Michael Jackson’s Nose: Now, Not Even Large Enough To Hold His Own Snot Nov 18 '02    Write an essay on this topic. Tweet The Bottom Line This ticketing system is as fucked up as Michael Jackson's nose. I would be hideously remiss if I didn’t take the time to thank everybody who has rushed to my support since I got the Ticket. First and foremost, of course, Sordid-1. Ken, I pet your nethers. Your vigorous and energetic grassroots campaign has warmed the cockles of my heart as they haven’t been warmed since a very, very long lovemaking session with Tony Blair in a dream I had a few months ago. Truly you have earned the honorific “Professional Hemorrhoid”. Also, you are the only person I am aware of who can post two comments simultaneously. Mr.Eyore, thanks for offering to undertake some protracted and ugly commando aktion. I’m sure we can think of other situations where this will be fun. Let me tell you, if I had to pick three combatants on my side in an ugly war, it’d be Sordid, Mr.Eyore and Tony Blair. I also have to thank Ken for running that prison photo of me. I don’t think I’ve ever been more photogenic; indeed, it’s the only picture taken of me where my head doesn’t look too ridiculously large for my body. Thanks to everyone who either wrote an essay or a poem, unselfishly posted my prison picture as their own, or incorporated pleas for my freedom into their profile page. (Although it did hurt my feelings to hear my picture called “uglyassed”.) A list of these freedom fighters can be found at Sordid’s profile page. Thanks to mobiprof for pointing out that my binoculars review technically should not have been ticketed; it should have been grandfathered. It was published before the more stringent User Agreement came into being. Since I have absolutely no clue about what kinds of things go on behind the curtain at Epinions, and really had no curiosity about it until now, and haven’t even read the User Agreement, this was particularly interesting news to me. But of course, this whole thing is not really about ME. As much as I’m enjoying my moment in the spotlight, it could have happened to dozens of other people. Hundreds, if you stick to a literal interpretation of the User Agreement. I’m just a proxy for people’s anger about this site and the TRUE abuses that occur here. And that’s fine with me. In the interests of public disclosure, I am pasting the email exchange I had with Community Care regarding the Ticket. ____________________________________________________________ I need Epinions to explain to me exactly in what way this review is offensive or pornographic before I can make any changes to it. I reviewed the product. I did so in part by describing what the product (binoculars) enabled me to see. 91 members, including 2 of the 3 Advisors who rated it, found my review Very Helpful. 1 member found my review Most Helpful. 2 members found it Helpful. Only 3 members found it Not Helpful. I would remind Customer Care that members are able to review pornographic books and movies, and books like the Kamasutra and Women's Guide to Anal Sex, yet these reviews are not called pornographic or offensive by pretty much anyone. Thank you, Lobstergirl ____________________________________________________________ Hi, Thank you for your email. The specific portions of the Site Usage Policy that your review violates is the following: - Posting material containing profanity - Submitting content on a product/topic that is reasonably likely to offend a person looking for information on that product/topic. You are correct, members are allowed to review pornographic books and movies on the site. We believe that a consumer who came to the site looking for information on a pornographic book or movie would expect to find a review that was slightly pornographic in nature. However, a consumer coming to the site looking for a review on binoculars would not expect to find a review that was at all pornographic. This is what happened in your case. This review was not brought to our attention by one of our members. It was brought to our attention by someone who simply visited our site to find information on the binoculars you had written about. Upon reading your review, we found that it violated the Site Usage Policy. A few of the specifics are lines such as the following: - That was, …...unnh…..…pretty……fucking good……unnnh, ooooohhhh," Renata rejoined frantically, "but remember the time the Rabbi was giving it to me from behind, you were giving it to the Rabbi, and Dr. Zeidman walked in on us? I thought you were going to shoot your wad right then. But he stepped right up to the plate and found an opening, like the talented otolaryngologist he is." - He was sitting back on his knees on the bed, swinging his manhood back and forth like a tank gunner. - Obviously Karen, like Barbara Walters, Barbra Streisand, Sandra Bernhardt and Eleanor Roosevelt before her, was now requiring larger and larger objects to satisfy herself. What was next, David Ben-Gurion's wooden leg? If you would like to either delete your review, edit it so it doesn't violate the Site Usage Policy or move it to the Writer's Corner, I will delete your ticket immediately. ____________________________________________________________ Dear Crystal, Thank you for your very detailed response. Before I decide what to do with my review, can you explain a few things? Why was it necessary to block my entire account from everyone outside my web of trust? Why was it necessary to render every single one of my comments invisible? Why was it necessary to stop all my email alerts? Couldn't you have achieved your desired end -- preventing people from seeing this one review you have deemed objectionable -- by blocking just this particular review? Don't you think it's much more likely that a member, perhaps a regular reader of mine, sought revenge by posing as a non-member and digging long and hard for this review in order to silence me? I appreciate that Epinions is a private entity and deserves to run this site pretty much any way it sees fit in order to maximize revenue, but do you really believe it was fair to almost completely gag me, to take such draconian measures against me? I do write quite a few serious reviews. Thank you, Lobstergirl ____________________________________________________________ Hi, Thank you for your email. I hope that I am able to answer your questions. In order to handle the large volume of email that we receive we have had to establish some general procedures. When we receive a complaint about an offensive review, we read the review in question. If we agree that the review violates our site usage policy than we issue the review a ticket. A ticket for offensive content automatically puts the entire account on probation. Being on probation means that you can log into your account, but others can not access your content. We implemented this procedure because in the vast majority of cases when one review by an author is found offensive, much of the rest of their content is also offensive. [emphasis mine] However, we do not have the time to read every review/comment that the member has written. The probation system allows us to temporarily hide an account, and then fully reactivate once the problem has been resolved. Regardless of who reported you to abuse, the review is innapropriate for a consumer to read about binoculars. If you delete/edit the review, or would like it moved. Please let me know. Sincerely, Crystal Epinions.com Community Care ____________________________________________________________ I have been informed of the existence of Epinions member cravea40, who currently has a Ticket for Copyright Infringement. Yet, I can access every one of his reviews that I’ve tried to access, whether logged in or not. Why is this? I guess he is not on PROBATION. Yet, to paraphrase Crystal, I suspect if you look at the history of plagiarism you might find that in the vast majority of cases when one piece by an author is found to contain plagiarism, much of the rest of their content also may contain plagiarism. But clearly the words “wad”, “manhood”, and “satisfy” are more deleterious to a phantom binoculars shopper than actual plagiarism. You know what I’d love to see? A full accounting from EPS of every member who has ever gotten a ticket, and for what, and exactly what was done to their accounts. You know what else I’d like to see? EPS get rid of the Offensive Content Ticket. It’s unnecessary and redundant. If sufficient numbers of members rate a review Not Helpful due to what they deem offensive content, the review won’t be visible to non-members anyway. If these members don’t want to see the review, they can block the writer. You know what I’d love to know? What nonexistent binoculars shopping consumer turned me in to the principal. Step forward, ye cowering, sniveling mofo. If you really think you’re doing the right thing, if you stand behind your actions, why not show your face? What are you afraid of?

Read all comments (67)|Write your own comment

Write an essay on this topic.