Toronto CIBC SQUARE | 241.39m | 50s | Hines | WilkinsonEyre

[UtakataNoAnnex]

If crane\building climbing photos are implicitly endorsed on this site it deserves to lose the professional like experience it’s had. A slippery slope and before long just another shitty social media site clamouring for views at any cost. I don’t think developers and construction companies would be too pleased to see encouraging reactions to these photos.

I don't think this site will ever turn into 4chan outside the occasioned edgelord that's got something to prove...

...I am however uncomfortable with this site unwittingly becoming the host to break-in pics...and that should be discouraged here. As I've said, there are plenty of other places for that.

Meanwhile, we can take solace in the myriad of pics taken publicly from the permissible side of security fencing. And for what that's worth.

 

[Collingwoodbuildinglover]

Yeah I think that we can put this debate to bed at this point and just enjoy the pictures we are getting We probably only have another 3 months before cranes come down at this site anyways though I can't wait till the exterior is finished up

 

[DSCToronto]

This.

Hoping for a response from mods soon.

@Edward Skira

Yes, the Mods have been surprisingly absent during this discussion - is the UT hit squad on break?

 

[C-mac]

Yeah I think that we can put this debate to bed at this point and just enjoy the pictures we are getting We probably only have another 3 months before cranes come down at this site anyways though I can't wait till the exterior is finished up

There's no "put this debate to bed" regarding this. There's members who want to close their account over this conduct so it needs to be addressed.

 

[A Torontonian Now]

In my view, it would be very problematic for UT to be condoning or encouraging break-and-enter and dangerous behaviour. However, I am not sure that permitting users to post such content is condoning the behaviour. If this content were featured as photo of the day or something of that sort, this would be condoning the behaviour in a way that would be unacceptable. But that is not the case here.

On the other hand, banning the content absent proof that it was obtained illegally can be a slippery slope. Right now, everyone has made a very rational and nearly certainly correct inference that this content was illegally obtained, but an inference is different from proof.

All this to say that it is a tough call, but if UT takes the decision to not outright ban this content while still discouraging it, I believe that would be a rational choice and would hope that highly valued users do not quit the site over such a decision.

 

[hawc]

To me it comes down to whether UT wants to be a site that hosts illegal activity.

Climbing cranes, sitting with your legs over the edge of buildings in the middle of the night is either trespassing and illegal, or a clear WSIB violation if he were 'let in' but with no PPE and then behaved recklessly.

Whether UT wants to host this is what's really at the heart of it.

Again, my analogy are the many car forums out there. Some will let anything go. But the better ones draw a strict line at no posting illegal activity like street takeover videos, or street racing.

Whether you want to say UT becomes 'complicit' or 'promotes' or 'encourages' the illegal activity is where it gets murkier, but at the very least they are definitely hosting it.

If I were a builder, like if this were one of SKYGRID's buildings (it's NOT, but if it were for example) would SKYGRID want to be a partner on site that hosted illegal activity in one of their buildings?

And are there WSIB or legal issues if the person who posted it said "Oh yeah I was fully let on to this site by the builder..." with no safety equipment etc.

It's just not the right path for UT to go down IMO. But hey, I'm boring.

 

[A Torontonian Now]

To me it comes down to whether UT wants to be a site that hosts illegal activity.

Climbing cranes, sitting with your legs over the edge of buildings in the middle of the night is either trespassing and illegal, or a clear WSIB violation if he were 'let in' but with no PPE.

Whether UT wants to host this is what's really at the heart of it.

Again, my analogy are the many car forums out there. Some will let anything go. But the better ones draw a strict line at no posting illegal activity like street takeover videos, or street racing.

Whether you want to say UT become 'complicit' or is 'promotes' or 'encourages' the illegal activity is where it gets murkier, but at the very least they are definitely hosting it.

If I were a builder, like if this were one of SKYGRID's buildings (it's NOT, but if it were for example) would SKYGRID want to be a partner on site that hosted illegal activity in one of their buildings?

And are there WSIB or legal issues if the person who posted it said "Oh yeah I was fully let on to this site by the builder with no safety equipment etc...".

It's just not the right path for UT to go down IMO. But hey, I'm boring.

I completely understand this perspective.

My concern with the slippery slope is that it then begs the question of where does UT's responsibility to ensure it does not host this sort of information end? What about photographs taken by a phone thrust over or through hoarding? What about photos taken from semi-private locations without explicit permission (ex: from restaurants located near the tops of towers, or rooftop patios). What about drone photos taken from positions where air rights are unclear? What about potentially leaked information about developments?

This last one is particularly interesting, as there are advantages and even public policy good that can come from some leaked information. UT's policy, to the best of my understanding from past incidents, is to permit such information to be hosted unless or until some entity asks it to be taken down.

Perhaps a similar approach is appropriate in this case - to permit the photos until the developer, contractor, or other entity associated with the project asks for it to be taken down.

I am not saying that this is necessarily the right approach - again, I think your points are valid - just trying to highlight the complexity of the question and what I mean by it being a slippery slope, in the hope that we do not lose such highly valued contributors as yourself if UT takes an approach with a nuance slightly different than the approach such users prefer.

 

[DSCToronto]

I completely understand this perspective.

My concern with the slippery slope is that it then begs the question of where does UT's responsibility to ensure it does not host this sort of information end? What about photographs taken by a phone thrust over or through hoarding? What about photos taken from semi-private locations without explicit permission (ex: from restaurants located near the tops of towers, or rooftop patios). What about drone photos taken from positions where air rights are unclear? What about potentially leaked information about developments?

