jdw

Excellent news.  Down with patent troll, AlivCor!

macmaverickk said:

Not all over a single iPhone… stolen vehicle, 6 firearms, a drone and $6k on cash

Why is that come-back above somehow a Gotcha that attracted 5 people to click Like on? Are you folks unaware that the USA is the world's gun storage?  That's a truth without even entering the gun debate.  Americans own a lot of guns, and an enthusiast can easy have 6 or more.  Sure, the cops don't like it.  But it's the second amendment, so what can you do?

Since when is a drone a SWAT worthy offense?

Since when does having a lot of cash mean the police can and should raid your home?  While dangerous, it is everyone's right to have their own money at home, rather than a bank, if they so choose.  If one ought not do that, ban cash by law.

The fact remains that the trigger is a SINGLE iPhone "as per the original article" which largely focuses on that.  Indeed, had it merely been the 6 guns, a single drone, and $6k in cash, the story wouldn't have even made the headlines here on AppleInsider.  Consider that.

I stand by my earlier post.

AppleInsider said:

...location of a stolen iPhone.

A SWAT raid on a home for "a" (in the singular) iPhone?  That sounds like a rather enormous waste of tax dollars to me.  I would say that even if the number was 9 iPhones.  Maybe if it was 50 or 100, then I can understand a SWAT raid.  But for one?  

In addition to that SWAT raid tax dollar waste, you then have the waste of having to pay to compensate the lady for all the broken items, including collectable dolls, some of which may not be so easy to replace.  And now you also have a lawsuit filed as well.

The police issue an apology (but refuse to pay for repairs) and expect that to end that particular case so they can then move on to the next SWAT raid, which could also be a mistake.

All the while, this poor lady is left with financial loss and with fear about what may next come through her door.

All over a SINGLE iPhone.

Madness.  Utter madness.

Very good news!

dewme said:

jdw said:

P.S.  I'm happy at least ONE AppleInsider article today allows Comments.  Totally hilarious to see all the Musk/Twitter articles today banning comments (i.e., stopping free speech) when it comes to topics that discuss free speech.  I've long taken issue with AppleInsider about that.  There are risks with freedom, but it's worth it.  No need to go full CCP to limit speech AppleInsider owners don't like.  You're not a true advocate of liberty until you afford your neighbor more freedom than you are willing to afford yourself. I don't smoke or drink alcohol, but I don't go around calling for total bans on those things.  And no, calling for more freedom to comment doesn't mean it's a free-for-all.  So long as no crimes are being committed and no laws broken, it's a fact that some speech may be pretty naught (personally, I had profanity), but that doesn't mean we need to censor anything and everything we don't like.  Loosening the comment restrictions is the right thing to do.  There really can be a proper balance, without the need to complete block all comments under multiple articles.  Blocking comments is more than just limiting speech. It's like AppleInsider is playing parent, spanking kids for having been naughty in other threads.  And yes, I've spoken to at least one AppleInsider author in the distance past who told me about SEO and how AppleInsider content appears in search engines as justification for censoring comments, but that argument was not persuasive at all in my humble opinion.  Strive for free speech whenever possible.  Thanks.

I'm not surprised by your post.

Maybe there's a compromise solution, like relocating articles that the AppleInsider moderation team flags as deviating from its commenting expectations to a different sub-forum, but only as long as the non-culled comments don't explicitly break any stated rules or guidelines? I personally have no desire to engage in an unmoderated forum.

 I can definitely see where the comment section of some articles do end end up going down very off-topic rabbit holes that have little to do with AppleInsider's mission statement and primary purpose. Of course any changes like I've suggested would impose more workload on the AppleInsider staff. The fact that there is already infrastructure in-place in the "All Forums" part of the AppleInsider site may lessen the required effort. I don't know.

Fundamentally, as guests on AppleInsider we aren't really in a position to make any demands, but suggestions are always fair game. We should always respect the concerns of our host and recognize that they are running a business here. We also need to be mindful of the need to self-regulate and apply our own self-moderation mechanisms, which I think sometimes get desensitized in the midst of a hot topic. I understand how it happens and I'm not immune to the temptation to get sucked into some of the rabbit holes or step dangerously close to the boundaries of the rules.

I think it's basic human nature to engage and participate and voice our opinions but we must always be aware of where the boundaries are and try not push things too far. We also need to take responsibility for what we "say" and self-test whether our posts are actually relevant to the topic at hand, ensure that what we post represents our original ideas, and make sure that what we post reflects our own personal perspectives and understanding of the topic itself or a topic-relevant adjacency. There are no real personal consequences of us shit-posting here other than getting banned, but AppleInsider can suffer business repercussions if their site becomes too toxic for advertisers to be associated with.

Nothing I've said has anything to do with free speech, but it has everything to do with us being considerate for what AppleInsider provides for us in terms of allowing us to participate in discussions around topics and subjects that are of shared interest to everyone. We really should never do anything that places AppleInsider in a negative business position. I'm assuming that shutting down comments is a damage control action, not an imposition on our freedom of self expression. 

Again, maybe there's a middle ground with mutual benefits that can be proposed by those who feel slighted by the eradication of comments from a topic. Fire away with some suggestions.

I wasn't planning to respond to your post, because I greatly appreciated what you wrote and didn't feel the need to add anything to what you said.  However, @muthuk_vanalingam wrote a post that explained his feeling that something else was needed from me.  So in light of your "fire away" closing sentence, I will cite one example of where comments, now banned, can be useful...

I have purchased two MS Office licenses because of AppleInsider advertising that.  No comments are allowed under those AppleInsider posts, which is a shame because I would like to post my 100% SATISFACTION with those license purchases, and I would also like to add my experience with customer support to say that in one case, the license number given to me was unusable, but after waiting 72 hours, their support staff (not affiliated with AppleInsider) supplied me with a new code that worked.  Honestly, I think comments like mine (what I just said) under the MS Office articles/ads would perhaps go toward making people feel more at ease with a purchase, allowing more sales of that.  Not sure how much AppleInsider makes off each sale, but more is better than less, right?

Again, just one example of where comments may be a benefit for all concerned.

By the way, whenever I find I cannot comment under an article here in the forum, I can usually go to FaceBook and find the same article.  Comments are not banned on FaceBook because they cannot be banned (I don't think).  So that is one way to let one's voice be heard.  It's just that I would sometimes rather write a comment here.  I prefer full fledged forums to FaceBook, especially when typing multiple paragraphs.