May 23, 2017
"Many of the commenters here show a bad trend in commenting. I wasn't awake and attempting to moderate..."
"... but I would like those who participated here to reflect on the dynamic among the commenters and let me know" — I wrote in the comments — "whether you see what I am talking about, whether you unwittingly contributed, whether you got off causing this to happen, or something in between. I would like to see comments that address the substance of the post, and this idea of calling out each other by name and doggedly insisting on always taking another shot and naming somebody who also needs to get the last shot, drives up the quantity of comments but makes them unreadable to anybody who's not among the named. If your name keeps coming up multiple times in comments threads, you are contributing to what I regard as a comments disease, and you need to help stop it or I will see you as doing it intentionally. It's shameful that you let this happen in a post about children being murdered.... If you keep finding yourself in what I call 'back and forth,' you need a new approach to commenting. There are a few people who regularly end up getting named in long back and forth and it's incredibly boring to read. I don't want that here. If you're one of these commenters and you don't understand why this is happening to you, then my advice is to think: substance.... Make your points alongside other people's points. You can respond to what other people say, but respond to the substance. Don't make it personal.... I'm only talking about the way people who are here in the comments name each other and go back and forth in a personal way. Instead of disagreeing with the substance, they frame their comment in the 'Jane, you ignorant slut' format...."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
254 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 254 of 254Totally agree, Ann. I have quit reading comments here for the most part for this very reason. When I see one commenter's name appear more than twice, I'm moving on.
Ann, just declare some threads Trump-free. The bombing thread became (as most do) a Trump thread. If you post a chicken recipe it will become a Trump thread. Zap Trump comments on such threads. Suspend repeat offenders for a while.
"Here's a simple rule that could help: Don't name other commenters. If you want to respond to them, just quote them and respond to the substance of the quote. Leave out the name."
The template you have chosen for this blog discourages that. There are templates with a quote function and subthreads. This one does not. That makes it cumbersome.
Cut and paste what you want to comment on and add quote marks, just as you've done; for extra credit use italics, as I've done. It's not that hard, and it encourages focus on the argument and not the person making it.
HoodlumDoodlum said...
If it were as easy as "just" putting the right things into the law I wouldn't have to think deeply at all!
5/23/17, 3:13 PM
You are right. Unfortunately I am not sure this is a problem that you can think your way out of. Not because you don't have the intellect but because (as you pointed out) you are playing a rigged game. The house always wins and in this case lefties are the house. They own all of Ed, all of the MSM, much of the behind-the-scenes Government, and have paid "grass-roots" orgs.
It saddens me to say but this will only continue to escalate and get worse because the left has yet to pay a price for their behavior. I think this "social fabric" is getting pretty thin in some places and the left is mistaking restraint for timidness. They will continue (through AntaFa, etc.) to embolden themselves until they do cross that line that can not be uncrossed and THEN SWHTF. Just as getting spit on for so long gave us Trump, this escalation [I fear] will lead to something worse. The left is actively demonstrating daily that acting civil is for suckers. Laws are for hayseeds and fly-over country. That demographic is like an oil tanker. It don't turn on a dime but when it turns and builds a head of steam, it takes an awful lot to stop it.
I toyed with the idea that some of the more outrageous commenters were actually Ann's alter ego, just as Ann Landers wrote a lot of her letters herself.
Over my limit, but did want to say to some of the folk who said they were attacked every time they posted: You should make sure your comments are reasoned, not just an emotional response. We all feel for the children. Emotional responses to issues (on either side) are not going to get you very far. It's one of the reasons I like this blog's commenters.
Bad commenters. Naughty Naughty. I think it is probably because some people have too much time on their hands.
I am working on finding qualities in others that are similar to mine. It is easy to pick out the qualities that make you different. The more interesting and harder part is to actually find something that you have in common and that you find is attractive.
So what do you guys find attractive about me?
thanks and have a great day.
tits.
i think i'm the only person who gets paid to post here.
Well done, vicari.
You're funny, Titus.
for example I used to go to the gym everyday and never say anything to anyone. No one talks to each other at my gym. And I was starting to look at these other members with disgust. I had an issue with each of them...but really the issue was with myself-profound I know.
So now I am looking at them differently and thinking they are cool, they live in my hood, they are working out like me. I started saying hi to them and asking them how they are doing. Most of them initially freaked (and I am talking mostly about the faggys) but now I get a smile out of them.
One smile at a time now is my motto.
I want an interaction with me to be positive, whether it is at work, outside work, with a waiter etc. I don't want to be dead sometime and all people have to say about me is I was a prick.
