Thursday, September 15, 2005
Question for all y'all
As most of you know, I am reluctant to delete comments, mainly because the thing I usually try to do is foster debate, or at least good discussion, and I am extremely tolerant of diverse views.
Sometimes, we all get to cuttin' up, too -- and almost anything goes there, too.
However, lately a few anonymi have been comin' in and causin' trouble. They violate the tone if not the general direction of serious debate and discussion -- and that's sayin' something considering how wide-ranging the threads can become. See "Jesus is a liberal. Discuss," for example.
And when we're just cuttin' up and carryin' on, the anonymi inevitably come in and start leavin' sophomoric remarks, not meant to provoke thought but to get a reaction, stupid stuff, just trying to disrupt the goings-on, or trying to draw attention to themselves just for the sake of drawing attention to themselves.
It reminds me of a party where a bunch of serious upperclassmen in college are drinkin' beer and discussin' life, the universe and everything, and some freshman comes in not knowing jack -- and not knowing that he doesn't know jack -- and interjecting himself into discourse he has no business involving himself in.
It's not a question of intelligence, knowledge or information, I don't think. Just blog maturity and protocol and experience.
The question: Do I start using the delete key more often or do I just ignore the jerks?
I do NOT have a problem with the anonymity, since most of us are anonymous here. My problem is with the immaturity and the trash talking.
To the anonymi: If you think you are who I'm talking about, you're probably right. If all you want to do is treat this place like a hecklers convention, go away.
--ER
Sometimes, we all get to cuttin' up, too -- and almost anything goes there, too.
However, lately a few anonymi have been comin' in and causin' trouble. They violate the tone if not the general direction of serious debate and discussion -- and that's sayin' something considering how wide-ranging the threads can become. See "Jesus is a liberal. Discuss," for example.
And when we're just cuttin' up and carryin' on, the anonymi inevitably come in and start leavin' sophomoric remarks, not meant to provoke thought but to get a reaction, stupid stuff, just trying to disrupt the goings-on, or trying to draw attention to themselves just for the sake of drawing attention to themselves.
It reminds me of a party where a bunch of serious upperclassmen in college are drinkin' beer and discussin' life, the universe and everything, and some freshman comes in not knowing jack -- and not knowing that he doesn't know jack -- and interjecting himself into discourse he has no business involving himself in.
It's not a question of intelligence, knowledge or information, I don't think. Just blog maturity and protocol and experience.
The question: Do I start using the delete key more often or do I just ignore the jerks?
I do NOT have a problem with the anonymity, since most of us are anonymous here. My problem is with the immaturity and the trash talking.
To the anonymi: If you think you are who I'm talking about, you're probably right. If all you want to do is treat this place like a hecklers convention, go away.
--ER
Comments:
<< Home
You would be well within your right to delete inappropriate comments from trolls.
Even in a forum like yours which chooses to foster debate, there is no promise or guarantee that every voice must be heard, so long as every point of view is. Ergo, even if there was no "troll-like" behavior, you would not be required to allow 65 John Birch members to post exactly the same comment (or whatever group; this is just an example). You are not being unfair, because the point of view can be presented with one comment.
Anyway, back to your question: Feel free to delete the mosquitoes. No warnings necessary. They don't add to the content and could well deter others from participating with meaningful comments.
In lieu of deleting, another tactic is simply to ignore the trolls until they dry up and blow away.
Even in a forum like yours which chooses to foster debate, there is no promise or guarantee that every voice must be heard, so long as every point of view is. Ergo, even if there was no "troll-like" behavior, you would not be required to allow 65 John Birch members to post exactly the same comment (or whatever group; this is just an example). You are not being unfair, because the point of view can be presented with one comment.
Anyway, back to your question: Feel free to delete the mosquitoes. No warnings necessary. They don't add to the content and could well deter others from participating with meaningful comments.
In lieu of deleting, another tactic is simply to ignore the trolls until they dry up and blow away.
