Who all does this apply to, and is it right?

Should top execs name be public and open to mention on Gaia?

yes!	89.5%	[ 136 ]
no!	3.9%	[ 6 ]
gold	6.6%	[ 10 ]
Total Votes:			[ 152 ]

[ProtectorofGlasses]

Earlier, I had a post of mine deleted because it mentioned the Gaia COO by name. I had assumed that the top Gaia staff, such as the CEO, made no secrecy as to what their real names were. (and I could have sworn I saw his name at least in official announcements, i.e "let's welcome ____ _____ to Gaia", as well as Lanzer's real name)

The entire (now censored by me) exchange about the matter via PM is screencapped here if anyone is curious: http://i1282.photobucket.com/albums/a528/Waspscreama/Gaiacapfinished_zps5d8415cc.png

I responded to the admin with the question about whether any staff, such as the CEO, were allowed to be referred to by real name, and I am awaiting their response. If anyone here could in any way shed clarity on the matter that would be appreciated as well. [ETA: Admin responded here: the policy has changed and their names, which were once mentionable, are now off-limits and any mentions of thier names are to be deleted]

The main meat of the discussion that I am curious about though, was a thought sparked by the admin's comments:

"This message is to let you know that we have deleted your post. The reason for this is because it contains real information about another person. We value the safety and privacy of all our users on Gaia Online, user and staff alike, and as a result, we do not allow names to be publicly posted."

This just seems really strange to me, that someone as high ranking as a CEO or COO of a company would expect to have their name be kept secret. Everyone knows that Bill Gates was head of Microsoft. We know Facebook's COO is Sheryl Sandberg.

Why should the name of Gaia's top executives be a secret when most other companies, even social media companies like Facebook, are open about who their top execs are, and certainly don't censor any reference to their name!

Should Gaia's execs be able to expect their names to be kept secret and off of Gaia? Should there be the accountability that comes with having one's actions on line, and in business, tied to your real name?

3nodding [ETA: capcha was "market forces". how appropriate...]

Links to other threads on the matter///users recounting similar experiences:
Topic Censoring?
So wait, we aren't allowed to say the CEO's name?

[Vardoger]

That information(Who the COO is) is public and that post deletion seems like a personal agenda.

But this is just my personal opinion.

[dah fuzzinator of dewm!]

I tried to figure out why my post was deleted, and I think the developers were trying to kill a necromanced thread since it was ressurrected.

As for why it wasn't deleted earlier, I couldn't managed to come up with an answer.

[ProtectorofGlasses]

dah fuzzinator of dewm!

I tried to figure out why my post was deleted, and I think the developers were trying to kill a necromanced thread since it was ressurrected.

As for why it wasn't deleted earlier, I couldn't managed to come up with an answer.

They didn't give you any explanation? eek I wonder if it's uncommon to not get one, as you did, or to get one, like I did... sweatdrop It's never happened to me before so I don't have any experience on this matter

[King Blackwater]

I'm not surprised a lot of people have been screaming for his murder, firing etc its gone to far and understandably I think deleting posts and banning users who do this is completely justified.

[dah fuzzinator of dewm!]

ProtectorofGlasses

dah fuzzinator of dewm!

I tried to figure out why my post was deleted, and I think the developers were trying to kill a necromanced thread since it was ressurrected.

As for why it wasn't deleted earlier, I couldn't managed to come up with an answer.

They didn't give you any explanation? eek I wonder if it's uncommon to not get one, as you did, or to get one, like I did... sweatdrop It's never happened to me before so I don't have any experience on this matter

I directly named the CEO by trying to called him Mr [REDACTED] and welcome him to gaia. But I didn't realize that the thread was an old thread at the time.

It doesn't feel like an explanation to me. I can't precisely describe why it didn't feel like an explanation. I guess I am reading into the post more than what it was meant to convey, though. Although I am not sure if the thread is still up sans my post or not.

[Einrick]

I seem to recall this being a policy that Gaia has had for awhile now.