I am also trying to develop qualities that I can be proud of. I have always been proud that I am good in bed but I want more than just being a hot fuck.
Thank you and good for me!
Of all the dopey boring ad hominem comments here, the ones directed at Chuck are the dumbest and tiredest.
The reason Chuck trips fuses is because he shows big signs of being some kind of fake phony fraud (to borrow from Bob Grant, who won't mind because he's dead). It's our big amygdalae, we sense, and dislike, cognitive dissonance and inappropriate behaviors. He just doesn't read right - how do you say it - he just doesn't scan. And it attracts people who want to penetrate the mystery. He's also an intolerable suckup to the emerita.
I won't go down other names, but you have a guy, or a sandwich, literally daring you to kick him off the blog and asking what he has to do to get kicked off the blog.
My guideline for "what is a troll" is balance.
Robert Cook, for instance, has politics that are not even wrong, but he shows intelligence and occasionally contributes interesting things, and his ramblings about...whatever...are at least predictable and one can make allowances. Cook has the gift of, I'd like to know more about him, even if I might have to torture him to death to get straight answers, there might be answers. Ritmo (et al) has a brain, well camouflaged by invective, but it's there. Even Titus...funny, not much from Titus lately, maybe he's abandoned the vapid harmless shtick and moved to a vapid harmful shtick under another name.
The sandwich has never said one interesting or valuable thing on this blog and I suspect he never will. This is not agree-with-me interesting, this is I-know/do/met-something/someone-interesting interesting, or I-didn't-think-of-that interesting. No intelligence is conveyed by his postings, possibly by design. Buwaya correctly identifies him as malevolent. I feel that to a degree with others but the sandwich is by far the worst. Better commenters are driven from the board. Literally, for one, Mary E. Glynn is a far better commenter than he.
You want to practice affirmative action for leftists, but this is the problem with AA, you elevate the inferior.
I am trying to be nicer to my partner too. He is Indian and I sometimes call him brownie or ask him to make me a slurpee. But he does call me whitey and a pig so maybe it is ok.
Chuck is a piece of work, and I find it funny to see him defended as a put-upon little angel, but he really isn't one of the You Know Whos, and some people are actually interested in his sperg-asms. He's easy enough to skip.
ARM is a good troll. Of course he's not arguing in good faith, but you knew that, didn't you? It's not fair to class him with the genuinely moronic You Know Whos. (Though occasionally on his bad days he does slip up and slip down to their level.)
But the schtick gets old, doesn't it? These are people playing a character. The "life long Republican", the "moderate". I guess it amusing for awhile but it doesn't age well unless you have real talent and imagination. If you don't, it results in thread after thread taking an entirely predictable direction.
If one is interested in performance art, I would prefer the classics. I think Lazlo would qualify. I hope he finds the motivation to continue.
Harley.
I think a lot of people define troll as somebody who disagrees with their point of view. This also has to do with some people who don't like having people who disagree with them on the blog. I don't really get that. Argumentation, done right, is fun and possibly enlightening.
"It was even better before the Meltdown. People like Hegalian and Hayden were the norm. The level of commentary was so good that I actually kept my mouth shut (mostly) to listen and learn.
"I'm sorry you missed all that. If you like it now you would have loved it back then."
Hmmm...I've lost track of how long I've been visiting here, but I don't recall any such halcyon days of elevated and educational commentary. It seems always to have been of a kind with today.
I think it was before your time Cook. I still regard you as a newcomer, although you've been here several years. It was before that incident when she closed the comments and loyalists took refuge on another site and commented from afar.
“Right-wing,” “Left-wing,” “fake Republican,” “weak conservative,” “troll,” blah blah blah. Some commenters apparently think this ad hominem crap adds value. For those looking for interesting arguments it’s utterly irrelevant.
RE: Robert Cook:
Hmmm...I've lost track of how long I've been visiting here, but I don't recall any such halcyon days of elevated and educational commentary. It seems always to have been of a kind with today.
Back in 2006 we had a civil discussion about gay marriage that ran for over 700 comments.
I thought there was also an incredibly long one on abortion, but some quick googling does not bring it up.
Todd said...
Meade said...
I've been spending more time on my bike
5/23/17, 2:47 PM
Harley style or Schwinn (say Harley, say Harley, even if it isn't true)?
Blogger Meade said...
Harley.
You two saps.
Still. They're better than when AMF owned the brand.
let me know when some of your screws vibrate out. I'll send you replacements.
Chuck did it.
