Hamlet stops linking to a certain antagonist SLr

Sometimes I'll rely on Hamlet Linden's list of links to get to other 'blogs. Bored, tired, and in need of a good hearty laugh, I go looking for a particular SLr's site.
His list skips from:
Osprey Therian
to:
Snakekiss Noir

Hmm.... wonder what could have made Hamlet remove a link?

YO my friend!

Enh, let's let this one go. Its the holidays and stuff. No need to stir the pot - I gotta drive all over PA tomorrow, and I'd miss the drama.

Besides, the person we know needs to defend themselves ain't here.

Let's let this one go.

Happy Holidays to Hiro, hie better half, you, yours, and everyone

-Flip

I'm just honestly curious. /shrug

I guess I'm not terribly surprised. With the shocking amount of invective and vitriol vented both upon Linden Lab and its customers, keeping a link there would be almost embarassing.

The practice of targeting a single resident my have run afoul of LL policies as well.

Hamlet doesnt cover SL...Hamlet covers "Hamlet's SL." He overlooks/ignores quite a lot, and focuses on the same, even when the world was much smaller.

Only at the inconsistent and ever-changing whim of the forum moderator based on the history of moderation seen and not seen since the inception of these forums. That is, certain posters will be allowed to "get away with murder" while others will almost certainly be warned, suspended or even banned for the same thing - as illustrated by the banned-from-the-forums resident-who-is-still-allowed-inworld and the winner-of-the-free-sim-experiment-gone-whacko who remains active in the forums.

Oh come on, the FIC is quite happy to target individual people they don't like! {That of whom we shall not speak} was the biggest target of the FIC and LL, and I don't believe you are too sorry to see him go.

Well if you see any other blogs on Hamlet's list that have an extensive history of singling out one single resident for the purpose of violating their privacy, lying about them, and basically calling them names, then you should compile a list of incriminating entries from that blogger and submit them to Hamlet. I'm sure he would consider removing them as well.

I for one couldn't find any other blogs like that.

Oh wait, I see. Nevermind. I thought you were defending {That of whom we shall not speak}!

I'm not entirely sure how you arrived at that interpretation, Hank. Rather, I was submitting that if this "FIC" really is guilty of targeting people they don't like, it certainly isn't reflected in their blogs as seen linked from New World Notes.

They work in conjunction with LL, behind the scenes, to do their dirty work.

No no, it's not behind the scenes. It's deep in a secret underground laboratory where hapless newbs use the default dance animations to turn giant hampster wheels to power the mind control device. If you're going to perpetuate tired and idiotic conspiracy theories, at least make them entertaining. I don't blame you for not crediting the misfortunes of those with axes to grind to their own crappy behavior. That just doesn't have the same zazz!

Did anyone stop to consider that the reason Hamlet may have removed a link to a particular blog is because of the things that the blog owner has said to and about Hamlet himself? Nothing to do with any other resident? Hamlet is a person, and full capable of deciding which blogs to be linked to. I know conspiracy theories (hi Hank!) are so much more fun, but at least come up with some new ones. This is all so 2005.

I assume we are talking about the same resident, of which, I have some IRC chatlogs where a Linden and some old players ( also refered to as the FIC) are discussing how and when to ban him from forums.

If Hamlet is doing what he is doing using his own name, which probably are not Linden, and in no assosiation with Secondlife, I do not see why he could choose not to refer to certian blogs, however, if the blogs he referes to are refered to because the residents has asked him to to refer to them (and he do so as a representative of Lindenlab); and he has removed this particular blog without it beeing requested to remove it by this individual; it would appear to me that the so called rule "we do not practice favouritism " would not have been followed.

Hi I'm from Mega Corp
and i want a represenitive from my resident group to do PR for us
so
Should i Pick:

A) A friendly happy worker who will paint Mega Corps. inna favorable light

B) A worker who is bitter about wrongs both real and imagined and rarely if ever says
anything positive about Mega Corps?

Again I am looking for PR not input to running my company
so...no matter who is right or wrong
who should i pick?? hmmmmm

Should i print teh letter from teh customer that says how much they enjoy teh Mega Corps. brand Whozadoodle (all rights reserved)
or the one from teh customer who has bought 5 Whozadoodles (all rights reserved) but threw the directions away and has decided that the model i chose for teh ad is to blame that they cannot figure out how to open it so the are demanding i change my buisness model to make it easier for them to not have to read directions

hmmmmm
this is a poser
i have noooo clue which way i should go...

Are you sure you posted in the right thread?
This was about a removed blog link

stpaulsub seems to be using an analogy to bring an important point.

If you're being paid to do PR for your company, should you link work from a naysayer or someone that speaks roses about the company you're employed by?


Ironically, I had been using the NWN link myself for some time out of convenience to skim you-know-who's work. Guess I'll have to bookmark it now.


Frankly, I'm of the opinion publication should present all views on the matter, regardless of stilt and bias. "I may not agree with what you say, but I'll fight to the death for your right to say it" and all that. Since drowning out posts here is no longer an issue, the question of censorship is quite valid.

Even if it's not that big a deal in the grand scheme of things.

hi Jeffery i sorta agree with you in principle but the real world of buisness soem times makes it hard to live up to that , my point was some wonder why LL in teh past has tended to point reporters in certain directions and to me it is obvious!
As a start up company trying to get backing ..you would want to put your best foot forward
10 years from now when I own 90% of teh market share i can go back to principle and allow the disgruntled to speak from MY soap box

You mean you have evidence?

Yes, there was evidence. I broke that story on these forums. I don't have the log, though. Maybe it was on SLUniverse or something, I forget.

coco

This is a very good point. Probably right on the money.

Missed reading this post (thanks for the quote, Enabran). And yeah, that too.

Not sure how professional it would be to cow at insults, though.

If I tried to present all views, I'd end up presenting six billion opinions. I'm of the opinion that if someone wants their views presented, they can do it on their own bloody website. I'm not a newspaper; it's neither my duty nor my responsibility to advertise for them.

Hamlet is an "embedded journalist", so this isn't quite the same for him, but even so, he's already published articles that discharge any responsibility as I see it. Advertising 24/7 for those people is unnecessary.

Who's insulting cows? Tell them to stop.

Hamlet doesn't link to me either but then I've only just started mine and it hasn't got past one entry as I forgot my password. Oh bugger.