Fellow directory owners, I would like to know if you'd accept "no need for government" type sites. I have received a request lately from one of such sites... The fact is that the site is not a political satire but it actually takes different governments' policies into consideration and concludes that countries do not need established government (with a strong revolutionary undertone!) It also contains a forum whose members seem to share similar views(...) I believe it could be considered free speech by many but it seems to promote anarchism. Would you list such a site under "Activism" category if you have one? I am just looking for some feedback. Regards P.S.: I did not wish to post the URL in this thread for obvious reasons.
I don't think that is enough information to make a decision. Anarchism in and of itself may not disqualify however do they promote illegal activities such as non-payment of taxes or do they promote any kind of violence in their content? Typically a site on anarchism will and the mitigating factors will disqualify it.
They do not promote violence but they do encourage civil disobedience. The thing is this type of encouragement often sows seeds of violence from a legal point of view.
I would probably lean towards declining it then. Without actually seeing it though who can say for sure and even then you may get five different opinions from five others. Not to mention different directories usually have different guidelines.
I don't know it all depends on what kind of things the site is about. If it promote terrorism then no. But there are a lot of revolutionary based anarchy sites. I would accept something like that for the US government is corrupt and fucked. Just my opinion.
I would list it...assuming that it is not some wacko site promoting violence. The "civil disobedience" that these anarchist type sites advocate are almost always things like protest rallies at political conventions and such. Pretty tame stuff that is not likely harmful to anyone, IMO. Think about it. Would you reject pro- or anti-abortion websites? Or feminist or gay activist sites? What sites would you list under "activism" that didn't involve at least some "civil disobedience"?
If that will help many users when they get to my directory I would accept it, but as its being describe it won't help much.
It seems to me that the issue is, do you apply your own moral and ethical perspective when you're listing websites? Personally I don't see how you can avoid this, to a degree. There's always going to be a matter of moral judgement and taste involved, even when it comes down to simply defining what is and isn't spam. So do what you think is best, and just list what you feel comfortable listing. Don't worry about absolutes. Don't worry about listing whatever meets your guidelines, to the letter, because there will always be exceptions that you didn't think of. You're not censoring anyone or suppressing their freedom of speech, because you're not removing their website from the internet. You are merely declining to link to it from yours. They can find other people to link in.
Depends what country you're in, no country is free no matter what they tell you. But if you're located in some over the top place or your site is hosted somewhere that is rather restrictive about what they allow you to do on the internet, and you list this site and what the site is doing is illegal and you can be held in a cell just because you listed it then obviously its not worth listing it. Whats interesting is that you dont even want to share the url how scared is the world nowadays? If you're that worried i would not touch it.
I am in the US and the site does speak negatively of our government... Personally there are government policies that I don't support like any other Americans I'd suppose. However, as an entrepreneur who is running a legal business in America (the directory is part of it), I'd rather abstain from promoting a community that goes against our government.
Nicely put! Every Web site deserves to be treated at its own merit. I believe French directory owners face similar issues while approving sites belonging to different "spiritual groups" in France cuz most of them are "banned" by their government. However, personally I'd not mind approving some of those sites simply cuz I see no problem with it from an American point of view. At the end of the day, it seems that even if we are "web" directory owners, our individual listing style is NOT independent of the country in which we live and how a particular situation, issue, group or controversy is treated by our jurisdiction.
Would you question accepting a site on communism? That would be the exact opposite it would seem. If you would question a site on anarchy, and not other forms of government or lack thereof then maybe you have some political bias. Really depends on the site.
I am convinced that we all are politically biased in a way or another. As you may know Communism is not something that most Americans are fond of. However, I actually would list a site or a web page on Communism that is purely informative and presents Communism as a social structure or social history etc but I'd think twice before I approve of a site that belongs to a local communist party located in another country that speaks negatively of the US government.
From this statement alone, I would most likely not place the link. I would not want to indirectly encourage violence, and it sounds like it teeters on violating laws. Furthermore, if the site criticizes country policies, that's one thing. If they criticize those policies and promote civil disobedience in a harmful way, then it's another thing, and I would reject this site. However, it's hard to say since I didn't see the site. Also, how do the search engines view this site? Does it have good PR? Is it recently cached? Is it showing up highly in SERPs? How do you think search engines will view the topic now and in the future? That information may help in deciding about whether to accept or reject the site.
I'm not sure what I would do if it were my directory but I would suggest that you alter your terms of service to match your decision.
Well I'm all about free speech. I think that as long as the site is not tailored to teach people how to make bombs or any thing like that then who am I do deny their right to get the message out. But as always, they would still have to submit to a relevant category.
Hi Rob I understand your point of view and like EveryQuery said that all sites under "Activism" category in a directory usually have something to do with some kind of civil disobedience. However, the point I was trying to make is that the function of a directory is not only 'listing' sites but also does it promote those sites...technically speaking(...) In all honesty, supporting cow slaughter could be considered free speech in India but could lead to severe controversies. I don't think many Indians would support this! By the same token, most Americans would not support a community that speaks of 9/11 as something that Americans needed(...), a community that supports anti-American discussions and portrays the US as the country that creates troubles around the world. Do you think someone from Israel would promote a site or blog that supports Iranian president's comment when he called for Israel to be "wiped off the map"? I guess what I am trying to say is...given how the world has changed since 9/11, I see a good reason why it's a not the best idea to participate in promoting a foreign community whose members support things that are legally questionable in the country where I live. Besides, as business owners we all adhere to some etiquette (all personal opinions aside) Sharing a personal opinion with friends and families around dinner table about our country's past or present policies is different than actually indirectly supporting a community with members sharing extremist views.