Talk:Longwood University Sucks/Online Advertising

From BluWiki

[edit] Play nice

This site welcomes a discussion about the content its users have contributed. If you feel you had a different experience at Longwood, or have something to say, speak up! You should add it to the talk pages (like the one you're on right now).

But DO NOT make personal attacks. If you attack any of the other users on this site, your comments will be removed and you may be blocked from bluwiki indefinitely. We're not here to flame eachother.

Thanks! --Sam Odio 02:56, 3 August 2006 (EDT)

[edit] Comments

Using search engine optimization techniques to defame a site happens to be against both terms of service for google and yahoo. I've reported it and I plan on encouraging others to report it as well. Create all the spam sites you want, but tieing key words to a site the defames and organization is not why sponsored results were created. --208.27.3.38

I'll let you know if Google and Yahoo say anything ;). I'm sure they appreciate your detective work.

I personally believe we are not "defaming" Longwood - since to defame an organization you must be making false accusations. You have yet to mention a single comment that satisfies this criteria - but if you can find one I encourage you to bring it to our attention. I'll gladly either remove any false complaints or change them so that they are factually correct. --Sam Odio

Not presenting the whole truth on subjects is slander. It's libelous to claim a site has "facts" about Longwood and then to be continually editing these facts. I have made plenty of changes already. The claims that Longwood is the only school that charges outrageous fees is a false statement. You got caught on the curfew issue as well. You are also not telling the whole truth on issues. I can easily complain about network violations as something as simple as "If you get a virus they take you to Judicial Board" but you don't explain that not a single student has ever gotten that far in the process or why the process is in place. It is slander to mislead the public this way. Perhaps to be honest you could explain why people came to you instead of the RTAs (you put flyers up all over your building). While that statement was factually correct, it was a half-truth that is still considered misleading. Those are the things I'm talking about. This site is full of examples like that.

Replies by Sam Odio 18:12, 5 August 2006 (EDT)

It's libelous to claim a site has "facts" about Longwood and then to be continually editing these facts."

Every time I've edited the comments of others - it was to make them clearer and closer to the truth. If you feel comments were improperly edited, simply bring those comments to our attention and we can do something about them.

" The claims that Longwood is the only school that charges outrageous fees is a false statement. "

Like I said earlier, we never claimed Longwood was the only school.

"You got caught on the curfew issue as well."

My RAs called it a curfew, and I quickly clarified when someone brought it up. That is a perfect example of how this site works. If there is anything that is ambiguous or incorrect, Longwood supporters such as yourself will invariably bring it up. --Sam Odio 20:47, 5 August 2006 (EDT)

"...you don't explain that not a single student has ever gotten that far in the process or why the process is in place..."

I don't know how many students have gone to the J-Board for viruses (is that info published?). However, on the site just said that it's Longwood's policy to pursue j-board action for users who got their computers infected with 3 viruses - and that's 100% true.

If the policy will be carried out - I don't know. But I can only assume that Longwood created this policy with the intent to enforce it. Also, I have first hand knowledge that the simple threat of disciplinary action for getting viruses disturbed several students as being unfair and unreasonable

"...you don't explain ... why the process is in place.."

It's not the role of this website to explain what Longwood's reasoning is behind these policies - simply that these policies exist.

Honestly, I don't know why this policy is in place - plenty of other organizations don't punish their network users for viruses. If other universities, corporate networks, and large networks (such as ISPs) get by without the threat of punishment, why can't Longwood? --Sam Odio 18:12, 5 August 2006 (EDT)