save the la mesa, our water, our life Options

[rockmyx]

12 MILLION PEOPLE IN METRO MANILA DEPEND ON

THE LA MESA RESERVOIR FOR WATER


PLEASE HELP KEEP IT SAFE AND CLEAN





add your voice to the campaign to preserve the La Mesa watersheld. join the signature campaign asking the government.


by signing the petition below, you are opposing the privatizing of the 59 hectere portion of the La Mesa reservoir, wherein a housing project will be built, thus endagering the integrity of the metro manila's water supply. Join the various organization in the La Mesa coalition in asking the government to exhaust all the means to find a just solution to the rights of the awardees / claimants of the 59 hectare land, without prejudicing the rights of 12 million metro manila residents to clean water.




please log-in to

Link Removed
for more info



or text

Text information removed

This post has been edited by iRock cB: Sep 23 2006, 09:56 AM

[smoke]

So.... if in debate, we post links to our sources, that is not allowed? Or if in the News forum, posting links to news sources is not allow either?

You know I'm glad you mentioned that because I was thinking this could be into news some how since is is an issue in his community. And I believe that links in there is a given because it's giving credit to where you got the information so it's not plagiarism, as is the same with the debate forum and to add to the point you are trying to make. You know that. Don't play dumb.

If you want to look at the rule strictly, yes, this was a form of advertising according to the rule. I personally questioned it but as a moderator, I have to abide by the rules and enforce them. In that case I won't put the link back up because rules are rules. Maybe we should change the rule around a bit to allow links such as these. Until then, the best solution is to to PM him because I'd love for you to help him out. I'll even talk to him about posting something up in the news section. Maybe an article about the issue and then he may supply the petition.

[Spirited Away]

You know I'm glad you mentioned that because I was thinking this could be into news some how since is is an issue in his community. And I believe that links in there is a given because it's giving credit to where you got the information so it's not plagiarism, as is the same with the debate forum and to add to the point you are trying to make. You know that. Don't play dumb.

If you want to look at the rule strictly, yes, this was a form of advertising according to the rule. I personally questioned it but as a moderator, I have to abide by the rules and enforce them. In that case I won't put the link back up because rules are rules. Maybe we should change the rule around a bit to allow links such as these. Until then, the best solution is to to PM him because I'd love for you to help him out. I'll even talk to him about posting something up in the news section. Maybe an article about the issue and then he may supply the petition.

Just to clear this up, did you just accuse me of playing dumb by any chance? I will bring this up in bylaws if I have to, but saying that you deleted the link because you were "strictly" following the rules is rather funny because it makes all your mod peers and all the mods who preceded you look completely useless and lazy. Wow that's a great feat. Have you ever heard of discrepancy though? But oh well.

[smoke]

Just to clear this up, did you just accuse me of playing dumb by any chance? I will bring this up in bylaws if I have to, but saying that you deleted the link because you were "strictly" following the rules is rather funny because it makes all your mod peers and all the mods who preceded you look completely useless and lazy. Wow that's a great feat. Have you ever heard of discrepancy though? But oh well.

^ aw, I was just kidding around. You don't have to take me so seriously. I meant it in a fun loving manner, haha. I didn't mean that you were exactly. Sorry. I meant that when I pointed that out I figured you'd already know that because I know you've been around here for a long time. Maybe I used it incorrectly.

And for future reference, I kid around a lot, so if someone doesn't have much of a sence of humor or takes things very seriously, I may offend them. And I'm not saying you don't have a sense of humor. I mean people in general... You know what I mean, haha.

And how does that make them look lazy? And if so, I honestly can't help that haha. I do my job. And please PM me. You an I are technically spamming, haha.

[Spirited Away]

^ aw, I was just kidding around. You don't have to take me so seriously. I meant it in a fun loving manner, haha. I didn't mean that you were exactly. Sorry. I meant that when I pointed that out I figured you'd already know that because I know you've been around here for a long time. Maybe I used it incorrectly.

And for future reference, I kid around a lot, so if someone doesn't have much of a sence of humor or takes things very seriously, I may offend them. And I'm not saying you don't have a sense of humor. I mean people in general... You know what I mean, haha.

And how does that make them look lazy? And if so, I honestly can't help that haha. I do my job. And please PM me. You an I are technically spamming, haha.

Sorry, I don't get online humor. People who knows me on this forum knows it. I rarely get it. You just have to get to know me, too.

Please check by-laws. If I'm wrong, then I'm wrong, but I don't think that censoring this message was fair.

Hes not useless and lazy, people agreed about it being advertisment. So he didn't do anything wrong.

He wants to make things better for people that want to sign the peptition so hes PMing the guy to make a topic in news about it and to post the link so he can get people that want to help him to sign the peptition.

I'm pretty positive he wasn't at all accusing you of playing dumb.

How does that make THEM (PREVIOUS MODS NOT HIM) look lazy and useless? Strictly following the rules means taking all "references and links to anything that is not personal, such as websites and forums" out. That is "strictly" following the rules. Who agreed that this is advertisement? Who presented a better case?