Althouse: You've come to the right place...

You've come to the right place...

... to talk about comments. Got a question about the comments policy? Don't understand or appreciate the deletion policies? Do you have some suggestions about how to improve the comments section?

This is the permanent — at least for now — place for conversations like this. Meade and I will participate in the comments. So... let the conversation about conversations begin.

431 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 431 Newer› Newest»

Meade said...: An extra special "thank you" to Shanna for reading Althouse and for her unique contributions that include smilies. :); 12/7/11, 6:41 PM
ndspinelli said...: For all you folks who posted comments here in good faith, do you now see your professor gave you a bit of honesty last night. This is a "restroom" and most of us got shit on here. But J is a protected species and sitting in the living room.; 12/7/11, 6:55 PM
Meade said...: nd, did you know that, through the Hubble telescope, astrophysicists recently discovered that the universe, from each and every single point, is expanding at the very exact same rate?

That means that YOU are in fact THE center of the universe.

Along with each and every single other person.

As my 85 year-old dear mother likes to say, "blows my mind!"; 12/7/11, 7:24 PM
howzerdo said...: nd...
I've read this comment thread and I am not sure I find anyone else you could be paraphrasing. I am guilty of something like that sentiment; so yes, you caught me. But you seem to by implying something more. What, I'm not sure. That's what "are you kidding me?" is about. I am not advocating for comment deletion, by the way. I don't care one way or the other. I am not even sure what has been deleted since this is the only comment thread I have read in weeks, maybe months.; 12/7/11, 7:25 PM
Shanna said...: An extra special "thank you" to Shanna for reading Althouse and for her unique contributions that include smilies. :)

Slightly less form lettery [smiley face deleted].; 12/7/11, 7:27 PM
Chip S. said...: @Browndog: You asked why I think adding repetitive comments detracts from a thread. Here's my answer.

It comes down to the question of why people comment in the first place. Your approach to commenting--which, btw, I had not noticed, so would not mention you had you not self-identified--implies that you think you're "adding value" (as AA puts it) by just saying something in response to the OP, regardless of what others have already said. That is, you view comments as pretty much b/w you (or any other commenter) and Althouse, one-on-one. I don't share that view.

I view the majority of AA's posts as attempts to precipitate a conversation. In that view, the comment thread takes on a life of its own. Many times people have moved on from the original topic, especially after it's been discussed in considerable detail. When someone comes along and simply restates something that's been thoroughly hashed out, it pretty much says "I have no interest in learning from or adding to what others have said; I'm just here to talk."

Well, I happen not to be all that interested in solo oratory; I like conversational back-and-forth, and not simply if I'm involved. Much of the time I just sit back and enjoy a dispute among people who know what they're talking about. I don't put in a lot of time reading threads that consist largely of personal insults or rehashing of shopworn arguments. And I say this in full awareness of my own occasional culpability on those scores.

This blog at its best is a really good cocktail party. At its worst it's a dysfunctional family's Thanksgiving. It seems to me that a very simple rule for all of us to follow that would keep the blog near its best most of the time is to act like we really are at a cocktail party, but not totally drunk. That involves being a good listener as well as a good story teller.

My $0.02, as they say.; 12/7/11, 8:20 PM
Patrick said...: "When someone comes along and simply restates something that's been thoroughly hashed out, it pretty much says "I have no interest in learning from or adding to what others have said; I'm just here to talk.""

That's a good point, Chip, but it's awfully difficult to wade through 200 comments to see if the point you want to make has already been made. I've repeated comments a time or two, and it'll probably happen again (I am not much of an original thinker) unless I swear off the long comment threads. Even at a good cocktail party, things get repeated.; 12/7/11, 8:44 PM
caplight said...: What Chip S said at 8:20 and what Patrick said right after that.; 12/7/11, 8:54 PM
ndspinelli said...: Well Meade, I don't get your point but I'm certain its profound, @ least for a Hoosier. What do you do for a living?; 12/7/11, 9:14 PM
ndspinelli said...: Well, howzerdo I don't know you, but I'll take you @ your word. I'm sorry for any angst I may have caused. You look like a good person and seem sincere. I like your taste in flicks and love upper NY State...specifically Saratoga Race Track in August. I missed the meet this year but thanks to OTB I was there remotely. Let's just say c'est la vie. Happy Holidays; 12/7/11, 9:23 PM
Meade said...: @caplight, careful, dude. I may have to delete that. Twice.; 12/7/11, 9:26 PM
Chip S. said...: @Patrick: Two points in reply. First, w.r.t. 200+ comment threads, the odds are that every point that can be made has been made. Yes, it's also true that the likelihood that others haven't read those earlier comments is also fairly high, so it may well be time to re-ignite the thread. OTOH, it may be time to let it die. Around here, new posts arrive pretty regularly, so there are plenty of opportunities to comment when threads are still short.

Second, there are lots of instances when the same basic thing gets said over and over again well before a thread becomes a megathread. Hell, I was just reading one a few minutes ago where someone was repeating comments he's made in at least three other threads I can recall within about the past month or so. Whatever point he thinks he's making has either (a) been made by him or (b) been adequately rebutted by others a long time ago, yet he persists, without ever really addressing the points made by others. He's simply using Althouse as a platform to air a familiar and not terribly convincing complaint about Scott Walker.

My main point is that comment threads are subject to a sort of "commons" problem if people value posting comments over reading them. No single repetitive comment kills a thread, but an accumulation of them surely does. If we all post before--or without--reading, then a thread is likely to be nothing more than a collection of declamatory statements.; 12/7/11, 9:31 PM
Patrick said...: Good point, Chip, about the distinction between discussing and merely posting. Discussions frequently are better, but not always. For myself, I don't always have time to re-engage and keep up with comments. Plus, if someone is wrong on the internet, I CANNOT LET IT STAND!!; 12/7/11, 9:40 PM
Chip S. said...: Patrick--a little something for you. If you've already seen it, my apologies for being repetitive.; 12/7/11, 9:43 PM
rcommal said...: what's asked; is that all?; 12/7/11, 10:00 PM
Patrick said...: Chip, great cartoon. I'd seen it before, but couldn't remember the source.; 12/7/11, 10:47 PM
ndspinelli said...: Aww..jokes about deletions. When Meade was deleted[and banned] on another site he and his bride had a hissy fit. But when they are the deleters it's funny..it's in the restroom...hardy har har. Scatalogical and condescending humor is the best!!

Absent an explanation, did you have a lawn mowing biz, Meade?; 12/8/11, 8:45 AM
Beta Rube said...: I think the line between permanent banning and deleting comments is pretty bright.; 12/8/11, 8:53 AM
Meade said...: "Absent an explanation, did you have a lawn mowing biz, Meade?"

No, but I have a lot of respect for many of the people I know who do have lawn mowing businesses, especially the ones who also offer snow removal services. Hard honest work.; 12/8/11, 9:05 AM
Patrick said...: My wife's classmate started up a lawn mowing business back when he was in high school. Instead of going to college, he stuck with his business, now has a bunch of employees, and makes lots of money.

If only he'd gone to college, he'd...I dunno, making money for someone else?

Why would it matter what Meade did in his bachelor days, or what he does now? How would that possibly affect the merit of his arguments?; 12/8/11, 9:34 AM
caplight said...: My buddy who was killed a couple months ago had a lawn cutting business. Hard working guy. His daughter was trying to keep the business going after his death. Last week some one stole his trailer with two 48 inch stand/riding mowers, all his blowers and weed wackers on it. Nice.; 12/8/11, 9:55 AM
howzerdo said...: Thanks nd, I appreciate that.; 12/8/11, 10:07 AM
rcocean said...: What, we can't call each Polack, redneck, cracker, squarehead, kraut, mic, greaser, wop, spic, cheesehead, gook, jap, chink, heb, yid, limey, frog or bohunk?

That's UnAmerican.; 12/8/11, 10:41 AM
Meade said...: rc, it's a free country. Do what you want. At this blog, try to be considerate of others and to avoid abusing anyone, especially if that abuse is based on characteristics the targeted person has no power to change.