Like Miss Trixie said - delete away. If it got bad enough, you could always ban certain IP addresses.
Why not go ahead and remove "Anonymous" as a posting choice? I don't know that it would help the situation, but I doubt it would hurt it.
Why not go ahead and remove "Anonymous" as a posting choice? I don't know that it would help the situation, but I doubt it would hurt it.
I know this has weighed heavily on ER's shoulders, because he likes to invite debate from all. But truth is, idiots are disguising themselves behind the anonymous tag and making dumbass, chickenshit comments because they can do so behind the big curtain.
That's not what the anonymous button is for. It's for those who may not "have" a blog -- I have a blog, but I choose not to write it; it's there so I can be identified in some way -- who still want to be involved in the true content of the discussion.
Look, I rarely see a need for this blog to get so damn heated and debated. I like ER's sense of humor, and I'd prefer to see that instead of all this deep-thinking stuff. But this is his forum, and I enjoy it nonetheless.
That said, I think ER should feel comfortable deleting comments he feels should be. Comments like, "If only John Kerry had been elected President. He would have prevented that damn hurrican!!!!!!" or "Are you sure it's not Erudite 'Pompous ass' Redneck?" are ignorant and intended by the hiding writer to be personal attacks and to trigger reactive remarks from those of us who ACTUALLY care about this blog.
What I'd like to happen, but the chickenshit hiding behind his anonymous tag won't do, is for anon to move along and find something else that's amusing. Since the chickenshit behind the curtain won't do that, his/her comments should be deleted so they don't trigger angered responses.
Delete away, ER. Now, let's get back to the fun. :-)
That's not what the anonymous button is for. It's for those who may not "have" a blog -- I have a blog, but I choose not to write it; it's there so I can be identified in some way -- who still want to be involved in the true content of the discussion.
Look, I rarely see a need for this blog to get so damn heated and debated. I like ER's sense of humor, and I'd prefer to see that instead of all this deep-thinking stuff. But this is his forum, and I enjoy it nonetheless.
That said, I think ER should feel comfortable deleting comments he feels should be. Comments like, "If only John Kerry had been elected President. He would have prevented that damn hurrican!!!!!!" or "Are you sure it's not Erudite 'Pompous ass' Redneck?" are ignorant and intended by the hiding writer to be personal attacks and to trigger reactive remarks from those of us who ACTUALLY care about this blog.
What I'd like to happen, but the chickenshit hiding behind his anonymous tag won't do, is for anon to move along and find something else that's amusing. Since the chickenshit behind the curtain won't do that, his/her comments should be deleted so they don't trigger angered responses.
Delete away, ER. Now, let's get back to the fun. :-)
All I've ever posted were the facts as close as any of us know, from what we've seen or read. Which is all any of us can do.
The trouble with you is you labor under the assumption that you are a far more intelligent than you really are. So continue to stroke each other and delete at will. The end of most arguments comes when one runs out of bullets. (Has no more to say in the way of defending his position)
If your ego is so fragile that you get this flustered when someone replies that you can’t keep up with go ahead and delete away. Delete this one too, you’re the only one that counts. Remember as you said it’s all about you, you, you, and you.
At least I'll know YOU read it!
The trouble with you is you labor under the assumption that you are a far more intelligent than you really are. So continue to stroke each other and delete at will. The end of most arguments comes when one runs out of bullets. (Has no more to say in the way of defending his position)
If your ego is so fragile that you get this flustered when someone replies that you can’t keep up with go ahead and delete away. Delete this one too, you’re the only one that counts. Remember as you said it’s all about you, you, you, and you.
At least I'll know YOU read it!
# posted by 
: 7:32 PM
: 7:32 PM
Re, "All I've ever posted were the facts as close as any of us know, from what we've seen or read. Which is all any of us can do."
If this is true, then I'm not talking about you, unless you also put up bullshit.
