# Open for TRF opinions...bring 'em on

### Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

#### EMRR

##### Well-Known Member
I sent a note on the EMRR Announcement List and then posted the
following:

Wow! Interesting feedback I got on my last note, so I thought I'd
open it up for discussion. I'm also going to post on RMR and TRF, so
you can reply privately or openly to either of those sites.

I said in my last post about someone pointing out a swear word in a
flight log.

"It is my desire to ensure that the site says kid-friendly. I will
remove the reported one as soon as I get home. I will also do a check
on all other site content. I will add "word" replacers in the scripts
as well (simple to do, don't know why I have never done it in the
past)."

Now my intent was NOT gross censorship, however, I did want to
eliminate the "S" and "F" words from the content of EMRR. I've done
that search and found only (4) incidents in the entire site!

However, my note brought interesting charges against EMRR (me) in the
following area (my paraphrasing):

1) Who do you think you are to censor, you have no right?

2) Articles submissions are over edited; there are people who don't
review anymore because of that

3) Articles are over formatted; your censors substitute entire
phrases that reviewers never said

What are your comments on these charges? Also is anyone aware of a
review being "over edited" or "over formatted" or "substitued

It's my customer service gene that has me asking.

Regards,
Nick

#### eugenefl

##### Well-Known Member
Hmm...rocketry and cuss words. Nah. The only place there should be swearing is on the field when your rocket nosedives from 2000ft and self destructs.

#### BlueNinja

##### Well-Known Member
I believe whoever is saying that is overreacting. There is a reason you have to censor, and it's a GOOD reason.

##### Well-Known Member
1)Who do you think you are to censor, you have no right?
If, as owner of the site, you are not allowed to edit who is? This one doesnt even get off the ground.

2) Articles submissions are over edited; there are people who don't review anymore because of that
The little that I have added, has gone up as posted. If an individual has stopped posting because of editing that is their choice.

3)Articles are over formatted; your censors substitute entire phrases that reviewers never said
As I have not been edited I can not comment on this point except to refer back to my first answer. If not you, who?

The reason that TRF and EMRR are what they are is due to the effort and vigilance of the owner/moderators. I have had to be refrained from expressing my opinion several times on TRF and each time it was appropriate. There are well defined rules for participation and thats what makes these places different.

There are places for me to go and jump up and down or to rant and rave about a particular issue. These two places of refuge from R.M.R type activity, where it is about ROCKETRY, not politics, religion.are good for the sport/hobby.

#### mojack82

##### Well-Known Member
Nick:

Keep doing what you're doing!

I'm no prude & can swear with the best of them - but it's nice to go to a site that's not riddled with profanity. Also, it's extremely important to carefully guard and nurture the hobby's image and reputation if we're to avoid over-regulation and pass the hobby on to our progeny. If people wish to cuss, head to rmr.

As far as reviews go, if folks' egos and pride of authorship can't take some editing (or even "heavy" editing) in their reviews, they always have the option of ceasing to write reviews. The fact that some folks took their ball and went home says more about their "issues" and hangups and nothing about your admirable attempt to maintain superior standards. Besides, it may stick in the craw of some inflated egos "out there", but somebody else will just as competently take their place anyway...

Keep doing the great job you're been doing and ignore those who attempt to regress to the mean or worse, the lowest common denominator. I for one appreciate your efforts and of the many others in this hobby who do the extra things and keep to high standards. You've got a great site I go to frequently and wouldn't think twice about letting my 11 year old daughter or my 73 year old mother cruise with no restrictions!

Jack

#### sandman

##### Well-Known Member
I will repeat here my feedback to Nick.

If someone swears in front of my child or grandchild (if I had any!) or ANY child in my house I have the RIGHT to ask them not to.

If they continue I will make them leave!

This is not censorship...it's manners.

The S and F words are not needed when writing a review of a model rocket.

#### Chilly

##### Well-Known Member
"1) Who do you think you are to censor, you have no right?"

You're doing the right thing. This is a family hobby. I'd be PO'd if my son came across foul language in a hobby forum.

#### SwingWing

##### Well-Known Member
Originally posted by Chilly
"1) Who do you think you are to censor, you have no right?"

You're doing the right thing. This is a family hobby. I'd be PO'd if my son came across foul language in a hobby forum.
Exactly!! Agree 100%!!

#### Donaldsrockets

##### Well-Known Member
I agree. Cuss words do not belong in rocket reviews or on any rocketry website for that matter.

I agree with Eugene's statement, it's fine if your rocket comes barreling in nose first from a few thousand feet but if there is a lot of kids around, you might really want to watch what you say.

