Should this post be approved?

[Cowtipper]

Of course, I do understand that you might wish to maintain a more positive, or at least neutral, tenor on this website. But in its strictest sense, it is a fan memory—potentially a really bad one—and though posting it might set a precedent, one could just as easily argue that not posting it could set the cooling precedent of censorship. Though, granted, I will say more than any other site I visit, this one offers the widest scope of 'free speech' and for that I am eternally grateful.



I think the compromise might be to post this one, but if you see a wave of similar comments in the future, that is when you could begin to shut them down.

[Edgy MD]

Edgy MD wrote: Lefty Specialist wrote: No upside, all downside. REJECT Well, the possibility that posting it potentially offers a victim the first chance he or she has found to call out his or her victimizer is a potential upside. Giving a voice to folks who've been treated badly and can't find a platform to respond is one of the democratizing benefits of the Internet. Fair enough, but the fact that it is being written on a Fan Memories commenting forum about a specific noted person on an, no offense, obscure website dedicated to a sports ball team, as opposed to communities on platforms such as Reddit, Facebook, Discord, etc does suggest something else besides “I need to get this story out there.”

I'm not sure there's any more mainstream site if you need to speak your truth about Charlie Samuels.

[stevejrogers]

Edgy MD wrote: Edgy MD wrote: Well, the possibility that posting it potentially offers a victim the first chance he or she has found to call out his or her victimizer is a potential upside. Giving a voice to folks who've been treated badly and can't find a platform to respond is one of the democratizing benefits of the Internet. Fair enough, but the fact that it is being written on a Fan Memories commenting forum about a specific noted person on an, no offense, obscure website dedicated to a sports ball team, as opposed to communities on platforms such as Reddit, Facebook, Discord, etc does suggest something else besides “I need to get this story out there.” I'm not sure there's any more mainstream site if you need to speak your truth about Charlie Samuels.

Sure there is. FWIW, case in point, So far on a few page surface level Google search on “Charlie Samuels Mets” is nothing but articles on his downfall. Not his Wiki page, archived bio from a decades old archive of Mets.com, UMDB or any other place a thumbnail bio with a section to add a comment to would be.



There are plenty of baseball and Met related social platform communities, or in general communities (ie subreddits on Reddit) to vaguely tell a story as a first salvo in getting something out there.

[Johnny Lunchbucket]

Write the OP first and see what happens. Come at it from a perspective that demonstrates you care -- you want to do everything you can to help get her message out but its your obligation as the Ultimate Met Gatekeeper to be sure that it serves your audience. Also if there were criminal shenanigans there are better places to report that

[metsmarathon]

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Write the OP first and see what happens. Come at it from a perspective that demonstrates you care -- you want to do everything you can to help get her message out but its your obligation as the Ultimate Met Gatekeeper to be sure that it serves your audience. Also if there were criminal shenanigans there are better places to report that

this. all of it. especially the last.

[stevejrogers]

Johnny Lunchbucket wrote: Write the OP first and see what happens. Come at it from a perspective that demonstrates you care -- you want to do everything you can to help get her message out but its your obligation as the Ultimate Met Gatekeeper to be sure that it serves your audience. Also if there were criminal shenanigans there are better places to report that

Ditto