What complicates matters is when, as in this example, someone posts something worthwhile, but then includes bullshit, like this, also from this example:
"The trouble with you is you labor under the assumption that you are a far more intelligent than you really are. So continue to stroke each other and delete at will."
See, the fact is, I AM pretty bright, as are most of the regulars who congregate here. On some subjects, I dare say I have more information because of the first half of the name of this blog: "erudite."
"Erudite" doesn't mean "intelligent." It means "studied" or "scholarly," dumbass.
That last word is an example, a piss-poor one, to be sure, of the second half of the name of this blog: "redneck."
Besides all that, every person in this country has the right to stand in his own living room and declare, however right or wrong he or she is, as to the level of his or her own understanding.
This is my on-line living room. More of a den, actually, or maybe a backyard deck.
Or sometimes, a tailgate.
Great response, y'all. Keep 'em coming. Even you anonymi. Explain yourselves. I'm listening.
--ER
If this is true, then I'm not talking about you, unless you also put up bullshit.
What complicates matters is when, as in this example, someone posts something worthwhile, but then includes bullshit, like this, also from this example:
"The trouble with you is you labor under the assumption that you are a far more intelligent than you really are. So continue to stroke each other and delete at will."
See, the fact is, I AM pretty bright, as are most of the regulars who congregate here. On some subjects, I dare say I have more information because of the first half of the name of this blog: "erudite."
"Erudite" doesn't mean "intelligent." It means "studied" or "scholarly," dumbass.
That last word is an example, a piss-poor one, to be sure, of the second half of the name of this blog: "redneck."
Besides all that, every person in this country has the right to stand in his own living room and declare, however right or wrong he or she is, as to the level of his or her own understanding.
This is my on-line living room. More of a den, actually, or maybe a backyard deck.
Or sometimes, a tailgate.
Great response, y'all. Keep 'em coming. Even you anonymi. Explain yourselves. I'm listening.
--ER
ER: You're into oxymorons. Explain how "my online living room" grants you exclusivity, and then why it merits the high dudgeon?
# posted by : 8:34 PM
: 8:34 PM
Why not just say "Since you won't let me be quarterback, I'm taking my ball and going home" ?
# posted by : 8:56 PM
: 8:56 PM
Help, I'm being ignored...getting weak....dry..ing..up....blow..ing....a...waayyyyyyyyyy.
# posted by : 9:00 PM
: 9:00 PM
OK.
Erudite response:
1. I do not think I am superior, although, like anyone who is making an argument, I usually think I'm right and people who disagree with me are wrong -- a stance without which no argument makes any sense.
2. I usually am indignant only in discussions having to do with high rights and wrongs, not about mere policy -- although in the heat of an argunent, I am, like most people, capable of overstating my case and overinterpreting, or underinterpreting evidence and information to suit my immediate purpose.
Redneck response:
1. Since it IS my online living room, I really don't have to defend my sense of superiority, even if I had one, which I don't think I do. But, since it is my living room, people who are assholes are liable to be thrown out.
2. Especially those who repeatedly employ ad hominem attacks rather than actually engaging an argument.
--ER
Erudite response:
1. I do not think I am superior, although, like anyone who is making an argument, I usually think I'm right and people who disagree with me are wrong -- a stance without which no argument makes any sense.
2. I usually am indignant only in discussions having to do with high rights and wrongs, not about mere policy -- although in the heat of an argunent, I am, like most people, capable of overstating my case and overinterpreting, or underinterpreting evidence and information to suit my immediate purpose.
Redneck response:
1. Since it IS my online living room, I really don't have to defend my sense of superiority, even if I had one, which I don't think I do. But, since it is my living room, people who are assholes are liable to be thrown out.
2. Especially those who repeatedly employ ad hominem attacks rather than actually engaging an argument.
--ER
Well, that's a good simile. I AM the quarterback of discussions here. What part of that don't you get? Seriously. This forum is as free as I choose to make it. Why do you find that offensive, or difficult?