We'll appreciate it, ocean dude.; 12/8/11, 11:07 AM
coolkevs said...: Ann/Meade - I haven't seen you post anything about the canning of Blaska's blog on Isthmus/The Daily Page (well, I can't say I really looked that hard). Was Dave being irascible or is the Isthmus snuffing out its only opposing viewpoint??; 12/8/11, 11:20 AM
Pastafarian said...: Meade: "@Pasta, aren't all those comments you quoted ignorable?"

Well, yes, of course they are. All comments are ignorable; but I thought you were trying to combat empty name-calling, repetition, and clutter.

By the way, J's back up to it today:

"Byro-queer aka Jay the mormon pedophile best to STFU before you embarrass yourself anymore, puto. Capichay? Heh"

It's all just insults, threats, and make-believe Italian. I think calling someone a pedophile and using the word "queer" to be intended as an insult cross the line.

But it's your place and your call. And I appreciate the fact that you're trying to make improvements; and the fact that trying to monitor comments is going to be a big, big task. That's why I thought I'd help by playing snitch. But if you're just going to ignore these alerts, I'll drop the J-watch, my "teacher, teacher, J just shit in the trashcan" bit is just becoming tiresome for all of us.

Just delete the right people, Meade; and don't drive away the good commenters.; 12/8/11, 11:23 AM
Chip S. said...: don't drive away the good commenters.

What seems to have bothered people to the point of driving them away is deletion without warning. I can understand why this annoyed the people it annoyed. Especially when the policy does not seem even-handed to many observers.

It seems like a "warning" system would work better. Instead of going through the work of deleting multiple comments, why not just post a criticism of a particular type of commenting offense that's showing up in a thread, with deletion coming only if a warning has been ignored?; 12/8/11, 11:36 AM
Meade said...: @Pasta, I hear you. I really do. And I appreciate what you're telling me along with your patience. I don't see complaints as snitching. I can't guarantee complaints will be solved to everyone's satisfaction but I encourage everyone to make them, here, where they will at least be read and considered. Thanks.

@coolkevs, hold on to your horses. I'm sure we'll have plenty to say when the time is right. Meanwhile, I recommend following Blaska on the Joy Cardin radio show along with Vicki's show.; 12/8/11, 11:39 AM
Meade said...: @Chip S., because we're all adults here (or should be) and because I'm a big right-winger who doesn't give warnings. I just take action.; 12/8/11, 11:42 AM
Meade said...: Also, Chip S., the problem is clutter. The remedy for clutter can't be more clutter.; 12/8/11, 11:46 AM
Chip S. said...: Yes, one problem is clutter. But a good conservative knows that nearly all policy choices involve trade-offs, not absolutes. The risk of ruthless pruning of "clutter" is a loss of free-flowing banter, which is what helps turn a anonymous posters into a community of commenters. If some of the personal exchanges help take some of the nasty edges off political disputes, that's a good thing, not clutter.; 12/8/11, 11:56 AM
Chip S. said...: The remedy for clutter can't be more clutter.

I thought about this comment a little more and realized how wrong I think it is.

The perceived arbitrariness of whatever your deletion policy is has generated this entire 230+ comment thread, as well as lots of oblique references to the Schism of 2011. I think that a tiny bit of "clutter" in the form of a simple, clear warning would reduce total clutter by quite a bit in the long run.; 12/8/11, 12:04 PM
Meade said...: Here is the warning. It's impossible to post a comment without seeing it:

Leave your comment

Join the Althouse comments community. Add value. There are lots of ways to add value, and I don't discriminate based on viewpoint, but I will delete spam, including things that I think clutter the thread to the detriment of most readers, especially back-and-forth attacks among a small group of commenters. There's a spam filter too, though, so if you don't see your comment, you might be caught in that. If you have any problems or comments about comments, talk to me about it here.

Chip S, although I like and respect many Conservatives, I don't consider myself to be one. I'm a right-wing conservative liberal. Or a conservative liberal right-winger, however you want to put it.; 12/8/11, 12:15 PM
Chip S. said...: Yeah, the clarity of that policy is evident from the lack of discussion about it.

Thanks for setting me straight on all this.; 12/8/11, 12:25 PM
Meade said...: de nada, my friend.; 12/8/11, 12:38 PM
Chip S. said...: Ever read this, amigo?

It's what I thought this

Do you have some suggestions about how to improve the comments section?

was about.

But I'm very happy that the new policy is working well.; 12/8/11, 12:51 PM
Meade said...: I haven't, but I will. Thanks.; 12/8/11, 12:55 PM
Shanna said...: The risk of ruthless pruning of "clutter" is a loss of free-flowing banter, which is what helps turn a anonymous posters into a community of commenters

This. Clutter, in the way I'm hearing from your site, is conversation. If you want to ruthlessly prune things to stay on topic, it's no longer a cocktail party. JMHO.; 12/8/11, 1:35 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Pastafarian: "By the way, J's back up to it today: 'Byro-queer aka Jay the mormon pedophile best to STFU before you embarrass yourself anymore, puto. Capichay? Heh.' It's all just insults, threats, and make-believe Italian. I think calling someone a pedophile and using the word "queer" to be intended as an insult cross the line."

Where is that? I don't see it? You need to show us where it is. I googled the phrase and found nothing. I can't believe you'd just make that up. But you're making an argument that we're permitting something, and that assumes we see it. You can't assume that! Where is it?!; 12/8/11, 4:15 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "The risk of ruthless pruning of "clutter" is a loss of free-flowing banter, which is what helps turn a anonymous posters into a community of commenters." This. Clutter, in the way I'm hearing from your site, is conversation. If you want to ruthlessly prune things to stay on topic, it's no longer a cocktail party. JMHO."

Well, you are hearing it wrong. Who said we "ruthlessly" prune or prune to keep things "on topic"?

I wrote "There are lots of ways to add value, and I don't discriminate based on viewpoint, but I will delete spam, including things that I think clutter the thread to the detriment of most readers, especially back-and-forth attacks among a small group of commenters."

The cocktail party image only goes so far. There are some crappy parties where some rotten guests drive others away. I said there are lots of ways to add value. If you are a good guest, you can find a way. Staying on topic is a conventional way to be a good guest, but there are other ways. Think about what they are. You wouldn't go to a party and just start insulting other guests or saying the same thing over and over.

We're trying to make this place a good place with good guests.; 12/8/11, 4:20 PM
ndspinelli said...: Don't you see folks. There are different criteria. For reasons understood by nobody, J gets passes daily. I replied to a stupid comment by J and it was deleted in minutes. J is not a threat to these folks inflated ego. The close surveillance is saved for those who hit the truth about their horseshit. Fellow commenters, you just need to take your meds from Nurse Ratchet when ordered. RP McMurphy is not tolerated, those type are a threat to the control. It's all about control w/ control freaks.

I worked for control freak attorneys. They would rather be in control than win. That only lasts for awhile though. Because in the real world, unlike the tenured world, it's about producing and winning.; 12/8/11, 4:44 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Heh. This is the tattle thread.; 12/8/11, 5:06 PM
Mike_K said...: The problem I complained about seems to have gone away. I didn't do anything. I wasn't implying that you did not want my comments but suggesting it didn't make any sense since most blogs want lots of comments. Anyway, here I am.; 12/8/11, 5:07 PM
Meade said...: RP McMurphy?

nd, you're suffering from delusions of grandeur.; 12/8/11, 5:15 PM
Meade said...: Freeman Hunt said...
"Heh. This is the tattle thread."

That's right, Freems. Now be good.; 12/8/11, 5:19 PM
ndspinelli said...: RP was a self described "mental defective" and a felon..is that grandeur? He was a better person than Nurse Ratchet, but that's a low bar.

You don't want to play "dozens" w/ me, dude. I'm book smart[not as much as you and your bride, of course], I'm people smart, and I'm street smart. I wasn't born on second or third base. I am a second generation American. All 4 of my grandparents were immigrants.

It has become quite clear to me as long as we minions accept the premise that you and your bride are smarter, and more importantly BETTER than all of use commenters, well then everything will fall into place. I reject the premise. That makes me a threat. I will not toe the line. You need to accept that. Then we can proceed civilly.; 12/8/11, 6:44 PM
caplight45 said...: Meade sleeps with the fishes.; 12/8/11, 7:08 PM
rcommal said...: If you don't want people to hear a certain chorus, perhaps it's best not to sound those chords.