"but I don't recall any such halcyon days of elevated and educational commentary. It seems always to have been of a kind with today."
In one way, sure.
But, it does seem like school yard name calling's quantity is much greater now.
I go out of my way to break the Alt-rules, but even I can't bring myself to throw in a bunch of "you're stupid/dumb/idiotic/etc" jabber.
I wish I could, then I'd be breaking all the rules.
But, I don't know how anyone could make themselves type those insults. If the insult is deserved, it's already self-evident, so why bother? If it's not obviously an accurate description of whoever...ouch, that's a devastating act of verbal self-immolation.
Anywho,
Carry on.
I said Harley but I was lying. It's a Trek.
Rusty, I hope your hip replacement is going well and that's no lie. Out: No pain, no gain. In: No pain, no pain.
"I said Harley but I was lying. It's a Trek."
As long as it's WI, all's good.
A lot of the comments have been great or, at least, of the comment level of some who can be counted on to say a variation of the "funny" obvious comment they've said before. Really tedious. But now, sheesh...I read the first comments and then the last...unless I see the avatar of someone I know who, whether I've agreed with them in the past, usually has new info or insightful writing. New posters with A LOT of interesting comments should remember that, like at work (in an office, at a corporate office, e.g.), being the person getting in the last word in the smartest kid in the class approach is annoying.
"By golly, that fellow sure is tenacious! Why, he's got the last word! I find myself persuaded!"
But I was told the political was personal by people I don't agree with often ideologically, hence in fact, I do admit presumptuous on the matter, being a very generous contributor even when (all-too-often-if-it-weren't-for-my-special-acknowledgement-of-the-Personal/Political-concepts-preached-by-those-arising-my-Irish) flailing at fail-to-launch attacks and cursing up a storm worthy drunken Hillary!.
Plus I see this as a new age lapidary ballet, not mere words soon to be lost and forgotten forever, but instead a more transcendant creation where quantity does have a quality unto itself to perhaps include such attributes as stick-to-it-ive-ness, persistence, and that Tom Petty "Won't Back Down" feeling that worked out so swell for Tom and assorted Heartbreakers.
I do feel like a jerk when I disrespect the rules of the house nevertheless. I couldn't explain it legally or nothing though, it's just a feeling sometimes I get.
Certain folks were told and believe even to this very day that if you bottle your emotions up, you get a post office job then go out and harm innocent people permanently, having "cracked" under the pressure. I only ask us all to please allow some recognition of these folks humanness if consideration beyond that which has already been extended is seen as warranted.
You look at people who listened to Science via Federal Goverment when they were told bread and grains were supposed to be the bedrock of a healthy diet. The target audience was indeed successfully convinced they were doing the right thing based on the authority of Uncle Sam and Scientists, yet I can't help but to conclude that had some stray vector of contrary info presented itself, a vector of which I am familiar and which are sundry (ergo yang/yang good with the bad) I see it as likely that even if caused by a faulty premise, more total wisdom could result at little to no higher costs to consumers.
"they were told bread and grains were supposed to be the bedrock of a healthy diet. "
Whole grains still are.
They are slow to breakdown thereby providing vital sustainance to our gut populations.
Sarcasm isn't as 1001% persuasive as we who practice it would believe it to be, but when it is used in an elite (emphatically non-pejorative use of elite) manner by a person with quite-likely unmatched collective credulity in a given locale it is way, way, way better than I could ever, ever,ever make an attempt at nudging an outcome into being, like totally.
Thank you for the response. Due to my nature as a failure I read Dr. Joy Bliss at maggiesfarm.anotherblogspot.com once say protein was for the rulers and well-informed, grains for proles.
Rather than confirm or diss my suspicions, or even know if I am remembering correctly the what where who, I let them lay dormant in a stew of pathetic unskilled envy and hatred, and by God it could have cost me dearly. Very dearly.
You have done far more than teach me how to fish Sir, and spiritually your gift to me shall not go unrewarded, although you may misperceive that it will for quite a period.
Good topic. I had been on the verge of describing some of Laslo's posts as creepy, but now am chastened & will go back to garnering my shorts, or something. (Long ago on "The West Wing" CJ Craig included "spatula" in "words that should be Yiddish, but aren't".)
Re-Watching ESPN's "30 for 30" show on the Duke Lacrosse trial of several years ago, it seems like it should be mandatory watching for every prosecuting attorney. It may have some application to those who engage in ad hominem attacks in blog comments, too.
"...spiritually your gift to me shall not go unrewarded..."
