Strelitzia Flower Co/Talk

InfoInfo ArticleArticle
Search:    
Differences:

version 119 (2010-06-09 08:11:38 by DonShor)
←previous edit
version 120 (2010-06-09 08:34:53 by EdWins)
next edit→
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 132: Line 132:
3 - Retain comment -["Users/edwins" ES]
3 - Retain comment -["Users/CovertProfessor"]

This page is for discussing the contents of Strelitzia Flower Co.

I believe accusations of racism should be deleted. —DonShor

Don, I'll second your suggestion. —JasonAller

Thirded. Not in every case, of course, but there's zero specifics here and so it comes off as foul play on the part of the hit-and-run commenter. —PhilipNeustrom

I'll repeat the relevant portions of what I already said to Jason on my page: She said something pretty harsh, but I think most people know that whether someone was acting in a racist manner can be somewhat of a matter of perception and will read the comment in that light. If that turns out to be the only comment that says that or if other people dispute the comment, then that will mean something. If other people corroborate the comment, then that will mean something, too. In short I think the comment is potentially informative. It is my belief that the person was probably ignored, as she said. Whether it was because of her race, her age, her clothing, her demeanor, or something else, I have no idea. She perceived it as due to her race; it may not have been. But I do think that it is not unheard of for people to act on biases that they themselves might not even be fully aware of. —CovertProfessor

It is akin to the infamous "when did you stop beating your wife?" question. It is not rebuttable or provable, and trying to reply to it just makes it worse. So it just hangs there as an unsubstantiated accusation by an anonymous poster. I happen to feel the same way about comments about food poisoning in restaurants. All the owner can do is say "no, it isn't true." I also feel that implementing some kind of system where people can't just leave drive-by comments the first time they post at the Wiki would help weed out these sorts of comments. But it seems that idea didn't fly..... —DS

Has anyone talked to this drive by person? not even a welcome to the wiki? Why not follow up that way and then if nothing productive occurs go about removing race based comments Daubert

I don't think it is right to place requirements on who can post what — that you have to have established identity (to whose satisfaction?) or otherwise shown your worthiness in order to report a negative experience with a business. We seem to be assuming that the charge of racism is false. But it may be true, or based on truth. There was a Chinese restaurant in another town I used to live in that consistently received comments (on another forum, of course) that said that it gave Asians poorer service. These things do happen; not to bring in politics, but look at Arizona or some of the recent incidents in the UC and you will see that racism is alive and well. Again, that doesn't mean that what Julia says is true, only that it might be true. Perhaps another way of addressing the concerns here would be to try to ask Julia — on the Strelitzia Flower Co page — to give evidence for why she thinks the treatment she received was due to her race, as opposed to one of the many other possible reasons. That would serve to call the comment into question for other people reading the comment (again, I think you guys are overstating the potential impact of the comment) and give Julia an opportunity to clarify, if that is indeed possible. —cp


Does anyone notice that the one person who should have chimed in hasn't? The author of the comment has been silent. They hit and run and left us with a pile of crap to deal with. —JasonAller

It clearly has zero value, I would love to hear more but I doubt the poster is going to do any more editing to the wiki... Unless that changes remove it, and lets edit the wiki in better ways than this... Daubert

Wow. Ok, never mind folks. There is nothing too outrageous to say on the Davis Wiki, apparently. Delete this page when you're done with it. —DonShor


We seem more or less equally split here, with strong feelings on both sides. We've all expressed our views and are starting to repeat ourselves. Suggestions for compromise? The comment has [WWW]now been marked as controversial. —cp

I can see both sides of the coin here. If the staff at the shop are racists then that is important and needs to be there. The tone of this comment makes me feel like the person who left it was a little quick to jump to conclusions. Just because they showed more attention to one customer over another does not mean it was racially motivated. There are so many factors that go into social situations, to conclude that they are racists is, in my opinion, not a sound conclusion. But, I was not there, so I can not say. If you want my opinion, it should be deleted, or better yet edited to remove accusations of racism. I think comments should be able to be edited to remove the B.S. —DagonJones

I just have to say, that I've been friends with the Labadies for MANY years. I've traveled with Janice. I know what kind of people they are. They would NEVER condone racism in their establishment, period. Sloppy customer service, possibly, racism, never. My opinion is that this borders on slander. As a business owner, I have a hard time finding this type of thing acceptable. If the Labadies knew, or now know, of this situation, it will be dealt with immediately. I propose we remove the comment, and if the author feels that it is important, they can re-post it.- Davidlm

If there is no reply by June 11 (2 weeks), I'm going to pull the comment. —DonShor


There has been too much talk, explicit or not, about policy and process. Perhaps it's good to have this discussion, but that doesn't mean we need to get bogged down with all that to make a good decision here.

We have a comment that could cause major problems for the subject and isn't backed up with much of anything. It's an accusation of racism that has the classic signs of invoking the race card because of a victim mentality. We don't have to write massive chunks of text about this and invoke all sorts of pet ideologies about identity, deference to commerce, or the wiki as a watchdog. Let's just look at the comment for what it is. I see a comment that lacks value. Let's just stop this nonsense and have this general debate another day. The comment needs to go. —WilliamLewis

I'm going to reiterate my previous point: Delete the comment, if the poster cares enough he/she can come back and explain in more detail, in the meantime lets devote our energy to editing the wiki in productive ways, as opposed to walls of text over this Daubert

William has stated it very well, lets not worry about precedent or policy, lets look at this as a single entry that most people seem to agree it should be deleted. —DagonJones


I'm starting to get more and more upset about this issue. (Yes, this one, not just the general policy). It is starting to feel like a collective "We don't think racism happens in this town. We don't think what you described could possibly have happened. We don't believe you. We think that you're just angry and trying to hurt the business." I'd like to ask — please — that everyone take step back and think about what that is saying, and how that might feel from Julia's point of view. In other words, try supposing for just a moment that what she said is true (that she was treated differently because of her race), and then think about the proposed action of deleting the comment and the message it is sending. Please. I'm basically begging at this point. —cp


I think a lot of this belongs over on the Wiki Community/Accusations of Racism or Sexism page. We're getting off-topic again. Is it time to call a vote? —tg

Proposed voting options:

  1. The comment should be removed two weeks from the time it was made (June 11, I believe) if no further information is forthcoming.

  2. The comment should be removed at a later date (maybe 2 months?) if no further information is forthcoming. 2 weeks isn't enough time.

  3. The comment should not be removed.

Votes for the two removal options would be added up and compared to votes against removal. If removal wins and neither option has a plurality of the votes, we can have a separate vote-off to determine time-frame.

1. Remove 6/11 —DonShor
3 - Retain comment -ES
3 - Retain comment -CovertProfessor

I have agreed to abide by the results of a vote, but it seems that those most opposed to removal of the comment refuse to vote. I have attempted to be collaborative and have discussed this issue very thoroughly. Unfortunately, the default position is that the accusation of racism stays. Davis Wiki has no "system" for resolving this. So just to reiterate: on June 11 I am going to remove the comment. —DonShor

  • 1I'm not saying that this particular one is either of these, but there are some out there
This is a Wiki Spot wiki. Wiki Spot is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization that helps communities collaborate via wikis.