--; 12/9/11, 1:34 AM
rcommal said...: For my part, never could hear that Helen song without eerily recollecting the one linked herein.; 12/9/11, 2:01 AM
Meade said...: J and Jay,

Knock it off.; 12/9/11, 12:53 PM
MadisonMan said...: The cocktail party image only goes so far. There are some crappy parties where some rotten guests drive others away.

I'm picturing J, drunk next to the hors-d'oeuvre table, belting out Hava Nagila and spraying the skewered shrimp appetizer with spittle.; 12/9/11, 1:06 PM
Scott M said...: Per Ann above, responding to Pasta

Where is that? I don't see it? You need to show us where it is. I googled the phrase and found nothing. I can't believe you'd just make that up. But you're making an argument that we're permitting something, and that assumes we see it. You can't assume that! Where is it?!

Honestly, if you did even a cursory search, you should have been able to find multiple instances of this exact sort of incoherent ranting. Luckily, dial-a-gibberish is cyclical. All you have to do is wait and the exact same insults will be reused again and again.; 12/9/11, 1:28 PM
Roger J. said...: I was referred to this comment thread from Trooper's site. I was cited in dispatches last Sunday for cluttering whatever that might have been. Yes, I indeed had a jocular interaction with another commenter, Allie, to be precise. I then apologized and ended up, along with Allie and AlanS, cited by the Professor after I had apologized.

Not a problem. Its a free country for the most part, and decided to abandon this blog and moved to another one.

This Blog is the professors, and she gets to set the rules; if I dont like them I leave, which I did. I certainly do not begrudge her her blog. I simply choose not to participate on it.

I will say I am a bit distressed about commentary with respect to the professor's marriage to Mr Meade--that should be simply off limits IMO.

And FWIW, I continue to read the blog, but will not comment. And this will be my last comment on the blog.

Gary Owen; 12/9/11, 4:51 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "Honestly, if you did even a cursory search, you should have been able to find multiple instances of this exact sort of incoherent ranting. Luckily, dial-a-gibberish is cyclical. All you have to do is wait and the exact same insults will be reused again and again."

That's an inadequate response. If you have something you're complaining about, point it out. I am not seeing it and I can't spend my life combing over old posts.

An emailer pointed to one old post, and we went back and deleted a lot of stuff.

So that's what you need to do.

If you come here and quote something, and I make the effort to Google it, and nothing comes up, and I let you know, don't just tell me I didn't look hard enough.

You can link to what you are talking about. If that's too hard for you, I'm not really that interested in taking your complaint seriously.

Raise your game.; 12/9/11, 8:42 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "I then apologized and ended up, along with Allie and AlanS, cited by the Professor after I had apologized."

Sorry. I was writing my response while you were putting that up, I think.

As I said at the time, there wasn't anything particularly bad about what you did, it's just not working for preserving the forum for most readers.

Please don't feel bad about it. You're welcome to comments. Just help us keep up these new standards, which are intended for the good of everyone.; 12/9/11, 8:46 PM
caplight45 said...: This is not directed to anyone in particular but I am posting here because I don't know where else to post it. Here goes:

I once heard an interview with the writer Stephen King on NPR when he was asked about the fan mail he receives. I remember him saying that there is a certain kind of fan who in their heart of hearts thinks that they could do what he did if they just had the breaks. He said that they are very angry because they felt that they had the talent to be just as successful, noticed and lauded as he and were just as deserving of it.

The reason it stuck with me all these years was that it clicked in my brain that I had several men in my congregation who had begun as pastors but had dropped out. One for mental illness (bipolar), one for financial reasons and another because he thought he didn’t really have “the call” after all. In the latter case I think he just didn’t get along with people very well. All three of these and there have been others professed a respect for me but I could always feel the distance, the subtle disapproval and the barbed humor. I called it the” Pastor Wannabe Syndrome and discovered that it is fairly common in churches as I talked to other pastors.

I think there is a definite “Blogger Wannabe Syndrome” in the blogosphere that afflicts some commenters. I think it afflicts some with smaller blogs who link to the Instapundits and Althouses hoping for an “Instalanche”-like event and who must ask (or beg) these larger sites to include them on their blog rolls. I think there is a lot of BWS these last few days directed at Ann Althouse and her blog.

I preach most every Sunday. People take notes of my sermons and listen to them on line. But if Glenn Reynolds quotes an email of mine (which he has a few times on issues of disaster preparedness) I text my kids and tell them to check me out on Insty! So I get the kick of being noticed on the internet. Yet I have no illusion or delusion that I could do what Insty does or what Ann Althouse does. Over the last seven years as a member of the bloggerati she has enlightened, challenged, entertained and held court in her virtual salon without a break or a co-blogger.(not even Meade). She has brought together a most unlikely gathering of readers and commenters who would never have found each other anywhere else in the world and has given us the privilege to exchange ideas, fight and even fling poop at each other. She has created a brand for herself that defies the usual categorization in both variety of topics and her blend of opinion and reporting. As such she has the right to protect her creative product. And on the way to almost 45,000,000 site visits she broke a few hearts when she married the Venerable Meade of whom I will say, a more stand –up guy does not exist.

So call me a sycophant, a suck-up, a wuss, drunk on the Kool-Aide if you want. It’s the United States and that is your privilege. I think of myself as grateful to an incredibly gifted person with an unbelievable work ethic, intense curiosity, and delightful sense of humor who enriches my life and makes the world a better and more enjoyable place even when I don’t agree with her. To those with Blogger Wannabe Syndrome work hard, give it your best shot and build your own brand and maybe you can get to a place where you feel good about it but BWS will never get you there.; 12/9/11, 10:49 PM
ndspinelli said...: Professor, There are 2 sets of standards. One stated by yourself on Bloody Sunday[boring, clutter aka: chatting, flirting are all delete worthy sins]. On Monday you added another sin..sucking up to other commenters. On Tuesday Meade stated it was ok to flirt, troll, chat, derail[aka clutter] and express affection.

There is a direct conflict here. You need to raise your game professor.

And caplight, I don't disagree w/ your polemic for the most part. However I can speak for myself and say I am not a wannabe. I could not do this. The quality of this blogs post is an 'A'. That is not my beef, or most of the beefs. I'm a PI and believe me I understand the wannabe pathology. In my profession I call them Barney Fifes.; 12/10/11, 10:02 AM
Meade said...: ndspinelli said...
"Professor, There are 2 sets of standards. One stated by yourself on Bloody Sunday[boring, clutter aka: chatting, flirting are all delete worthy sins]. On Monday you added another sin..sucking up to other commenters. On Tuesday Meade stated it was ok to flirt, troll, chat, derail[aka clutter] and express affection."

Read, as they say, the whole thing:

Express wit, intelligent debate, humor, creativity, silliness, and, of course, affection - particularly with sharpness and pithiness. If you do, your comments, whether or not they receive a reply, will be highly valued here.   Flirt, troll, chat, derail as you wish - but please be judicious. While some amount will be tolerated, we have our limits and if you wish to test those limits, deletion will be your clue to enough having become enough.; 12/10/11, 2:05 PM
ndspinelli said...: Meade, Can I sum it up w/ plain language, "I'm in charge and if I delete you it means you pissed me off."

Give it up, your true colors are showing and more and more folks are seeing it. Do you think you're dealing w/ some bozo you can bullshit. You picked the wrong guy for that. Let's just stop this tit for tat..you're stinking up the restroom. I'm heading to the kitchen for some lunch.; 12/10/11, 2:35 PM
Sockpuppets 'R' Us said...: Ann Althouse said...

"If you come here and quote something, and I make the effort to Google it, and nothing comes up, and I let you know, don't just tell me I didn't look hard enough."

The exact quote which Pastafarian provided comes up as the only result in both Bing and Google searches:

Google result.

Bing result.

You don't even have to restrict the search to your blog. The quote that Pastafarian provided appears nowhere else on the internet. I think you are lying when you said you made the effort to find the comment.

You have certainly spent more time and effort defending your inability to find the comment in question and berating those who brought it to your attention than it would take for you to actually look for the comment and remove it.