Plus I used chit chat re microbiota to tie your comment into an allegory re the topic of this post.
Of course, if that was comprehensible by ya'll, I'm doin' somethin' wrong.
Well, let's not lose perspective here. Blogs in general are not that significant. And this blog is not that significant amoung blogs. And this thread is even less so. And the issue of - what we were talking about? - oh yes, ad hominem attacks... zzzzzzzzz
"The West Wing" CJ Craig included "spatula" in "words that should be Yiddish, but aren't".)
Stolen from Portnoy's Complaint.
"And this blog is not that significant amoung blogs."
This POV is true for all of humanity w/ one exception. Of course I'm not denying that some folks are committed to committing time homicide here.
But that's small spuds compared to whatever it is that's goin' on between Althouse's ears such that she thinks this blog is worth a gigantic amount of her................time.
Anywho,
Carry on.
@althouse:
Do you ever regret choices you made with regard to your blog as far back as early 2007 and at intervals since that time? reader_iam is asking a sincere, serious and true question.
Regards,
L
3rd, that's a valid point, it's her work product and we are just her guests. But even as mere guests we deserve some courtesy from any host, basic principles so old they are enshrined in Roman, Greek and Norse mythology.
If she was staying in my home, it would be dishonorable of me to sit back and allow my other guests to call her a racist sexist homophobe, or attack her with other similar harassments.
And even if I was not so honorable, I certainly wouldn't demand that she just ignore it.
Interesting to see comments from those whose names are quite unfamiliar here..
Some seem quite disappointed in their level of entertainment.
"Interesting to see comments from those whose names are quite unfamiliar here..
Some seem quite disappointed in their level of entertainment."
This sorta thread calls for such.
I can't be the only one who resuscitated some of the their sycophant socks.
Althouse sometimes needs some affirmation.
She's a little sick of all this winning.
winning or whining?
Her email inbox might inform..
TBC, I've never done sock puppets. I have posted here at althouse as, initially, reader_iam, and, later, rcommal.
Some might find those handles unfamiliar; althouse, among others, can't, even if the preference is otherwise.
My only problem with moderation here is that leftists only seem to ever get the axe if a right winger can be taken down simultaneously. Until someone on the right is provoked enough to retaliate in kind, leftists like Ritmo can get away with the most outrageous crap like calling another poster Mengele, or saying we "get off" on slaughters like Manchester, and nothing ever seems to happen to them until equal punishment can be dealt to a conservative. All in pursuit of "cruel neutrality", I guess.
And, also, by the way, it was althouse herself who encouraged me to "go blogger" and post online publicly via that platform, way, way, way way back in that day.
===
For the record, she knew my real name from that very start.
On account of all that emailing, beforehand.
"My only problem with moderation here is that leftists only seem to ever get the axe if a right winger can be taken down simultaneously."
Is it just me, or does the word "only" seem out of place here?
E.g., if the "only" bad thing about going to Hell is that you will suffer torture for eternity, maybe it's ok to skip the "only" qualifier.
Just sayin.
For the record, I'm posting some documentation here, as evidence, of sorts, anyway, at least:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/09/quite-frankly-if-theyd-been-able-to.html?showComment=1125857100000#c112585711702914124
Here's another piece of it:
http://althouse.blogspot.com/2005/09/quite-frankly-if-theyd-been-able-to.html?showComment=1125864060000#c112586408592291096
"name other commenters. If you want to respond to them, just quote them"
I mostly do it this way. You can tell with me whether I am using an iPad or a PC by whether my quotes are in quote marks or italics (Firefox on a PC makes adding HTML easy). Used to try to use italics on my iPads, but you have to go through so many keyboard changes that it is a pain, and then the spellchecker isn't consistent about upper casing "I" (and Blogger needs opening and closing token types to match exactly). Oh, and sometimes with long posts, when I get on a roll, I find that the IOS spellchecker has made a mash of what I said. Winter half the year is more PC, since that is my house, and my office there is convenient, but we have moved to her house, which means that I mostly rotate through my iPads, using one while the others charge (iPad Pro during the day because it has 4G/LTE, older ones at night, using my WiFi).
Back to Ann's point - when you use names, it becomes personal, and if you get personal, you are much more likely to get a negative response, which turns into flame wars. Last week, I tried an experiment, and used the name of one of our most vociferous female posters, and she quickly responded with an ad hominem attack on me. Don't do it. Don't feed the trolls. Life is to short, and feeding the trolls just makes them hungry, filling the threads with ad hominem attacks.