If I walked into your living room, pulled down my britches and shit on your carpet, in front of your family and friends, what would you do? I would hope you would kick my ass.
--ER
If I walked into your living room, pulled down my britches and shit on your carpet, in front of your family and friends, what would you do? I would hope you would kick my ass.
--ER
So, for the sake of argument, and I'm not trying to be a jerk here: if it's online, and it's YOUR living room, then you get to decide who's invited? You own the Internet?
Your "living room" is wide open.
Seems to me, you have to take what you get with that.
Your "living room" is wide open.
Seems to me, you have to take what you get with that.
# posted by : 9:10 PM
: 9:10 PM
When we open the online door to our comments, it's an open invitation to all. Overall, I think that's a great thing. So if someone annoys, don't delete. Just ignore, unless their comment is worthy of debate.
I pretty much feel that as this is your blog, you should set the tone as you like.
If there are comments that are disruptive to the flow of conversation, delete them.
Unfortunately I have been hearing a lot of this problem.
If there are comments that are disruptive to the flow of conversation, delete them.
Unfortunately I have been hearing a lot of this problem.
So what have you created here? a little Simms-like world where you, and only you, get to say who can stay and who must go? Are we to be banished from Eden because we're not in lock-step with you and the little like-minded group you have surrounded yourself with? ALL HAIL THE GREAT ER!!!!!!!!!! (can I stay now?)
# posted by : 9:37 PM
: 9:37 PM
I for one, just step back and say "yuck" if you post something that I find offensive (in my own mind, it is offensive, such as some of the stuff you copy from other blogs instead of taking the time to write your own) -- and I don't comment. I figure eventually, there will be something I feel like responding to.
That is probably going on all the time -- not everybody agrees with you all the time, and not everybody bothers saying so.
Probably if you just ignore people -- politely, of course, since you are erudite and have your vast knowledge of manners -- when they say something that rubs you the wrong way, you'll just get over it.
That is probably going on all the time -- not everybody agrees with you all the time, and not everybody bothers saying so.
Probably if you just ignore people -- politely, of course, since you are erudite and have your vast knowledge of manners -- when they say something that rubs you the wrong way, you'll just get over it.
# posted by : 9:45 PM
: 9:45 PM
Leave them here. I find them amusing. By leaving them, you can choose to ignore and you can watch others humiliate them. It's part of the fun, I say!
I never delete comments over at my place. As I often explain, everyone has the right to say what they want. They also have the right to make a fool of themselves. Something that I am particuarly good at myself.
I never delete comments over at my place. As I often explain, everyone has the right to say what they want. They also have the right to make a fool of themselves. Something that I am particuarly good at myself.
Delete and, if the software will allow it, ban.
First of all, everyone in the world knows the difference between an argument, even a heated one, even one that gets a bit personal, and a personal insult disguised as an argument. The first is allowable; the second isn't. If in doubt, you can tell by how people respond when the blogger steps in and says, "now cool down": those of good faith will step back, those of bad faith will step it up. Delete the latter.
Second, the presence of trolls can really destroy conversation. If people are amused by trolling, they can find it elsewhere; but as this is your blog, and you really *do* want to have good arguments, debates, and discussions, letting any asshole who wants to shout loudly in will only, eventually, drown out the worthwhile discourse.
Third, they probably piss you off. I know trolls at my plkace piss me off (which of course is their goal). So I delete them. As you said, it's your blog, your hobby; you want it to go a certain way. So get rid of the folks who want to argue with the ground rules. They can go start their own damn blogs. There's zero point in letting your own hobby turn into a source of annoyance and irritation. And I'll also throw in that I think one reason the discussion at my joint is usually pretty damn good is that trolls aren't tolerated. Nothing throws a good talk off like some loutish jerk yelping all the damn time.