The comment's still there, by the way.; 12/10/11, 3:21 PM
Meade said...: "I think you are lying when you said you made the effort to find the comment. "

Think whatever you want. When we googled it it wasn't there.

Pastafarian could have provided the link but he didn't.

J's comment has been deleted.; 12/10/11, 3:56 PM
gail said...: caplight45's comments @ 12/9/11 10:49 PM : x 2

the comments have become readable again: thoughtful, humorous, enjoyable...thanks for taking out the trash.; 12/10/11, 5:56 PM
caplight said...: @ndspinelli

Love the "Barney Fife" tag. I pastor cops and an ADA and one of my staff used to be a PO before becoming a minister. How true. Thank yu for your comment.

@Gail
Your welcome to the extent that I helped.

But let's not sing "Kum Bah Yah"; 12/10/11, 6:34 PM
rcommal said...: Origins for Kum Ba[h] Ya[h].; 12/10/11, 6:43 PM
ndspinelli said...: caplight, de nada. I always try to say thank you when given a compliment, or when I ask for something and people respond w/ answers. It's just the right thing to do. I'm sure you were raised that way too, caplight. There's just some poor folks who weren't raised right and don't know the basics of courtesy and human decency. C'est la vie.; 12/10/11, 8:16 PM
shiloh said...: Late to the party ~ thank god, but

"I'm more likely to read the first 30 comments than comments around 100 and up."

And it's a great time saver as with most political blogs, there is nothing knew under the sun.

"Flirt, troll, chat, derail as you wish - but please be judicious."

Indeed, but judicious is not included in troll's definition. ;)

>

ndspinelli said...

Meade, Can I sum it up w/ plain language, "I'm in charge and if I delete you it means you pissed me off."

Bingo!

Having just had a post deleted by Meade in a current thread and having posts deleted by Meade previously he's nothing but consistent, and again, all I ask for is consistency lol.

Speaking of consistent, good to see Seven M. still has a shiloh fetish. :-P

>

And bottom line, since the days of Usenet, there have been threads like this one ie censorship/kumbaya, can't we all get along discussions, which as a rule, tend to go nowhere. So, in a sense, this thread is a success!

At a political forum I frequented from 2003/2006 the discussion would get soooo heated, they would have (3) day cool down periods when posting was totally halted. But alas :-P this could not happen here as it would break Althouse's continuous streak of daily posts, eh.

btw, the easiest thing in the world is to skip over posts, posters you wish to avoid, really. ok, ok, some folk have a hard time w/this concept.

>

And if Meade deletes this post it would be my coup de gras er perfect! :D

And please, let the deletions, censorship, sucking up, trolling, flirting etc. continue because re: political blogs or any blogs there is really only (1) rule. Don't be boring, be entertaining. Like mittens, Gingrich, Bachmann, Perry et al. I digress.

that is all; 12/11/11, 12:03 AM
Meade said...: "And if Meade deletes this post it would be my coup de gras er perfect! :D"

No, Shiloh, no cup of grass for you!

"that is all"

Threat or promise? (kidding); 12/11/11, 8:27 AM
shiloh said...: "Threat or promise? (kidding)"

?!? Meade, most if not all of my posts about you are sarcasm er just for my own amusement ie :D

Interesting 2 or 3 of the posts "you" deleted had to do w/AA donations to her favorite charity lol. hmm, a very touchy subject, eh. A fool er teabagger and their $$$ is soon parted so no biggie. Free enterprise is the ticket.

btw, really enjoyed how a couple posters destroyed my "buddy" Seven M. in last night's debate thread albeit a very easy task to accomplish. ;)

Suffice it to say if Althouse ever stopped blogging Seven and several other winger regulars would have withdrawal symptons. :-P

take care; 12/11/11, 9:15 AM
caplight45 said...: If you guys are drinking a cup of grass it better be for medicinal purposes only.; 12/11/11, 9:15 AM
Lem the artificially intelligent said...: No comment ;); 12/11/11, 12:48 PM
Meade said...: Hey! That is not allowed!; 12/11/11, 12:55 PM
Meade said...: Mr. Spinelli, I'll be deleting the comments you post that strike me as clutter, especially the ones that add nothing of substance to the discussion of the particular thread.; 12/12/11, 9:42 AM
Meade said...: If you have not saved copies and would like to have deleted comments, please email me. I may be able to recover some specific deleted comments.; 12/12/11, 9:46 AM
Meade said...: Most recently deleted:

ndspinelli said...
ScottM, We think the same a lot! I was going to do a similar post but couldn't think of a way to put the German accent on paper. You nailed it. I'm sucking up to you..real man crush!! But it's not flirting, I am very hetero. Not that there's anything wrong w/ being homo.
12/12/11 9:26 AM

ndspinelli said...
And, RonF doesn't get your wry humor. Lighten up dude!; 12/12/11, 9:50 AM
ndspinelli said...: Meade, I know a law firm that needs an errand boy. Running documents to the courthouse, taking partners cars out to be washed, etc. Let me know if you're interested. I think you're just right for the job. Of course the job title isn't errand boy. I think it's some euphemistic title. Even attorneys allow people to have some shred of dignity.; 12/12/11, 10:02 AM
Meade said...: Thanks, Nick, but I have my hands full. Why don't you apply, yourself. Sounds like it's right up your alley. And you obviously have time on your hands.

If you would ever like to begin commenting here again, feel free to email and let me know that you are ready to do so on our terms.

Thanks, good luck, and merry Christmas.; 12/12/11, 10:26 AM
shiloh said...: It's a good thing Althouse doesn't "generally" read past comment #30.

Just sayin'

Echoing my "kumbaya" buddy Meade ~ Merry Christmas er happy holidays everyone.; 12/12/11, 10:37 AM
Meade said...: Fen said...
J: Was the Iraqi war that the NYT supported for years, democratic?  Democratic? Put the crack pipe down, Libtard.
12/12/11 10:50 AM; 12/12/11, 11:05 AM
Pastafarian said...: Althouse: "Where is that? I don't see it?"

You can't believe I'd just make that up, huh? Seriously?

9:43am, the Fast and Furious thread of 8 Dec. The one J quote I don't tag with a time and thread, and it just can't be found.

Although it's now been deleted by a blog administrator. And I can't find a cached version, so maybe I'm just making it up; although a Google search for the phrase I quoted takes me to the comments for that particular thread, even though it's been deleted. But maybe I manipulated Google to do that too.

This is one problem with deleting such comments: The comment was up long enough to serve J's purpose. He dragged the thread into the gutter of homophobia, religious bigotry, name-calling and threats, at the time that comments were being read and submitted.

Then you (or Meade) came along and deleted it hours later, when you found it, and all this did was make me look like a liar.

Here's an analogy: You have a rabid wolverine that lives in your kitchen, chained to the radiator. Every fucking morning, you wake up and that stupid son-of-a-bitch has shit all over your panini-maker.

Sure, you can clean it up, but that won't do any good. Tomorrow morning, you'll get up to find a warm steaming pile of weasel shit; and sooner or later you're going to get trichinosis.

I don't care how cute you find Mr. Whiskers when he snaps through that live rat's pelvic bone, sooner or later, you're going to have to get rid of that goddamned wolverine.; 12/12/11, 11:24 AM
Meade said...: ndspinelli said...
I'm banned in Lilliputia..enjoy J however.

12/12/11 11:21 AM; 12/12/11, 11:24 AM
Meade said...: You are not banned, Nick. But you could be. Do you want to be banned?; 12/12/11, 11:28 AM
Meade said...: Pastafarian said...
Althouse: "Where is that? I don't see it?"

You can't believe I'd just make that up, huh? Seriously?

9:43am, the Fast and Furious thread of 8 Dec. The one J quote I don't tag with a time and thread, and it just can't be found.

Although it's now been deleted by a blog administrator. And I can't find a cached version, so maybe I'm just making it up;

I found it. I deleted it. In the future, if everyone would add a link to comments they are complaining about, I will greatly appreciate it.; 12/12/11, 11:31 AM
Meade said...: ndspinelli said...
Remember, You could be next..I can come back if I wear a Scarlet 'B' for Banned. I just won't do it.