But I do often mention the name of people who just made a good point that I agree with (which inevitably means that it wasn't an ad hominem attack). And, thanks to those above who did the same with my name. Nice to be appreciated. Surprisingly, given the discussion here, that is one of the reasons that this is still, after all these years, one of my very top blogs - I compulsively check it, throughout the day, day in and day out to see if anything new was posted.
And in this vein, I want to give a shout out for Dr K, whom I think is under appreciated here. He is amazingly well read, having provided interesting links and cites numerous times, has a lot of interesting life experiences, and has probably forgotten more than many of us know on some subjects. But he is not alone there, with my favorite commenters giving me glimpses into their interesting lives. Even Titus, whom we haven't seen often enough recently. A lot of life experience here.
I use my own name (and that is really a picture of me - but from when I had my own blog better than a decade ago). Anyone with enough energy can kinda track me down on the Internet. That keeps you more honest, and less likely to engage in ad hominem attacks. I am almost 100% certain that we had paid trolls here last summer trying to disrupt the blog. I personally blame George Soros, Crooked Hillary, etc, for that. In any case, I pretty much ignore anyone with a new Blogger identity, and the more that I know that you are a real person, with a real identity, the more I am going to take your posts seriously. For example, I rarely agree with Cook, but I read what he says, because he has been around here for years with the same Blogger identity, which I suspect is his real name, and, on occasion makes points that make me think.
I understand though why some prefer at least some anonymity. Nearing 20 years ago, on a patent listserve, I made some comments that someone took fault with. He then, as my boss pointed out, went up and down executive row with his complaints about me. Imagine, for a minute, the Corporate Patent Counsel and EVP having this sprung on him in an executive committee meeting, run by the CEO, in a company of over 100k employees around the world, and over 100 patent attys. That is decidedly not how you want the CEO, nor your own EVP, to hear your name. I only survived because his assistant (and ultimate replacement) was a very good attorney who did his research first, and determined that I only posted on my own time, never mentioned my employer, and included a .sig trailer disclaiming that this was my employer's opinion. Our local VP was ready to fire me, which is probably indicative of why he didn't get that top job when it opened up a year or two later. This was before Google put personal information at everyone's fingertips.
The sort of accountability that using your own name requires seems to keep people more civil on blogs. It is anonymity, in many cases that allows, and maybe even encourages, people to engage in ad hominem attacks and flame wars. Wonder why those leftist thugs rioting in Berkely, etc, wear masks? Anonymity really does often result in bad behavior, because it allows people to duck responsibility for their actions and their speech.
"determined that I only posted on my own time, never mentioned my employer, and included a .sig trailer disclaiming that this was (?) my employer's opinion"
I was ready to add a "Not" to the last phrase (?) in a correction, since the .sig said (and continues to say to this day) that the above doesn't constitute the opinions of my employer. But I then realized that "disclaimer" combined with "not" might give the wrong message - almost a double negative, but not quite, and, hence, the ambiguity. Sorry about the OC side of having been an atty.
Rusty said...
Still. They're better than when AMF owned the brand.
let me know when some of your screws vibrate out. I'll send you replacements.
5/23/17, 4:54 PM
I wish! Sad to say I don't possess a mechanized two wheeler. Had my eyes set on a very nice low-boy in mat black but when the motion came up for a vote it failed to pass ("family democracy" takes two yes votes).
On the other hand, I get no grief over my "collection" of shooting irons, so there is that.
Relax Anne, you ignorant slut. Don't you realize that there are over 250 comments here before anyone thinks to say, "Anne, you ignorant slut"?
I keep a list of commenters in my head that I want to read here, and I use control F to find them in the threads. For Althouse, it starts with the blogstress herself, followed by Young Hegelian, Bruce Hayden, Michelle Dulak Thomson, Matthew Sablan, Robert Cook, tcrosse, etc. I will otherwise just page down the section looking for those names and a few others.
But that's part of the problem. You react to the huge volume of name-calling comments by only looking for commenters who you know don't engage in that behavior. People like me who post only a few comments that don't engage in name-calling seem to be ignored.
I post maybe three or four comments in a good week. By the time I notice a post and think of a comment, there are often already a hundred or more comments on it, mostly of the name-calling variety. Everyone who isn't interested in name-calling has already departed, so substantive comments get no reaction, and I don't think it's because I'm such a horrible writer. The most reactions have come in response to defenses of Robert Cook and Chuck.
Also, I want to issue a plea to Laslo: Please, don't let the noise stop you from commenting. I love your stuff, and can't get enough of it.
Post a Comment