Matt, I assume this applies to TopSEOs type stories.  Is that correct?

Hi Alan - it applies to any and all shame/attack stories. We'll review. We may delete, or we may not. Depends on the overall value/significance of the story.

Alan, I would imagine that tone has a lot to do with the review and deletion process. For a long time, I have found the tone taken in many criticism articles the main problem, not the message. It's possible to highlight undesirable business practices and scams without taking a tone of personal attack, no matter how skeptical one is of the subject. For the most part, I find that it is a matter of skill with the English language. Whilst I've not taken any interest in the content here in a while (this was a coincidental visit!), it strikes me as a good idea to outlaw posts / threads that descend into childish bus stop brawls.

Jane,

While I appreciate your point of view, if I write an article, and if that article garners many comments expressing appreciation for that article, regardless of tone, and if, in spite of tone, the overall message is one seeking positive change in our industry regarding deceptive practices, my personal opinion is that it is a noteworthy article.

Our society has generated a political-correctness attitude that counters this and thus has created a belief that tone should always be polite and respectful. I strongly disagree that it is a matter of skill with the English language.  To say that it is, insults my intelligence.  No, it's not a matter of skill with the language.  It's a matter of delicacy of the reader's mind.

"Whilst I've not taken any interest in the content here in a while." Excuse us peons, Ms Copeland.

Hi Alan,

I guess a real life example of what I find tiresome about people being unnecessarily antagonistic to each other online is when I hear via email that you've called me an elitist douchebag on Twitter :). http://twitter.com/AlanBleiweiss/status/20403838499

I wasn't referring to anything you've written, as I don't think I've read it, but i was agreeing with the sentiment of Matt's decision.

I'm sorry I've never met you in person (some of my best friends speak highly of you), and I apologise if I caused offense. No need to chew me up and spit me out ;) http://twitter.com/AlanBleiweiss/status/20404182347

@Alan, I don't think Jane was talking about anything specific to what you may have written. She was just speaking generally.

@BeantownSEO I'm assuming your comment was meant to be sarcastically ironic by doing the very thing Jane mentioned in her comment, i.e., "...posts / threads that descend into childish bus stop brawls."

(added: Cross posted with Jane's reply which I didn't see first.)

Jane,

When I say "my intelligence", I speak for anyone online who chooses to use a tone that some people find offensive.

You are sharp Jill. However, I still found the comment to be humurous and a subtle (perhaps deliberate or not) shot at the community who still poke their heads in.

I do feel however, after taking a look at Alan's Twitter account and the comments he made regarding a very general comment by another, that they were a bit "over-the-top." If these are the types of things that get people fired up and angry these days to the point they feel it is necessary to resort to blasting out personal name-calling, it just makes me wonder.

Jill,

I think what unfolded in this thread is a good example of why the Sphinn team has chosen to selectively remove attack/shame based entries.  I'm a generally reactive person, and quite often shoot from the hip without fully vetting, processing things, as many people are.

That, in turn, leads to some seriously over the top and quite inflamatory statements.  Given that we live in a world where the "standard" of acceptance regarding interpersonal communication is one in which such statements are considered out of bounds, I can now see where the desire is to have a more civilized forum.

Where this went south is the fact that some of us feel that it is a form of censorship of ideas.  Combine that view with the personalities involved, and it's a powder-keg topic.  I sincerely apologize for my own "anonymized" tweet that was clearly referring to you - upon further enlightenment of who you are as a person, that was not just "over the top" but downright wrong.

Alan, I think you may be referring to Jane in much of your last post not me, correct?

oh duh.  This is what happens when trying to communicate in a thread while working on final revisions of a 20 hour site audit.  Jane, not Jill.  < sigh >

Welcome back, Jane. Sorry your return probably makes you feel attacked, ironically in a thread that's about attacking.

Alan, like Matt said, it'll be something that we'll review case-by-case. The TopSEOs stories have largely been relevant to the entire industry and noteworthy in my view.

thanks for chiming in Danny.  Once again I think this was a case where I pulled one of my infamous "assume first, learn the facts later" stunts in assuming it was more "blanket" than "as appropriate".  Since I do a LOT of rant articles on my blog, and since there are months where as much as 13% of my traffic comes from Sphinn, I panicked.  Then someone tweeted about it in a way that triggered my "this is censorship" mentality.

The final straw was reading today about the Digg scandal.  Kind of like a perfect storm.

In any event, because we have the commenting here and the ability to discuss things, my ability to step back and detatch took hold.  So at the moment, I'm back in the "I respect the integrity of Sphinn's editors" camp.  :-)

As one of the more popular target of stories like this, I can understand that my praise of this move might seem biased in motivation. However, I think it's worth it to say how much I support this move. Just feels really positive and TAGFEE. Bravo Sphinn team.

Jane - I also wanted to chime in because I hate to see folks take heat and not have their friends stand up publicly for them. You know you've always got my support (even though you left just when things were getting awesome ;-) ).

Alan - it was great talking to you last week. I know you're a good guy with good intentions; hopefully you and Jane will get to meet in person someday. She was an absolutely terrific person to work with, and I still miss her keenly. I'm sure you'll find a lot of common ground if/when you get to know each other.

OK, my question is Y?

Because, as the guideline says, "Sphinn is not the place to wage reputation management battles."