12/12/11 11:29 AM; 12/12/11, 11:33 AM
Pastafarian said...: Oh, and to complete the analogy -- I'm standing in your kitchen and telling you that the wolverine shit on your sandwich press again; Meade is standing there with a bottle of 409 and he's stripping off rubber gloves; and you're looking at your now-spotless panini-maker and saying "Why are you making up lies about Mr. Whiskers?"; 12/12/11, 11:34 AM
Meade said...: ndspinelli said...
Banned by the professor who helped write the free speech code @ UW. Merry Christmas to all, and Happy New Year to j

12/12/11 11:27 AM
ndspinelli said...
Watch me disappear before your eyes.

They really want you to email them..not deal in the open.

12/12/11 11:28 AM; 12/12/11, 11:37 AM
Meade said...: @Pasta, no one has called you a liar. A link is all I'm asking for - in future. Okay?; 12/12/11, 11:40 AM
ndspinelli said...: Christ Almighty I don't want to be banned, you're asking questions like an ineffective father. But, I will not jump through your hoops, I don't jump through anyones hoops. If you have something to say to me then try and grow a pair and say it where everyone can see it. I'm saying what I think and "feel", why can't you.

This "email me" horseshit is classic control stuff. Attorneys do it w/ phone calls and emails all the time. You have to realize you're dealing w/ someone who has been around and knows every game. I don't play games, and I don't dance.

Tell me, where everyone can read, what your reason for deleting me en masse is. I'm certain it would be edifying for some. Or, is the reason you're deleting me indigeneous to me. You didn't put into your restroom here the post I made on cannabis to the Sgt. this morning. You just deleted it. I took a shot..a legit shot, @ your bride. She was talking out of her ass on the subject and I called her on it. What category does that fall into? Thin Skin deletion.; 12/12/11, 2:20 PM
Anonymous said...: This articl cld stand 2 be sorted most-recent 1st, if its a continu talkrr.; 12/12/11, 2:22 PM
Ann Althouse said...: @Pastafarian I assume what happened was that when I took the trouble to Google it, Google hadn't found it yet, so nothing came up. Later it did.

Why can't you just say you are sorry for not providing the link in the first place, for wasting my time and trying my patience saying I hadn't looked hard enough, and for continuing to whine about the whole thing? Then say that next time you will provide the link?

Really, this is just plain stupid.; 12/12/11, 4:04 PM
Meade said...: Mr. Spinelli, you are right - do not email me.

If, on this blog, you want to avoid having your comments deleted, here are my terms:

Post comments that are
1. thoughtful
2. humorous
3. enjoyable

Otherwise, please don't bother. You'll be wasting a lot of your precious time and a little of mine and I don't have enough time the way it is, if you get my drift and I think you do.

Sincerely,
Meade; 12/12/11, 4:33 PM
ndspinelli said...: Meade, Although not stated, those are hopefully both yours and the professors terms. They are reasonable and I accept them. Thanks for clearing this up.

Whether you folks realize it or not, I am not the enemy. The professor has much to offer, and I have something to offer. If I didn't think that I would have just said, "fuck it." Unfortunately, for all of us, others w/ something to offer have said "fuck it", and we are all diminished because of that.; 12/12/11, 5:04 PM
Pastafarian said...: Althouse, in reverse order:

"Really, this is just plain stupid."

We stupid people prefer the term 'intellectually differently-abled.'

"Then say that next time you will provide the link?"

As an intellectually differently-abled person over 40 years old, I find these interwebs quite confusing. If you or Meade can leave instructions on linking to a specific comment in a thread, I will link next time.

Seriously, I don't know how. I could copy and paste the URL to the thread itself, but I'm sure there's a much more elegant method that pinpoints the very comment without a huge glob of text, that's clickable.

"...continuing to whine..."

Well, now that's kind of nasty, using the word "whine". But I thought that was the purpose of this restroom. You're like the guy in the next stall complaining about the smell I'm making.

"...saying I hadn't looked hard enough..."

That was ScottM, I think. He's the non-stupid conservatarian with the hog for an avatar.

"...for wasting my time..."

Well, I am sorry if I wasted your time. I get the sense that I do that from time to time, and I do try not to (or at least I don't purposefully try to.)

"Why can't you just say you are sorry..."

Because you pissed me off by calling my a liar, goddammit. I rescind my apology from the last paragraph.; 12/12/11, 5:10 PM
Meade said...: "Unfortunately, for all of us, others w/ something to offer have said "fuck it", and we are all diminished because of that."

Bullshit. Who has been diminished? Name someone. You can't because no one is. Your ego may be diminished but that is because you are full of yourself.

Grow up, Spinelli.

Can you ignore J and other commenters who you find annoying? A few people can't seem to do that simple thing. Most can. I notice that those who are able to do so tend to be many of our best and most longtime commenters.

I invite you to join them, if you wish. Otherwise, I wish you farewell, good luck, and goodbye.; 12/12/11, 5:42 PM
Meade said...: Pastafarian,

Rescinded apology accepted.

No, seriously - let's let this go, can we? You are an honorable person and no one here called you a liar or thinks of you as one.

I appreciate the humor in your last comment. And if you would like a lesson in creating hyperlinks, please email me and I'll be happy to take you through it. I'm being completely earnest.

Meade; 12/12/11, 5:51 PM
Meade said...: ps: to Spinelli: I just read your latest (undeleted) comments.

Well done. Thank you.; 12/12/11, 6:49 PM
ndspinelli said...: Well Meade, I thought we were making progress. I believe we are ALL diminished by the absence of those driven off by J, yourself, and the professor. Obviously you and your bride disagree. Reasonable people can disagree w/o being disagreeable.

I will take your comment that I am "full of myself" into serious consideration. You are an expert on this topic, and could probably write a book about living w/ people "full of themself."; 12/12/11, 6:50 PM
ndspinelli said...: Meade, Presumably you speak of the comment about my sister. I loved her dearly and miss her every day. You know dude, I'm a good man and speak from my brain, heart and soul, depending upon the topic. I know who I am. I know I am flawed, as are we all. God bless you, and I didn't say that because you sneezed. And I would NEVER say that if I didn't mean it.; 12/12/11, 6:57 PM
Meade said...: "Reasonable people can disagree w/o being disagreeable."

With that, I believe we have reached point of complete agreement. And I wish you a very good night.; 12/12/11, 7:00 PM
Meade said...: ndspinelli said...
Where's J on this topic???

12/13/11 10:16 AM; 12/13/11, 11:07 AM
Meade said...: ndspinelli said...
It is becoming apparent that our commenter who uses the 10th letter of the alphabet as his moniker is returning to his default position, toxic.

12/13/11 11:31 AM; 12/13/11, 11:48 AM
ndspinelli said...: Meade, You need to take a deep breath. J spews his toxic comments and he can't even be tweaked??

You and your bride protect him like he has something on you. Or, more like he's your rich, crazy uncle and you don't want to be put out of his will.

I'm telling you man, you're not being righteous. And, if you took a deep breath, and put aside your "feelings" about me, you would see that. Most everyone else does. However, it's blatantly obvious being honorable isn't the point here. It's showing me who's in charge.; 12/13/11, 12:15 PM
Meade said...: I have no "feelings" for you or for J. I just want readers and commenters to be free of having to read boring back and forth tweaks. I don't care who does it - if I see it beginning to develop, I'll de it.; 12/13/11, 12:49 PM
Scott M said...: And you're not seeing it develop in the Ron Paul thread? Does it have to be a back-and-forth? A series of inane, completely meaningless attack comments directed at other commenters doesn't qualify?; 12/13/11, 2:06 PM
Meade said...: No, I don't. Can you be more specific? I see a lot of ignorable comments, beginning with a few of my own.

As far as I can tell, the thread is continuing with relatively little clutter.; 12/13/11, 2:27 PM
Scott M said...: Byro-Sorepaw-Jay, touched a nerve, dissing your hero Larry the Cable the Guy, eh Gumpronius. Sad, yr hero Cain gone.

keep your stalking on, okie-doke (Annie herself , taking the stand soon).

