you shaunt, but there is a bigger question at large.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Fri 27 Feb 15 #16 
Doctor Factenstein
Evil Genius

Your respective standpoints are both understood. Thanks both.

Let's be clear here. Facts can and have been removed. In particular, facts about Gary Glitter have been removed already. The only ones which remain are those in the UK Number Ones topic - as JMK questions whether it's worth removing them and creating gaps in what is, otherwise, a canonical topic.

So, there's no bigger question at large, facts can be removed and they will be where they're deemed incorrect or inappropriate.

This is, ultimately, just a fun site.

There will be no more BioBrainoffs on Gary Glitter - thanks for bringing that to our attention.




Knows 34637 facts
like | send message
2 people like this post


Fri 27 Feb 15 #17 
jmaxg
Contributor

Sometimes, it's great to belong to this site.

Sometimes, it's not.

Other times, it's not great to belong to this site.  When they drag out dinosours, not because they have anything to add, but just because they are "imposing", which has happened all too often because Factacular.com hasn't a clue......

I thought the idea was Stu, that you go to the background and not impose on people......which you have a tendency to do.

The fact was that nothing had changed and the "argument" (if there was one) was being solved.

So that begs the question, why did you comment anyway?




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #18 
jmaxg
Contributor

I gotta save this conversation to my browser bookmarks.

Curiosity requires it.  I hope everyone else does too.

It's not a question of whether I win or lose now......as if that was a question anyway.

But I guess it is now.  The problem with all this, of course, is that the "BOSS" looks emasculated.......without any real power.

It's probable that a number of guys, and yes, editors, probablky thought that anyway.

I guess they didn't expect it to be confirmed.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #19 
Doctor Factenstein
Evil Genius

I've made no changes above and beyond what JMK did - I was merely stating a position. JMK removed the facts herself (and said so).

 




Knows 34637 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #20 
jmaxg
Contributor

The boss made changes to existing posts......wow......thanks for that.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Fri 27 Feb 15 #21 
sally906
Contributor

The withdrawal came from Rolf's camp after he was refused permission by a judge to lodge an appeal - apparently there was another avenue but this has not been pursued and I think a deadline for that has passed.   Appeals were also lodged over the 'leniency' of the sentence (just over 5 years) but these two were denied as it was said that the time would not be extended due to his age.




Knows 27432 facts
like | send message


Sun 1 Mar 15 #22 
jmaxg
Contributor

LOL  Look, whatever.

To the demands of shaunt, i suggested not to do ANYTHING.

So the BOSS drags up Doctor Factenstien to imtimidate us and put us in our place.

His response?  "Hey, we are a fun site remember!  Let's do something!"

But, but....doesn't that make things harder for editors?

The counter-intuitiveness of this is impressive to say the least.

But hey, when the BOSS feels not up to the task and so the "INTIMIDATOR" is brought forward, I guess the rest of us should just shut the ^%&* up.

I mean, that's what "fun" sites do, right?




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message


Sun 1 Mar 15 #23 
kevg
The Grumpinator

The Intimidator is brought forward ? Rubbish, I never moved off me couch, stop making it up. I sympathise with Shaunt but it's Facts so a note in the extra information as suggested is all we need. Now stop being silly and play nice.

If anyone suggests banning references to Hitler I shall be most displeased !!




Knows 40110 facts
like | send message


Sun 1 Mar 15 #24 
shaunt
Contributor

For the record, and apologies to those on the site that can read English, but I actually demanded nothing. It was a polite request.

Goodbye.


Knows 58506 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


Sun 1 Mar 15 #25 
JMK
Editor

This matter has been settled. Thanks for bringing the matter to our attention shaunt.




Knows 47700 facts
like | send message


Sat 21 Mar 15 #26 
jmaxg
Contributor

An announcement:

In my comments above I may have inferred that I had a loss of confidence in our Factacular leadership.

I would like to state outright that the above comments of mine were not warranted and a complete mistake due to my emotional state at the time.

I further offer my apologies to shaunt who began the forum and felt the need to withdraw under duress.

I unequivocally state that the conflict in this forum was caused by me and did not need to occur.

I also offer, again, my apologies to shaunt.

Even for a "fun" site, emotions do erupt from time to time.  Some warranted, some not.

This was not warranted.




Knows 33692 facts
like | send message
1 person likes this post


This topic is now closed.






   About - Terms - Privacy Log In