Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Site policy on identifying individual people and properties
A couple of issues arose recently where I've had to think about whether it is right to identify either a specific person or a specific property in connection with a neighbour problem. The site code of conduct seeks to deal with this as follows:
5. Neighbour Disputes & Issues
From time to members use the site to ask for support in resolving issues that arise with neighbouring properties where the issues require particular knowledge and expertise or action by local public services. HoL can be useful as an information exchange and means of neighbourly support at time like this. We welcome the site being used in this way. However, we have concluded that it is best if members do not use the site to pursue disputes or resolve problems on the site by identifying particular people or properties. Please discuss the issue in general terms by all means, but avoid mentioning specific individuals or properties.
Whilst I totally empathise with the instinct to identify a particular neighbour in a 'neighbour problem' post, I've had to think about this issue on and off recently and I've concluded that there may a real downside to doing so. Most posts that do so may be fine; some will cross the line. There may also be legal issues involved for the site too if libellous statements are allowed. So it seems to me that a universal policy asking people not to do this is the only choice.
I'd really welcome your thoughts.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
You know what I think it should cover. Suggestions for alternative wording welcomed.
-
Permalink Reply by Stuart on
-
Yes, but what does it actually cover? Sorry for labouring this but the drafting of the policy is very unclear and I'd like to know if the above post examples at 3 to 5 are now excluded or not. If the policy is purely about "vulnerable neighbours", then clearly they are not but example 7 should not have been amended as it is not talking about a "vulnerable neighbour".
If it is about any disputes in relation to specific neighbours or properties, then why would 3 to 5 not also be amended in line with the policy? As someone who has been actively involved in the campaign against fraudulent Certificates of Lawfulness, and who relied hugely on the types of postings at 3 to 5 to be able to collate information, not being able to post on the lines of 3 to 5 would be a big issue for me.
I'm not questioning your authority to set the policy. All I am asking is for certainty - so that it is clear so that people know before posting what they can and can't say. Right now, it isn't. I'd also hope it would make your job easier because there's less risk of the Site Admin people being accused of acting arbitrarily in amending/deleting posts.
-
-
I think my previous answer where I explained why I feel 3 to 5 are excluded taken together with the policy as is explains what I want to block.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
