Talk:Internet vigilantism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Hey Vthiru! Thanks for starting the article I added some more words in to avoid it being deleted within a couple of days, for being too short. I however did it quite fast, so do some gramma check for me thanks :) --220.238.150.184 15:11, 1 June 2006 (UTC)
Contents |
[edit] Stolen Sidekick
I think the link for the Stolen Sidekick is a valid one.I may be incorrect thank you. -- Evanx(tag?) 23:36, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] YTMND-Day
why was this removed? it seems like a valid example to me.
[edit] Huh? It's missing?
Did this article get PROD'd or something? I'm sad... if I remember correctly, it was a pretty high quality article. This should've been given a proper AfD. --Czj 22:04, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
- You could bring it up to deletion review..._dk 00:02, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
- It has been restored with the kind help of Samuel Blanning. Hooray! It looks like the only reason it was PROD'd originally is because somone disagreed with the title of the article or something... I have to say that sounds like a pretty hasty judgment call. At least it's back now, though. If someone thinks another title would better suit this concept, please make suggestions instead of trying to remove the entire article for the wrong reasons. --Czj 00:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Corporate stuff
In 2006 in the United States, blogger Vincent Ferrari publicised a recording of a telephone conversation with an AOL customer service representative, in order to convey his dissatisfaction with the service provided. The recording was distributed via blogs and YouTube.
I removed this because I don't think complaining about a service provided by a company is "vigilantism" - if anything, the verizon .002-cents thing would fit better on the dubious basis that it gets personal about the phone reps' math skills. --Random832 12:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
Are we all sure that the bottom isn't meant to be piracy rather than privacy? I know we all love our clever word switches, but with no other sources I'd say it's probably a typo or a lie. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.135.62.115 (talk) 04:34, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