And fourth, they piss *me* off. Yeah, I pretty much just ignore the b.s., but it still needs to be scrolled through, it got old about two weeks ago, and it's a waste of your readers' time.
Yeah, I have an opinion about trolls. Glad you asked :)
First of all, everyone in the world knows the difference between an argument, even a heated one, even one that gets a bit personal, and a personal insult disguised as an argument. The first is allowable; the second isn't. If in doubt, you can tell by how people respond when the blogger steps in and says, "now cool down": those of good faith will step back, those of bad faith will step it up. Delete the latter.
Second, the presence of trolls can really destroy conversation. If people are amused by trolling, they can find it elsewhere; but as this is your blog, and you really *do* want to have good arguments, debates, and discussions, letting any asshole who wants to shout loudly in will only, eventually, drown out the worthwhile discourse.
Third, they probably piss you off. I know trolls at my plkace piss me off (which of course is their goal). So I delete them. As you said, it's your blog, your hobby; you want it to go a certain way. So get rid of the folks who want to argue with the ground rules. They can go start their own damn blogs. There's zero point in letting your own hobby turn into a source of annoyance and irritation. And I'll also throw in that I think one reason the discussion at my joint is usually pretty damn good is that trolls aren't tolerated. Nothing throws a good talk off like some loutish jerk yelping all the damn time.
And fourth, they piss *me* off. Yeah, I pretty much just ignore the b.s., but it still needs to be scrolled through, it got old about two weeks ago, and it's a waste of your readers' time.
Yeah, I have an opinion about trolls. Glad you asked :)
I dunno. On one hand, I question their choice of not even making up some pseudonym, but at the same time, everybody gets to talk, since we are, in theory, a society in which free speech is protected.
However- you're correct in noting that this isn't necessarily public space; it is indeed your living room, and you own it. You can say buh-bye to whoever you want.
But I also agree that once you open up your mouth in public, you change the rules for yourself and anyone else. Maybe these cowards who won't even express their feelings with a blog of their own deserve a hearing, too.
Or-maybe they need to do a better job explaining themselves, if that's what they really care about. If they just want to make noise, fergit 'em; that's what most people do.
But on the other hand, unless you want this to turn into some sort of awful circle jerk between people who already are of the same mind set, maybe the heretical viewpoint, no matter how poorly phrased and awfully reasoned, should be allowed.
Mind you, what do I know? I've been insane ever since Mark had a bad acid trip in the '70's, apparently.
However- you're correct in noting that this isn't necessarily public space; it is indeed your living room, and you own it. You can say buh-bye to whoever you want.
But I also agree that once you open up your mouth in public, you change the rules for yourself and anyone else. Maybe these cowards who won't even express their feelings with a blog of their own deserve a hearing, too.
Or-maybe they need to do a better job explaining themselves, if that's what they really care about. If they just want to make noise, fergit 'em; that's what most people do.
But on the other hand, unless you want this to turn into some sort of awful circle jerk between people who already are of the same mind set, maybe the heretical viewpoint, no matter how poorly phrased and awfully reasoned, should be allowed.
Mind you, what do I know? I've been insane ever since Mark had a bad acid trip in the '70's, apparently.
You have a pretty high tolerance level for debate, ER, which is why I enjoy reading your blog. Lately, though, I've enjoyed it less due to a few anonymous folks abusing your tolerance, so my inclination would be for you to delete those comments that you feel go too far. What's "too far"? That's up to you. As has already been said, this is your place. I'm just amazed that there are folks who use "public space" as justification for personal attacks, hatefulness, or just plain rudeness.
This happens in the library, too--people think that just because it's a public space, that there aren't rules for appropriate behaviour. We don't care if you stink. We don't care if your people skills are nonexistent. We don't care about your politics, your income level, or you religion. But standing at the circulation desk and screaming at the employees is inappropriate, and will get you invited to leave.
