WSO Censorship vs Moderation
Moderation: removing contributions that are abusive, illegal, or generally harmful to the community
Censorship: systematically removing contributions that expose a truth to protect those affected
Moderation is necessary, but censorship should have no place on a forum that serves as one of the most important public discussion boards for the broader finance community.
WSO has a history of removing unconfirmed rumors off of the forum, and I can understand why it might be necessary for this incident considering many submissions included names/details. However, if WSO wants to retain trust they need to be transparent about why content was removed.
Deletion with no explanation does not help anyone. Users will find out about the incident either way, it draws attention to the censorship and encourages circumvention, and makes it look like the site is censoring on behalf of the affected firm/employees.
Patrick/Andy/moderators - please make a comment/post explaining how the decision was made to delete/stop deleting posts related to the Jefferies incident (the user guidelines only mentions a rule on disclosing personal information).
Can't lie, pretty frustrated that there isn't any discussion allowed on this. Seems like there are a handful of users with fairly strong evidence / information that would be good to know. So long as no one's actual name is being used, there isn't any doxxing. As many of us are aware, this isn't just one individual, but a leader of one of the largest IBs manipulating his power to ruin the lives of perfectly innocent analysts just trying to kick off their careers.
Based on what I have seen elsewhere it looks like there is compelling evidence that at least some of the Jeffries MDs have acted in a despicable and discriminatory manner. Imagine being a female trying to decide if you should take a Jeffries offer vs. other, and you couldn't gain any insight into the current situation despite many users willingly volunteering information.
Hope we get some additional clarity on the situation soon.
My comment "fuck citi" was removed with no explanation 😑 is this censorship?
hey everyone, this thread is still up as are several others on the topic. I'm reviewing what my mod team did yesterday, but I suspect certain threads/content was removed because it contained specific names and/or offensive content (from what I've seen so far) - and most of it was coming from brand new members.
When I came across this late last night I even saw someone saying/implying on Twitter that the CEO of Jefferies is somehow close with WSO. This is not true -- I've never even spoken with him in my life.
I understand the importance of WSO allowing certain topics / situations to be exposed for what they are, however, we must also try and be as balanced as possible and not allow names (from non-public figures) and accusations be posted all over our boards. We have no journalists on staff and don't have the resources / media team to go do proper fact checking, so we have to rely on our members (ideally certified) to verify certain situations.
Please be patient as I look through everything.
Thank you,
Patrick
What happened with Jefferies?
Voluptas ab blanditiis fugiat. Eos perspiciatis voluptatum libero repudiandae dolores ad sint. Ullam repellat ipsam minus quidem. Sunt quae optio sed qui placeat nobis.
Maiores voluptate sunt dolores aut non consequuntur distinctio quam. Consequatur nihil ad omnis at qui dolorum iure animi. Dolorem est non quo reiciendis natus. Cupiditate voluptas voluptatem modi dolorem sunt.
Aut quisquam placeat amet illum at asperiores et. Aut ipsam eum iure reiciendis. Molestiae laborum est eaque excepturi ea explicabo. Eligendi sunt sapiente et voluptatum modi nobis.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...