Just my .02 cents.

#### GL-P

##### Well-Known Member
I use profanity but I'm very careful around children and don't use profanity in front of other parents or people I don't know. Rocketry doesn't neet profanity.

I've never been edited. (as far as I can tell)

#### KermieD

##### Well-Known Member
I think Head Hunter hit the nail on the head on all counts. Nick, you do a great job and offer a great service to the community. It may be thankless at times and some knuckleheads may take issue with what you do, but don't let those few bad apples ruin a good thing.

Keep up the great work. You are the one rocketeer who, more than any other, I hope to meet someday to shake your hand and say thank you for what you do for the hobby.

#### lamart72

##### Well-Known Member
Nick,

It looks like overwhelming support for you and your "clean" site.
I also would like to thank you for your invaluable contributions to the rocketry community.

If someone doesn't like your site..then they can go elsewhere.
TRF and EMRR are truly wonderful sites thanks in large part to the high-flying morals of its members. Lets keep it that way.

Lamar

#### Stymye

##### Well-Known Member
Nick ,
there is no doubt,you do a great job and are a valuable asset to the rocketry hobby,

so,I just want to say Thank You !

#### jflis

##### Well-Known Member
Well, Nick, I sent you a private email, but wanted to comment on a few things here similar to what I said in email...

For the owner of a *place* (be it a web site, forum, ball park or back yard) to restrict what can and can not be said, that is NOT censorship (as the law defines it). If someone *other* than the owner (like a law enforcement officer) tries to restrict me, of his OWN accord, then that is censorship.

Such is not the case with EMRR, so go for it

If someone sent me a DOM, for example, with a vulgarity in it (by MY definition) and I remove it, it isn't "censorship", it's "excersizing my perogative" and nothing more.

jim

#### r1dermon

##### Well-Known Member
i was one that reported a swear on your site yesterday, my brother frequents that site, and he's really young. its not cool to have that kind of stuff on a review site, ya know? its not meant for that. its meant to give an opinion on the kit. it wasnt even in the review, it was in a flight log. i dont think that type of stuff is appropriate in a public site which gets a lot of attention by young people, like my brother. i thank the EMRR staff for removing those and taking measures to ensure that this wont happen again. i dont blame anyone but the person who logged the flight. it seems they should take a little more responsibility in the content that they post. thank you for addresing this issue.

oh, and they're absolutely out of line to challenge your authority as the owner operator of the site which their content is posted on. because ultimately, it doesnt hurt their rep, it hurts the site, and i dont like that. because EMRR is a great informative site. keep up the good work.

#### GL-P

##### Well-Known Member

It's the best and is "clean".

#### sandman

##### Well-Known Member
Nick,

You were right he was wrong we all agree...we now resume our regular programming.