Freeper-Fen,--when your tweek buzz subsides, go back to the David Duke site with yr new klan-queer pal Byro-sorepaw the tee-shirt salesman of Sac, perp.

sorepaw-byro, gomer --get that AA in meth studies. Even Ayn Rand 's a bit much for a flunkie tee-shirt sales-dolt (and you've been traced to David Duke, puerco).

All within roughly ten minutes.; 12/13/11, 2:42 PM
Meade said...: Thanks. Ignorable but I'll try to keep an eye on it. People need to learn how to not take the bait. And if bait is taken, how to drop it.; 12/13/11, 2:53 PM
ndspinelli said...: ScottM, I know you're a bright dude...you must see what the hell is going on here. You're using reason, Meade is using the Al Haig line, "I'm in charge here." It's not very complicated.; 12/13/11, 3:09 PM
Meade said...: ndspinelli said...
Cancellare l'umorismo come prezioso stronzo!

12/13/11 3:01 PM

ndspinelli said...
I didn't know Candy was a Cheesehead, but she does look like a few deer in my headlights I've almost hit.

12/13/11 3:02 PM

Meade said...
"Cancellare l'umorismo come prezioso stronzo! "

lo stesso per voi, stonzo.

12/13/11 3:07 PM; 12/13/11, 3:09 PM
ndspinelli said...: Meade, You're among other things, getting incredibly tedious. Please tell me what was wrong w/ the "deer in headlight" comment. Have you seen those eyes? It's humor, maybe not your sense of it. Is it violent? Are you in PETA? WTF!!

And, it's "stronzo" w/ the "str" rolling off your tongue w/ derision. But, nobody can say it like a dago.; 12/13/11, 3:42 PM
Meade said...: Sorry - your deer in the headlight comment got caught in my dagnet. There it is. If it's important to you, repost it. Unless you would find it tedious.; 12/13/11, 4:01 PM
shiloh said...: Speaking of tedious, again, it's relatively easy to ignore posts/posters.

Unless one is obsessed w/certain posters. ;)

carry on; 12/13/11, 4:39 PM
caplight45 said...: The only reason I read J today is because of the present kerfuffle about comments and deletions. Other than that I just skip over whatever he writes.; 12/13/11, 5:25 PM
Scott M said...: ed, what actually "started this" was commenters who could not seem to not bite at J's bait.

So...guests calling out obvious and repetitive bigotry = bad, but as long as it's just bait, it's okay.

That dog simply doesn't hunt well.; 12/14/11, 11:29 AM
Meade said...: Call it out right here, Scott. Or email me.; 12/14/11, 11:31 AM
Meade said...: sorepaw, J: knock it off or all your future comments will be summarily deleted.; 12/14/11, 11:44 AM
Chip S. said...: Meade, If you go back through the old threads, I think you'll find that what "started this" wasn't actually a dispute over J's comments. What started the rock rolling downhill was the deletion of a long dispute b/w Trooper and whatever name Allie was posting under at the time. He objected to what he perceived as her unverifiable claims about her daughter's military service, as well as her serial screen names. That was the first mass deletion, and it clearly offended TY because none of J's performance art had been similarly deleted.

The issue--IMO at least--has always been Althouse's departure from her previous free-speech absolutism. There is also--IMO--a bit of a property-rights dispute. Whereas it used to feel like the comment threads "belonged" to the commenters, it's now clear that they belong to Althouse. NTTAWWT: the proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Althouse is of course free to establish whatever comments policy she thinks best advances her goals for her blog. And if she thinks the new policy is worth the cost of thread monitoring, then it's a success. It would be interesting to hear how things look from your end.; 12/14/11, 11:46 AM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/14/11, 11:50 AM
Meade said...: You are free to delete any of your own comments on any thread. You won't be the first commenter to do that.

Free speech has never been absolute on this blog and I'm sure it never will be. Best of luck to anyone who is looking for that anywhere in the blogosphere.; 12/14/11, 11:55 AM
Chip S. said...: Free speech has never been absolute on this blog

I don't care enough about this to go back and find Althouse's statements to this effect, but except for the mysterious "Mary" and the ban on the "n-word," can you tell us what speech was deletion-worthy prior to a couple of months ago?; 12/14/11, 12:00 PM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/14/11, 12:04 PM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/14/11, 12:09 PM
Ann Althouse said...: Chip S: "Meade, If you go back through the old threads, I think you'll find that what "started this" wasn't actually a dispute over J's comments. What started the rock rolling downhill was the deletion of a long dispute b/w Trooper and whatever name Allie was posting under at the time. He objected to what he perceived as her unverifiable claims about her daughter's military service, as well as her serial screen names. That was the first mass deletion, and it clearly offended TY because none of J's performance art had been similarly deleted."

I have no memory of that historic event, but based on your description and assuming it happened, I'm guessing that Trooper made factual assertions about a real person who was not participating in the comments (and not a public figure). That's something I've rarely seen on the blog, but when I have noticed it, I have deleted consistently. I don't know why the female commenter was talking about her daughter, but the daughter wasn't here, and if Trooper was attacking her, that is a complete mess, and it doesn't belong in the comments. Do you understand that policy? Seriously. Tell me you understand. If you don't understand now that I've explained the policy, tell me what part of it you don't understand.

"The issue--IMO at least--has always been Althouse's departure from her previous free-speech absolutism."

You're misstating my policy. I'm strong on free speech, but there are some things that I won't accept, and while the policy has evolved in response to the emergence of problem comments/commenters, I have been principled, and I will defend everything I've done in working on the comments. Your failure to appreciate this work is disappointing.

"There is also--IMO--a bit of a property-rights dispute. Whereas it used to feel like the comment threads "belonged" to the commenters, it's now clear that they belong to Althouse."

It is my blog, and I have created place for people to write and to gain a lot of readers for their writing. Some people would ruin the place for others. I'm supposed to sit back and let them do that? Bad commenters can drive out good ones. It's a resource. Ever heard of the "tragedy of the commons." (I typo'd "tragedy of the comments.")

"Althouse is of course free to establish whatever comments policy she thinks best advances her goals for her blog. And if she thinks the new policy is worth the cost of thread monitoring, then it's a success. It would be interesting to hear how things look from your end."

Now that you've heard it, perhaps you'll say "I get it now. And thanks." Or something like that.; 12/14/11, 12:17 PM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/14/11, 12:25 PM
ndspinelli said...: "Bad commenters" and "Good Commenters"; and "Ay, there's the rub!" It's lately really about, Good boys/girls, and Bad boys/girls.; 12/14/11, 12:31 PM
purplepenquin said...: Less than 20 minutes after vowing to never post again, Sorepaw keeps on posting. :D

That said, if you want to find (and then delete) each&every comment you've made on this site then enter the following into a Google-search:

sorepaw site:http://althouse.blogspot.com/

(Why doesn't blogger have an "All posts by this user" option on the profile?); 12/14/11, 12:33 PM
ndspinelli said...: sorepaw, You're not the boss of them. Christ Almighty, that's the point!!!; 12/14/11, 12:33 PM
ndspinelli said...: Better called the porta potty guy, this "restroom" is getting filled up.

It would have been so much better if we had this Festivus airing of the grievances in the kitchen or living room.; 12/14/11, 12:35 PM
Scott M said...: (Why doesn't blogger have an "All posts by this user" option on the profile?)

It's right next to the "Ignore" option blogger doesn't have.; 12/14/11, 12:36 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "If you showed a consistent policy of actually taking action against bad commenters, I expect there would be fewer complaints. What's the point of protecting "J"?"

I'm not "protecting" some people and not others. There's a lot of bad or questionable stuff that has been left up. But every time a judgment has been made and something has been deleted, it has been for a reason and it has been principled.

I don't have the time to explain every distinction I (and Meade) have made. I don't have time to do that, but I know I could do it. You can choose not to believe that, but I know it's true.

As for nondeletions, I can't explain every nondeletions, because I haven't read and thought about ever comment. If you are expecting consistency in nondeletion, you are being radically unfair, and you should admit that to yourself.; 12/14/11, 12:37 PM
Chip S. said...: Ann Althouse @12:17 on 12/14/11 said...Ever heard of the "tragedy of the commons."

See the last paragraph of my comment of 12/7 @ 9:31 pm.