This happens in the library, too--people think that just because it's a public space, that there aren't rules for appropriate behaviour. We don't care if you stink. We don't care if your people skills are nonexistent. We don't care about your politics, your income level, or you religion. But standing at the circulation desk and screaming at the employees is inappropriate, and will get you invited to leave.
Censorship always defeats it own purpose, for it creates in the end the kind of society that is incapable of exercising real discretion.
Henry Steele Commager
Henry Steele Commager
# posted by : 9:33 AM
: 9:33 AM
Censorship
In ancient Rome, censorship was the office or function of a censor. This article is about controls over publication and discussion.
Censorship is the use of state or group power to control freedom of expression. Censorship 'criminalizes' certain actions or the communication of such actions - or suggested communications of such actions. In a modern sense censorship consists of any attempt to suppress information, points of view, or method of expression such as art, or profanity. The purpose of censorship is to maintain the status quo.
Read the first line. "Group", as in the small like-minded group we have here.
In ancient Rome, censorship was the office or function of a censor. This article is about controls over publication and discussion.
Censorship is the use of state or group power to control freedom of expression. Censorship 'criminalizes' certain actions or the communication of such actions - or suggested communications of such actions. In a modern sense censorship consists of any attempt to suppress information, points of view, or method of expression such as art, or profanity. The purpose of censorship is to maintain the status quo.
Read the first line. "Group", as in the small like-minded group we have here.
# posted by : 9:48 AM
: 9:48 AM
Deleting comments on a blog does not rise to the level of censorship. The freedom to express ourselves is guaranteed by our Constitution. However, the Constitution does NOT guarantee the right to express yourself, in all manners, in all places.
Remember the argument against shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater. Not all speech or expression is protected.
IF you a truly interested in your rights to express yourself, feel free to start your own blog. There you may say whatever you wish. That right is not afforded to you on SOMEONE ELSE'S blog. Just as the government cannot force a newspaper to publish a statement, neither can you force another blogger to provide you with a forum for nonsense and offensive crap.
Remember the argument against shouting "FIRE" in a crowded theater. Not all speech or expression is protected.
IF you a truly interested in your rights to express yourself, feel free to start your own blog. There you may say whatever you wish. That right is not afforded to you on SOMEONE ELSE'S blog. Just as the government cannot force a newspaper to publish a statement, neither can you force another blogger to provide you with a forum for nonsense and offensive crap.
Yeah, what Trixie said.
The Constitution only guarantees that "Congress shall make no law...abriding the freedom of speech." It says nothing about ER (private parties) having to take whatever you dish out. Since this is ER's blog, comments are subject to his rules, and he can call the bouncer if he wants.
Anyone can be anonymous and still have a blog moniker, or two, or twenty. If they want to comment that badly, they can go to the trouble to register for an identity for each of their personalities. :)
The Constitution only guarantees that "Congress shall make no law...abriding the freedom of speech." It says nothing about ER (private parties) having to take whatever you dish out. Since this is ER's blog, comments are subject to his rules, and he can call the bouncer if he wants.
Anyone can be anonymous and still have a blog moniker, or two, or twenty. If they want to comment that badly, they can go to the trouble to register for an identity for each of their personalities. :)
# posted by : 11:32 AM
: 11:32 AM
Used to be in junior high school, you'd be ridiculed for not being with the program if you didn't own khakis and an Izod shirt.
In today's society, I guess those same people have grown up to have all this time on their hands to create and maintain blogs (really online journals of free association, not really newspapers, which are more "for the people") -- and the rest of us sorry-ass grownups who "don't bother to have their own blog" are not invited to read and comment.
Bloggers -- the new clique.
Is that what I'm hearing?
It would be really helpful to know, not having my own blog, if the etiquette is that only those with blogs are "allowed" to comment on other blogs.
Somehow, it doesn't quite make sense that that would be the rule, being as how at least one newspaper I know of has a column that repeats entries on blogs on a different topic each day. (As a side thought: will those people who posted their comments under assumed names -- just like everyone on THIS blog -- try to sue for copyright infringement??)