#### rstaff3

I sent Nick my comments directly, but I'll repeat/rephrase. Replace the swear words, they don't add useful information. A @#$% gives the same message of frustration with a lost rocket without being offensive. I am not 100% sure I didn't get close to the line on a flight log. If I did, or do, I have NO PROBLEM with an change. As for the other part, I have had my reviews edited. Not what I would have done, but its just not a big deal. I agree with the others, its your site and you have to be proud of what's there. You are doing a great job, on your own time, for the betterment of the hobby. 'Nuff said! #### BKROSNEY ##### Well-Known Member My comments to Nick... Can't comment on reviews being over-editted or over-formatted, however as a parent I DO appreciate the "kid-friendly" approach. We all know there are plenty of questionable sites on the Internet. In the interest of passing my passion for rocketry on to my children I'd like to encourage them to freely and frequently visit the EMRR site because of it's content and lack (some may say control) of vocabulary presented. Let's face it. If a product sucks, or some disasterous event causes the occassional expletive in the field; we can all present our displeasure and frustration when writing in a forum that does not necessitate swear words. 'nuff said. ... Bill #### lalligood ##### Well-Known Member I know it has been said rather well already by other TRFers but I want to express my opinion that while EMRR's content is largely community driven, it IS ultimately Nick's site so he indeed has the final say on what gets posted & what doesn't. A friendly, easy to read website with content for rocketeers of all ages does not equal the evil hand of censorship. With that said, I would like to personally address the "over-editting" and "over-formatting" issues. A little over a year ago, Nick put out a call for volunteers to assist him with proofreading product reviews submitted by the community. He had found that the reviews were coming at a frequency too great for him to handle alone while maintaining the rest of the site, not to mention wanting to have more of a life than just managing the EMRR website! I am one of several volunteers and, according to Nick, I am the most active as far as the persons responsible for proofreading and editting the submitted content. I can tell you that there are a definite core group of 10-15 folks who have submitted reviews at a steady if not frequent pace along with a generous helping of individuals who are one-time and/or infrequent contributors during this time I have been involved. My goal as a proofreader is to make sure that each review "tells a story" along with conveying that journey with any submitted pictures. Content (text or images) that wanders off or is not relevant to the review will probably be trimmed. If it sticks to the topic, it stays. It is that simple. I am taking this opportunity make it known to inform the rocketry community that it has been MY responsibility to proofread & edit (the bulk of) the reviews submitted to EMRR and that the burden of addressing these comments should not be placed solely on Nick--although I always consider him EMRR's "editor in chief" and as such, he has final say on any content that I have put my hands on (along with any & all other content on the site). Even though I consider my relationship with Nick & EMRR to be an employee/boss-like arrangement, I do NOT get paid for my time & work--I do it as a gesture of "paying it forward" for the good of the rocketry community in the same manner that folks contribute reviews. I also will be the first to admit that I'm not perfect. I can handle having my mistakes pointed out & promise to make every effort to learn from them. My goal is to be helpful; not offend or turn off any reader and/or contributor in the audience. Without actually having to dig through 300+ reviews that I have personally proofread during my tenure, I would "guesstimate" that about one-half to two-thirds of the reviews submitted often need little more than a spell check, fix a common grammar pitfall or two, and/or perhaps clean up a particularly clunky or fragmented sentence here or there. The remaining contributions can sometimes be downright indecipherable. I am not about to get on a soapbox and declare that the downfall of civilization is near because of any/some supposed horrible writing, language or grammar of reviews in question. But I am not a mindreader either! I can only work with what is given to me. That only leaves me with attempting to glean what the contributor meant & making sense of the submission best I can. If that comes out as being heavy handed with the "red pen" or over-editting, you have my sincerest apologies. If the submitter of a review & I were in a true paid working environment, we would work together & discuss the content, however, it is far more difficult to do that in this volunteer based environment. It would also impede the progress of updates on the site. I am not an English teacher (much less pretend to be one on TV!) out to teach how to write nor can or will I scold anyone for their submission. There simply are some submissions that just need considerable work for them to be readable and downright make sense to the remainder of the audience. I am here to make EMRR as enjoyable an experience as I can for anyone who happens to reads it. If there is anyone that disagrees with the way their review was editted, then I strongly suggest that you revisit & reread what you submitted first. Once you have had a chance to look it over, then we can sit down & have a mature discussion of why those changes were made if you are still unclear on the reason behind the change(s). I'm sure that Nick would not object to posting any corrected reviews, however I would expect that there would need to be substantial reason for doing so, as any addendums to reviews are more beneficial--not to mention more easily made through the Tips, Opinions, and Flight Logs of any currently existing reviews. Regarding the over-formatting, I am unclear as to what is meant by the term so someone will have to provide more information or examples of this. I do feel that the previous two paragraphs probably address this issue though. Here are some helpful guidelines for anyone who wants to submit a review in the future: First, take good notes (and hopefully pictures) throughout the build and when flying the rocket (write it down while it's fresh in your mind at the field!) I have found it easiest to do this by creating a text or Word file using a template that is similar in format to how the information is requested on the EMRR Submit page when putting everything together. Second, take your time writing the review. Read what you have written. Then read it again. Then wait 10, 15, even 30 minutes & come back & read it again. Print it out or read it aloud if you need to. Third, make sure that it makes sense and conveys the steps clearly and your opinion about the product. Not only does this pay dividends on the quality of your submissions, but you will probably find new insights and even patterns (good or bad) in your rocket building and launching experience, which can only benefit you in the long run! It certainly has been of great help to me. Ultimately, EMRR wouldn't be a fraction of the valued resource to the rocketry community it is & will always be if it weren't for YOU AND THE CONTENT THAT YOU PROVIDE! I thank everyone who has submitted reviews and will submit reviews in the future to Nick's site. #### Fishhead ##### Keel Loopy Edit away. I have no problems with that at all. I'm grateful to have a forum to do something like this. It almost makes all of that college tuition worth it. ;-) #### Hospital_Rocket ##### Well-Known Member Nick 1) You own it you post what you want 2) I wish you would edit more, my spelling and grammar mistakes make it into my posts waaaay to often. #### goose_in_co ##### Well-Known Member Nick, Thanks are to you and to all of the other people that help you put together that great site. All of you do a great service to the rocketry community. I really do appreciate the work that all of you have done to keep EMRR rated G. Goose #### JStarStar ##### Well-Known Member Nick, keep up your great job. Myself, I swear like a brother-trucker, but I know it's really not too cool to post that stuff on a public bulletin board where kids are likely to frequent. The keyboard has plenty of characters such as$%$%^%^%&^%@&@$*@ which can be used to substitute when needed.