I've previously linked to Hirschman's Exit, Voice, and Loyalty here, to make the point that at least some of the comments in this thread should be read as signs of support for this blog, offered in the spirit of trying to help.

If you go back and read my comments in this thread, I think you'll see that I generally support your efforts to weed the comment garden, as it were. I don't see any evidence that I have failed to comprehend what you're trying to do.

Those comments of mine that you appear to find disappointing are attempts to explain what I see as the main complaint people seem to have. You consider your policies clear because they are clear to you. You seem to interpret the existence of this thread as evidence that many of your commenters are dense. I disagree, respectfully.

As for "free speech," my perception of this blog as a bastion of free speech is what drew me here, b/c it contrasted so favorably with The Moderate Voice, where I had been commenting previously. I found their comment policing policy to be stifling, so I left. Thanks to this blog, I haven't missed that forum at all.

I had intended my next post in this thread as a "thank you" to you for providing such an outstanding platform for spirited debate, pending Meade's reply to my request for clarification about the extent of the site's actual commitment to free speech. Instead of a clarification, I got your expression of disappointment in my cognitive ability. So I guess this comment will have to do by way of a show of appreciation.; 12/14/11, 12:38 PM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/14/11, 12:38 PM
shiloh said...: "but I have no intention of ever commenting here again, under any name."

(20) minutes later ...

"You may do whatever you like." yada yada yada

sorepaw, never say never, eh.

>

In the final analysis, this is just one of many internet playgrounds. Children, please try to behave. At my first political forum the general rule of thumb, would you say that at a family gathering? Although I have my disagreements w/AA, this blog does "allow" a lot more than most political blogs as bad language would get you instantly banned at many political blogs.

carry on; 12/14/11, 12:41 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "That said, if you want to find (and then delete) each&every comment you've made on this site then enter the following into a Google-search..."

Anyone who deletes their old posts is making holes in old conversations and doing an injury to the comments community and to the individual commenters who have responded to them.

I know there are some people who've done that and lived to regret it. You don't know what you've got until it's gone, and there were some interesting writers who found an audience on my blog, then lost their audience. Because of the way they left, they probably felt they couldn't come back. Maybe they started their own blog, thinking they had a lot of admirers, but they didn't bring that many readers along with them, and now they remember how cool it was being read and admired in the comments on my blog. But they didn't value it when they got mad and left.

And then there are the real trolls, who never valued it and don't even like my front-page writing, and they just want to stink up the place.; 12/14/11, 12:45 PM
shiloh said...: sorepaw reminds me of Colombo ~ Ma'am, just one more question. :D

btw, the best way to permanently leave a blog is just to leave. No need to (((announce))) said departure ...

See 'ya!; 12/14/11, 12:50 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "I had intended my next post in this thread as a "thank you" to you for providing such an outstanding platform for spirited debate, pending Meade's reply to my request for clarification about the extent of the site's actual commitment to free speech. Instead of a clarification, I got your expression of disappointment in my cognitive ability. So I guess this comment will have to do by way of a show of appreciation."

Thank for your words of support. What got me fired up was what you said about that deletion of material about the young woman's military service. That was news to me and shed new light for me on what was eating some people. I was truly outraged to learn that that was or might be the source of some of the most vicious antagonism against me. I absolutely stand on principle about a deletion like that, and if it is the case that some people are stirring up others because they are aggrieved about that.... then I want everyone who is getting stirred up to know what the real situation is.

I guess that's not really very much about you, Chip S. You're just the bearer of interesting news that I had to react to.; 12/14/11, 12:55 PM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/14/11, 12:55 PM
Ann Althouse said...: @ sorepaw

1. I don't have the capacity to ban people, only to delete comments.

2. I need to know about comments before deleting them.

3. You refer to things generically, and you don't respond to requests to identify individual comments that you think fall within the deletion policy.

4. Do you see why you are so unsuccessful in getting what you want?

5. Do you care?

6. I thought not.; 12/14/11, 1:02 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "sorepaw reminds me of Colombo ~ Ma'am, just one more question. :D btw, the best way to permanently leave a blog is just to leave. No need to (((announce))) said departure ..."

That's really unfair to Columbo. He was being wily and getting more information so he could do what he was always trying to do. Figure out what really happened.

Sorepaw keeps coming back because he wants to insist that we will miss him when he's gone. He'd like us to feel the pain of his flounce-off. There have been many flounce-offs on the Althouse blog over the years, and the idea that the one that's really going to hurt is Sorepaw's is... well... it's embarrassing for Sorepaw.; 12/14/11, 1:06 PM
sorepaw said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/14/11, 1:10 PM
Ann Althouse said...: "No request has been made..."

Then you haven't been paying attention.

"But if you want to know what "J" writes, generically or specifically, just follow J's comments down any thread to which he, she, or it has contributed more than twice and you'll see soon enough what I'm talking about."

To say that is to say you're not doing what was requested. You really don't deserve a personal response when you say things like that. You deserve deletion.

"Besides, by this point I no longer have any idea what falls within the deletion policy."

You won't bother to try to understand. You are flaunting the way in which you are not worth spending time talking to.; 12/14/11, 1:39 PM
Ann Althouse said...: That is my last personal response to Sorepaw. My new response for him is deletion. I gave him personal tutoring here, and he squandered it.; 12/14/11, 1:41 PM
Toad Trend said...: Well it pays to poke around a little bit. I don't comment all that much and my purpose isn't always to inform as many of you will confirm but I find many of the individuals here quite interesting. Everyone has something to contribute for sure and I believe Ann and Mr. Meade appreciate that. It is not for me to decide which comments they wish to delete (my microphone, my radio show). It is their blog after all - and I am not going to get anal about what might constitute deletion either. Life is too short.

And so it goes...; 12/14/11, 2:17 PM
ndspinelli said...: shiloh, I surmise you're from a family where everyone smiles and eats[or drinks!] their anger; problems are handled passive-aggresively, and then snipe behind the back. I know there are all types of family dynamics, and the one I just described is common in Wi. That was not my ethnic, blue collar, upbringing. So..when you say the discussion should be suitable for a "family gathering" you are projecting your self-absorbed notion of what a "family gathering" looks and sounds like.

Professor, Nixon truly believed he was making a "principled" stand in protecting the Presidency from Congress and the Judiciary.

Or more recently, "It depends what your definition of 'is' is."

Marshall law saps the strength of the enforcer, and usually invigorates the masses under its rule.

Just Sayn'; 12/14/11, 4:28 PM
caplight45 said...: Spinelli
Humor me, please. You said:

"shiloh, I surmise you're from a family where everyone smiles and eats[or drinks!] their anger; problems are handled passive-aggresively, and then snipe behind the back. I know there are all types of family dynamics, and the one I just described is common in Wi. That was not my ethnic, blue collar, upbringing. So..when you say the discussion should be suitable for a "family gathering" you are projecting your self-absorbed notion of what a "family gathering" looks and sounds like."

I am curious why you have to add the modifier "self-absorbed". He was offering his idea of what the blog comments should be like. Obviously it's his idea. Then at the same time you are "surmising" his whole family system based on your impression from very little data--read that, your "self-absorbed" notion of shiloh's family. It's like you aren't happy unless you're really sticking it to somebody. BTW my Hunky family gatherings were verbal free for alls.; 12/14/11, 6:35 PM
shiloh said...: "That's really unfair to Columbo."

OK, apologies to Columbo. btw, my mom and dad watched the show religiously, but my mom's fave was McMillan and Wife as she had the hots for Rock going back to the 50s.

I digress.

Long story short. There was a notorious troll at 538.com who said he was leaving umpteen times. Had a top ten most despised list of 538 posters Dec. 2008 after the election in which he said he was leaving and also threatened Nate Silver's life a couple times. Of course he said he would not follow Nate to the NYT's or the (2) off-shoot sites from 538.com, but he managed to show up nonetheless lol. And yes, he really needed/needs a hug. He also had several aliases ~ my fave shilohbuster :D.

And yes, most who "announce" they are leaving really, really want peep(s) to beg them not to leave. Oops!