So, what is it? Not invited if no blog -- or just pushed to the fringes by the "in crowd"?
In today's society, I guess those same people have grown up to have all this time on their hands to create and maintain blogs (really online journals of free association, not really newspapers, which are more "for the people") -- and the rest of us sorry-ass grownups who "don't bother to have their own blog" are not invited to read and comment.
Bloggers -- the new clique.
Is that what I'm hearing?
It would be really helpful to know, not having my own blog, if the etiquette is that only those with blogs are "allowed" to comment on other blogs.
Somehow, it doesn't quite make sense that that would be the rule, being as how at least one newspaper I know of has a column that repeats entries on blogs on a different topic each day. (As a side thought: will those people who posted their comments under assumed names -- just like everyone on THIS blog -- try to sue for copyright infringement??)
So, what is it? Not invited if no blog -- or just pushed to the fringes by the "in crowd"?
# posted by : 12:44 PM
: 12:44 PM
E.R. is allowing anyone who wants to to comment here. Fair comment is always welcome, as I understand E.R.'s position. What he is asking about is not anonymous comment that is relevant to the discussion. The matter at hand is whether he has to sit here and be subjected to rudeness and off-topic assault from people who are simply trolling.
E.R. has always maintained an open house here. But there's good reason to take out the trash when the place is being overrun.
E.R. has always maintained an open house here. But there's good reason to take out the trash when the place is being overrun.
And for the record -- E.R.is free to smack me down when he feels like it, and has. It's a reciprocal agreement, and I am fairly certain he works the same way with other people. The problem is a few (maybe just one) bad egg who hides behind the curtain and lobs nasty remarks, for the sole purpose of taunting or being derisive. Nothing is gained by such behavior.
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
# posted by Anonymous : 9:32 PM
# posted by Anonymous : 9:32 PM
# posted by : 1:58 PM
: 1:58 PM
Wow, I didn't know that the word "anonymous" carried so many meanings, and had such a strong shibolethic character. ER, leave the buggers to comment. If they are not worth while, then ignore them as several of you have already suggested. Responding to them in any way at all is positive re-inforcement. Not responding to them will eventually extinguish their behavior. That's the way my wife does me anyway.
# posted by : 2:04 PM
: 2:04 PM
Ditto Bitch PhD and Trixie. Ditto ditto ditto. Tantrums do not constitute "comment," banning does not constitute "censorship."
Anyone who reads this blog for more than 12 seconds will find high tolerance for different points of view. That is precisely what I value about this blog (besides ER's writing, POV, choice of topic...), and I come down hard on the side of deleting the disrupters. There is little chance of this devolving into a circle jerk, so let's not give that sort of provocation any credence.
I have one suggestion, ER: a posted Rules of Engagement. Let newcomers and potential trolls know that there are certain guidelines for commenting. Most of us know how to play by the rules; some are sad types who need lots of attention, oh well. This is your living room, by gawd, and you make the rules here. And that's fine by me.
Anyone who reads this blog for more than 12 seconds will find high tolerance for different points of view. That is precisely what I value about this blog (besides ER's writing, POV, choice of topic...), and I come down hard on the side of deleting the disrupters. There is little chance of this devolving into a circle jerk, so let's not give that sort of provocation any credence.
I have one suggestion, ER: a posted Rules of Engagement. Let newcomers and potential trolls know that there are certain guidelines for commenting. Most of us know how to play by the rules; some are sad types who need lots of attention, oh well. This is your living room, by gawd, and you make the rules here. And that's fine by me.
# posted by : 5:39 PM
: 5:39 PM
I don't think it was an anonymi that said the "F" word the other day.
signed Anonymous001
Post a Comment
signed Anonymous001
# posted by : 2:03 PM
: 2:03 PM << Home