Edit posts to meet with the standards you see fit to establish on your board.

I doubt very, very, very much too many people refuse to post because they cant spew obscenities throughout their post. IF they do, oh well...

#### DynaSoar

##### Well-Known Member
Tell 'em to eat bugs. It's your property. You own it. You can decide anything you want.

If that chases anyone away, good, they needed chased away.

They want to spew trash, there's always r.m.r

##### Well-Known Member
Originally posted by EMRR
However, my note brought interesting charges against EMRR (me) in the
following area (my paraphrasing):

1) Who do you think you are to censor, you have no right?
The owner of the site. End of argument.
2) Articles submissions are over edited; there are people who don't
review anymore because of that
If there are people who can't express themselves without swearing, or who believe they have a right to swear in front of the children who are some of your readers, then you probably don't want their reviews anyway. Bottom line: whose complaints would you rather face, those from adolescent fools who can't express themselves without vulgarity, or those from parents who don't want their children exposed to swearword-infested sites?
3) Articles are over formatted; your censors substitute entire
phrases that reviewers never said
A serious allegation; it claims that you are writing your own material and including it in someone else's review. Would the accuser like to back up that claim with evidence or apologise?

My own experience is from my entries into DesCon 14. You did reformat my articles, necessarily - one had to be converted from a Word document to HTML, the other had to be converted from plain text to HTML. There were a couple of problems, of a technical rather than editorial nature, which were resolved quickly by e-mail exchange. And the flight report in one of them was moved to another part of the article so it could be found more easily. Nothing was substituted, the article was just re-arranged a bit. I have no problem with that. If this is how other reviews and articles are handled, keep up the good work.

#### lalligood

##### Well-Known Member
After letting 12+ hours go by and reading all fo the comments here & even on r.m.r., I'm getting the feeling that this is all much ado about nothing. (So maybe I was a bit hasty in my previous--and lengthy--comment?)

It's nice to hear consistently high praise for the efforts & work that is done by Nick too

#### Johnnie

##### Well-Known Member
My mom is of the opinion that a person is judged by how clean they keep their house...and how they clean their house is no one elses business, as long as it is kept clean...EMRR is your house Nick, and I say clean away.

Do you think that a rating system will be instated by the FED GOV for web sites, like they do movies and television

EMRR: PG-13, May contain ADULT Language Content

Nah, it would hard if not impossible to inforce world wide...

You have done a fantastic job, and I say carry on.

#### EMRR

##### Well-Known Member
Originally posted by lalligood
Here are some helpful guidelines for anyone who wants to submit a review in the future: First, take good notes (and hopefully pictures) throughout the build and when flying the rocket (write it down while it's fresh in your mind at the field!) I have found it easiest to do this by creating a text or Word file using a template that is similar in format to how the information is requested on the EMRR Submit page when putting everything together.
I'm working on a tool that will allow you to write portions of reviews and then come back to them, call them up and finish them. For instance, the construction could be several days/weeks before finishing, which could be several days/weeks/months before actually flying. This way you can write while it is fresh and finish it later. Then it would be submitted. I should have this done for January.

Originally posted by lalligood
Ultimately, EMRR wouldn't be a fraction of the valued resource to the rocketry community it is & will always be if it weren't for YOU AND THE CONTENT THAT YOU PROVIDE! I thank everyone who has submitted reviews and will submit reviews in the future to Nick's site.
Agreed. we'll take any submission but there has to be enough content to be meaningful.

Regards,
Nick

#### aksarben10

##### Well-Known Member
I think that this post has shown that people are in favor of your efforts to remove profanity from YOUR web site.

I read those 3 concerns and think that they are all really off base. First and foremost, its your web site and you control the content and if you do not want profanity its your call. I am a reviewer from time to time and I have never noticed any editing to any of my reviews content wise. The only edits I have noticed were added trademark signs when I use a trademarked word. As to the formatting, you have to consider the continuity of the web pages so yes the should be formatted alike.

EMMR is an asset to this community and we need all of them we can get as we have more then our share of 'anchors' some are regulatory and some are human.

Thanks Nick, you do a great job.

Scott