This last one is particularly interesting, as there are advantages and even public policy good that can come from some leaked information. UT's policy, to the best of my understanding from past incidents, is to permit such information to be hosted unless or until some entity asks it to be taken down.

Perhaps a similar approach is appropriate in this case - to permit the photos until the developer, contractor, or other entity associated with the project asks for it to be taken down.

I am not saying that this is necessarily the right approach - again, I think your points are valid - just trying to highlight the complexity of the question and what I mean by it being a slippery slope, in the hope that we do not lose such highly valued contributors as yourself if UT takes an approach with a nuance slightly different than the approach such users prefer.

I think this whole conversation would be more useful if we knew what the UT policy actually is! Are the Mods simply too busy (or hung over?) to get involved and remove some content or are they happy that some of the photos show us things we had never seen before and that nobody died or made an 'official' complaint.

 

[GabrielHurl]

Maybe they are having a break like the rest of us.

Don’t they deserve a break over the holidays too????

 

[C-mac]

In my view, it would be very problematic for UT to be condoning or encouraging break-and-enter and dangerous behaviour. However, I am not sure that permitting users to post such content is condoning the behaviour. If this content were featured as photo of the day or something of that sort, this would be condoning the behaviour in a way that would be unacceptable. But that is not the case here.

For the most part, I would say any photo UT is not comfortable with featuring would be where I would draw the line. I don't mean not comfortable because it's bad photography or something of that nature, I'm specifically talking about photo's that they feel are unethical and don't fit the spirit of this forum. To me that would be a good place to draw the line.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

I think this whole conversation would be more useful if we knew what the UT policy actually is! Are the Mods simply too busy (or hung over?) to get involved and remove some content or are they happy that some of the photos show us things we had never seen before and that nobody died or made an 'official' complaint.

Welp...let's take a look at that:

UrbanToronto Rules Of Conduct

UrbanToronto Rules Of Conduct We think UrbanToronto is a wonderful resource and we want it to continue to grow. However, as in any community, anarchy can result without rules. These are the new UrbanToronto Rules of Conduct. Please familiarize yourself with these rules. Registration - Only...

urbantoronto.ca

...now, outside of posting porn (illicit material), there doesn't seem to be an anything that quite covers this. Not to say there is, it's just not something specific to that from what I can gather. Maybe there was a presumption that posters would post their pics in good faith by abiding by the given laws and boundaries from where they are taking those pics from. Who knows...perhaps this maybe a time to update the CoC to include this. And maybe one that requires legal advice just how to go about doing that...something I imagine will take a little bit of time to make sure those "t's" are crossed and "i's" dotted when spelling that out.

I am in the boat that where I think this horse has been beaten, hung, drawn and quartered here. Until we hear from admin on this, there's not really much more to say that hasn't been already clearly said and discussed, IMO. Maybe ping admin privately till you get a response instead? Mr. 42 always answers my private correspondence in the anecdote.

...in the meantime, just stick higherupJ's sorried buttcheeks on /ignore, I guess.

 

[Sandpit]

In my view, it would be very problematic for UT to be condoning or encouraging break-and-enter and dangerous behaviour. However, I am not sure that permitting users to post such content is condoning the behaviour. If this content were featured as photo of the day or something of that sort, this would be condoning the behaviour in a way that would be unacceptable. But that is not the case here.

On the other hand, banning the content absent proof that it was obtained illegally can be a slippery slope. Right now, everyone has made a very rational and nearly certainly correct inference that this content was illegally obtained, but an inference is different from proof.

All this to say that it is a tough call, but if UT takes the decision to not outright ban this content while still discouraging it, I believe that would be a rational choice and would hope that highly valued users do not quit the site over such a decision.

I feel that this is the best solution. Tolerate but not endorse/promote/glorify. Or if that is still too much for some people, only allow as an external link (e.g. instagram).

I understand the concern some members have, but it’s also coming close to that old expression about forums and airports…

 

[DSCToronto]

Welp...let's take a look at that:

UrbanToronto Rules Of Conduct

UrbanToronto Rules Of Conduct We think UrbanToronto is a wonderful resource and we want it to continue to grow. However, as in any community, anarchy can result without rules. These are the new UrbanToronto Rules of Conduct. Please familiarize yourself with these rules. Registration - Only...

urbantoronto.ca

...now, outside of posting porn (illicit material), there doesn't seem to be an anything that quite covers this. Not to say there is, it's just not something specific to that from what I can gather. Maybe there was a presumption that posters would post their pics in good faith by abiding by the given laws and boundaries from where they are taking those pics from. Who knows...perhaps this maybe a time to update the CoC to include this. And maybe one that requires legal advice just how to go about doing that...something I imagine will take a little bit of time to make sure those "t's" are crossed and "i's" dotted when spelling that out.

I am in the boat that where I think this horse has been beaten, hung, drawn and quartered here. Until we hear from admin on this, there's not really much more to say that hasn't been already clearly said and discussed, IMO. Maybe ping admin privately till you get a response instead? Mr. 42 always answers my private correspondence in the anecdote.

...in the meantime, just stick higherupJ's sorried buttcheeks on /ignore, I guess.

As you (and many of us) have said: " Until we hear from admin on this, there's not really much more to say "

 

[ImmenselyMental]

Although this thread has really devolved into a discussion that is off-topic and likely belongs in its own thread; I will have to say that entering a construction site to post urbex photos like those posted earlier in the thread is a risk I cannot take myself, partially because my personality is not one to take a risk with heavy potential consequences.

Anyways, here are some photos I took of CIBC Square yesterday afternoon:

 

[DavidCapizzano]

Is the tint of the glass slightly different on phase 2 or am I seeing things