Is there a reason why the restriction on ads includes "concerts" and "seeking roommates", but doesn't capture "We're going canvassing for Pat Jehlen and would like your help"?
Volunteers to hold up signs (which is essentially what canvassing is) doesn't fit into my view of what a service is. It is also neither property nor money, so I do not consider the post an advertisement (as per the definition in the rules). Sure, one could argue that canvassing is a service, but since this is my community, what I view as a service counts.
I'm sorry I didn't respond to your other comments, but I've been in a very bitchy mood the last few days, and I didn't want to give you an undeserved overly snarky reply.
Canvassing can also entail going door to door with fliers and talking to residents. In this case, volunteers were rewarded with a barbecue, an arrangement that looks a lot like incentive for services rendered.
It is, of course, your decision to do whatever you like with your community, but this does appear inconsistent with the new hard line that is designed to keep people from "getting their friends list filled up with crap." Politics are far uglier than any roommate ad could be. It probably wouldn't happen here simply because the list appears to lean well to the left, would you have taken the same approach had the poster been requesting canvassers for something like Ciampa's write-in campaign (http://www.massequality.org/hot_bg_10_31.php)? (Keeping in mind that Ciampa himself never made the satements that would fall under the anti-intolerance rule of the community... he just failed to denounce them.)
I'm not really interested in arguing this point. My decisions stands. I will deal with future situations on a case by case basis. If you are questioning whether something you post should be cut, I'd advising erring on the side of cutting.
You have chosen not to give clear indication that it is not, citing moderator fiat alone to exempt volunteer service for a favored political candidate.
(frozen) Third try
Date: 2005-08-12 07:54 pm (UTC)(frozen) Re: Third try
Date: 2005-08-12 08:08 pm (UTC)I'm sorry I didn't respond to your other comments, but I've been in a very bitchy mood the last few days, and I didn't want to give you an undeserved overly snarky reply.
(frozen) Re: Third try
Date: 2005-08-12 08:42 pm (UTC)It is, of course, your decision to do whatever you like with your community, but this does appear inconsistent with the new hard line that is designed to keep people from "getting their friends list filled up with crap." Politics are far uglier than any roommate ad could be. It probably wouldn't happen here simply because the list appears to lean well to the left, would you have taken the same approach had the poster been requesting canvassers for something like Ciampa's write-in campaign (http://www.massequality.org/hot_bg_10_31.php)? (Keeping in mind that Ciampa himself never made the satements that would fall under the anti-intolerance rule of the community... he just failed to denounce them.)
(frozen) Re: Third try
Date: 2005-08-12 08:46 pm (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 08:49 pm (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 09:00 pm (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 09:09 pm (UTC)(frozen) no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 09:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 07:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 08:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 08:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 08:10 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2005-08-12 08:14 pm (UTC)