why did the article on zaki get taken down? if 40 people thought it was news worthy and relevant enough to comment on, shouldn't that be the indymedia editors' cue that they should leave it up? what was the reason for pulling it, and is that reason or that decision making process transparent for all of us to see and criticize?
i think that article had some comments which devolved, but fundamentally i thought it was getting real differences of opinion to be aired and dealt with. i felt it was pushing people to think about what is gossip and what is substantiated. i felt it was pushing us to ask about what security culture we should have and what things might be going too far, and be too paranoid.
for these reasons i thought that article and the comments it generated were worthy of being on indymedia.