That said, I find it rather suspicious given that we had an entire thread here in the GCD welcoming the new CEO, by name, created by an Admin. I could understand not wanting to have personal information of a user released, or not wanting to have a number of users start some sort of trolling crusade against an individual person. But the CEO of Gaia Online is public information. He is quite relevant to Gaia Online. It seems unusual, especially since they seem to have all disappeared at the same time.

Then again, there has been a lot of misinformation and accusations about the guy flying around. To play devil's advocate, perhaps it was a large sweep to remove posts accusing him of things or trying to make connections between his position and his activities outside of work?

[Adnama Lavode]

Bornes

That information(Who the COO is) is public and that post deletion seems like a personal agenda.

But this is just my personal opinion.

I had a post deleted for the same reason, for just having the COO's name in my post, but it was removed by a different Admin. If by "personal agenda" you meant that specific admin has their sights on the OP or one particular Admin is doing the post removal, I don't think so, because my post was removed by a different Admin. I wonder if they were given a green light to do this kind of sweeping censorship just recently, because it all seemed to happen in the last few hours. There's a lot of this happening in the SF right now.

[rococobro]

some folks over at SF noticed sisky's thread 'welcoming' him is gone, too.
i'm so confused honestly
i never supported the animosity and the aggression towards him (doesn't mean i agree with the direction gaia's been taken, i'm just not one to personally attack anyone over it), but all this crazy-sudden-secretiveness about the dude's name?
like
what

[Pamina]

I don't think it's appropriate, but it *is* damaging to your personal brand to have your name googleable with so many colorful posts. They seem to be framing this as a security issue, but I wouldn't be surprised if there are other considerations at play in the new policy.

[Anja Sedai]

That's a bit weird. The CEO and COO's names are pretty common knowledge and easily findable. It's not like you were outing a user's irl identity. Are they trying to shove the mess they're making of Gaia under the rug? Make sure none of this shows up if someone decides to search their name? This leans a bit too much towards censorship to make me comfortable with it.

[Einrick]

rococobro

some folks over at SF noticed sisky's thread 'welcoming' him is gone, too.
i'm so confused honestly
i never supported the animosity and the aggression towards him (doesn't mean i agree with the direction gaia's been taken, i'm just not one to personally attack anyone over it), but all this crazy-sudden-secretiveness about the dude's name?
like
what

I noticed that I can't find the welcoming thread anymore, either.

Like I said before, I think part of the problem involves people posting stuff he and other Gaia management were doing outside of work, and trying to draw connections between that and what's happening with Gaia Online now. Accusing the CEO and other people of stuff because of presentations they've done outside work is likely the same kind of lynch-mobbing they want to avoid happening with anyone.

That said, given the current actions and decisions of Gaia management, I'm not much inclined to defend them these days. confused

[Vardoger]

Adnama Lavode

Bornes

That information(Who the COO is) is public and that post deletion seems like a personal agenda.

But this is just my personal opinion.

I had a post deleted for the same reason, for just having the COO's name in my post, but it was removed by a different Admin. If by "personal agenda" you meant that specific admin has their sights on the OP or one particular Admin is doing the post removal, I don't think so, because my post was removed by a different Admin. I wonder if they were given a green light to do this kind of sweeping censorship just recently, because it all seemed to happen in the last few hours. There's a lot of this happening in the SF right now.

"Personal agenda" could mean they had it in for this user or they personally decided the name shouldn't be said, so decided to delete everyone's posts. I'm not going to pitchfork anything.

It's probably like you and someone else said. So much hate, they decided to go through damage control. I mean, technically, it is still personally identifiable information -- which isn't allowed under the TOS -- but you'd think there'd be an exception when the information is publicly available.

It's like deleting posts for saying the president's name is Barack Obama.

[Yeata Zi]

Can I google it?

Yes.

Ok. Public knowledge. Deleting your post is dumb.

[Vardoger]

rococobro

some folks over at SF noticed sisky's thread 'welcoming' him is gone, too.
i'm so confused honestly
i never supported the animosity and the aggression towards him (doesn't mean i agree with the direction gaia's been taken, i'm just not one to personally attack anyone over it), but all this crazy-sudden-secretiveness about the dude's name?
like
what

That thread about sending Gaia HQ letters is gone as well.

Actually I am surprised that thread didn't get moved/deleted sooner.