>

Clarification for blog psychoanalyst ndspinelli :) a polite, good natured, happy family gathering. Again, at my first political forum profanity of any kind would get you instantly banned.

p.s. Those of you who spent any time at 538.com in 2008/2009 know the troll I'm talkin' about as he's a legend lol, so pathetic he was/is somewhat entertaining.

that is all; 12/14/11, 7:25 PM
ndspinelli said...: cap45, Just taking my cue from the professor. And, can't Shiloh speak for himself? He seems perfectly capable of doing so, and indeed has numerous times. Are you his attorney? Or, just in projection mode tonight? If Shiloh has a problem w/ something I said to him he can say it and I will answer. You can shit in your hat on this one.; 12/14/11, 8:46 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I see that over on his blog, Trooper York has confirmed the incident that Chip S. enlightened me about, and which I responded to at 12/14/11 12:17 PM.

If Allie is reading this and now understands the game Trooper has been playing with her, I assume she feels pretty bad about it. His antagonism to me stemmed from a deletion that I did to protect her daughter. I assume she didn't realize that and didn't really fathom the deep misogyny of the posts like the one he just put up, portraying the woman he demeaned lying on the ground sucking from a cow's udder.

Allie is welcome to email me or to post here. I feel sorry for her. Trooper can seem like a lot of fun, and it can lure you into feeling like you are part of the fun. But that's not what's going on there.; 12/14/11, 8:51 PM
caplight45 said...: Spinelli

You make me smile. You really do.

BTW I don't wear hats. I'm secure in my baldness.; 12/14/11, 8:58 PM
ndspinelli said...: Wow, Ann..Desperate times call for desperate measures. A law school professor acting like she's in middle school. Do your students read this? En vino veritas. We see your true colors here.
I alway thought you were a nasty drunk.

You may want to have Barney Fife, the deputy of deletions, erase this one for you. I'm giving you some "personal tutoring here, don't squander it."; 12/14/11, 9:06 PM
Ann Althouse said...: I think I've figured out where the deletions were that Chip S. told me about. It's this post.

I see that Allie (Mitochondri-Allie) had just posted:

"I am a mother of a Corpsman who is serving in Afghanistan to keep your sorry asses safe. I stand by my observation of the level of hate I have had hurled at myself and my daughter today by some of Althouse's loyal commenters.Same on you, as the protesters would say shame, shame , shame."

One minute later, I posted this:

"This comments thread sucks.

"How about talking about substance instead of bullshitting about each other? Do you seriously think this dreck has value for the general reader?

"I feel like deleting 80% of the comments on this thread.

"In fact... I will.

"Now, start over and no more talk about sockpuppets or whatever the fuck you've been wasting my space on."

9 minutes after that, I wrote:

"I apologize to the good commenters who got deleted in the vast culling I just performed. But let this be a lesson to everyone.

"You need to be interesting. Insults can be interesting, but a long string of insults just drives away most readers. When an obvious troll shows up, don't fill up the thread with interaction with this person. That is just stupid and makes the thread worthless."

I can't see what I took out there, but that was the thing Chip S. referred to, I think, and it seems to have had to do with the abuse of the commenter Allie having to do with her daughter in Afghanistan and also with people making a total mess of a comments thread.

I even apologized to the "good commenters" who had to go down to clear things out.

I stand by what I did.; 12/14/11, 9:33 PM
Ann Althouse said...: And by "good," I mean commenters who post in good faith, that is, because they want to have a real conversation and they like adding to a website they enjoy.

By contrast, there are "bad" commenters, that is, commenters who post in bad faith. They don't really like the site, and the don't mind wrecking it or appropriating it for themselves.

We've got to take note of what is going on, and the bad-faithers like to use the talisman "free speech." That worked for me up to a point, but in the end, I can see that they weren't really about a free-wheeling conversational forum. They were about ruining this website for everyone.

If you're not sure whether you're good or bad here, think about it. Do you enjoy having this blog as a place to go or would you like to see it destroyed? Do you care that it is a speech forum for a lot of people or are you into taking that away?; 12/14/11, 9:39 PM
ndspinelli said...: Normally one doubles down when you have a 10 or 11. But, I guess doubling down w/ 15 could work.; 12/14/11, 9:51 PM
Anonymous said...: You have a lot of nerve Althouse. You wanted to protect me from Trooper, that's why you deleted all his posts and some of mine during that exchange Trooper and I had? Disingenuous bull.

You have called me insipid and boring and a cluttered of your precious blog, now you want to save your well earned reputation . I do not believe in your sincerity.

What Trooper does on his blog is raw humor, I am a feminist that does not get her bloomers in a bundle over humor.

If you truly wanted to protect me, you would have stepped in when "B" called me a breeder, no misoginism there , right? How about when B said my husband committed suicide instead of staying married to me, where were you then, where was your concern?

How strange for you to reach out to me at this point , after all the shit hit the fan, well maybe it's not strange at all. I think you see that your own behavior has lost you some of your valued commenters.

Oh well.; 12/14/11, 9:52 PM
caplight45 said...: "I think you see that your own behavior has lost you some of your valued commenters."

I was unaware that that had occurred.; 12/14/11, 10:28 PM
somewhy said...: Allie, please be careful where you place loyalty - if at all. The huge difference in the number of commenters between here and Trooper's is almost a guarentee that while here you may find 'cruel neutrality', there you will be manipulated.

Not to suggest some of Trooper's themes aren't funny or thoughtful; just to say playing by the rules at either place (and you must, as should all) will leave less of a bitter taste at Althouse.; 12/14/11, 11:01 PM
Meade said...: Allie said...
You have a lot of nerve Althouse. You wanted to protect me from Trooper, that's why you deleted all his posts and some of mine during that exchange Trooper and I had? Disingenuous bull [...] If you truly wanted to protect me, you would have stepped in when "B" called me a breeder, no misoginism there , right? How about when B said my husband committed suicide instead of staying married to me, where were you then, where was your concern?

Allie, she did not say she was protecting you. She said she was trying to protect your daughter - a real (non-public, non celebrity) person who was not present in the comments to protect herself. Oddly enough, Althouse was doing for you what you should have been doing yourself, for your daughter. Read (carefully):

Althouse: "If Allie is reading this and now understands the game Trooper has been playing with her, I assume she feels pretty bad about it. His antagonism to me stemmed from a deletion that I did to protect her daughter."

Allie: You have called me insipid and boring and a cluttered of your precious blog, now you want to save your well earned reputation . I do not believe in your sincerity.

Allie, you are insipid and you are boring and you have, for too long, cluttered this blog. Believe what you like, Ann Althouse's well-earned reputation is in no danger and in no need of being saved.

Goodnight, good luck, and goodbye.; 12/14/11, 11:03 PM
Anonymous said...: Me, or my daughter, whatever. Ann was not trying to PROTECT either of us, that is such bull. She didn't like the "clutter". Why don't you two admit you screwed up royally by allowing commenters like J to spew his psychotic crap and deleting or threatening to delete what you deem " boring" or clutter.

Ann didn't like the "flirting" , she said that herself. The silly flirting episode was at most 10 comments in all, hardly derailing the thread, which was BORING. Every blog post I ever commented on created a lot of traffic, lots of hits for Althouse, you should have thanked me.

You are fooling no one here.; 12/14/11, 11:17 PM
B said...: Meade and Althouse,

I read Althouse, but don't often comment. I thought this might be a good time to offer a bit of clarification/correction though.

Allie has made the claim several times that I said her husband committed suicide to get way from her. I never mentioned her husband in any context in any comment. I challenged her to link or quote it. She can't and hasn't, but won't stop making the claim.

She claims I called her a breeder. What I did was tell her that SHE was defining HERSELF as a breeder by repeatedly validating her life and claiming moral authority through the accomplishments of her children.

She didn't get it. Not even close.

Anyway, like yourselves, I consider Allie vacuous and insipid and I mocked her openly. What is happening at Trooper York's is something entirely different though. I wouldn't normally consider the Allie type as worth much empathy, but I don't think anyone with any character wouldn't be put off by how she is being toyed with there.

So if you read this, Allie, smarten up. READ that blog. Seeing everything as being all about you comes easily to you. Step back a bit and apply that. Stop being baited and stop being bait.; 12/15/11, 12:11 AM
Icepick said...: Wow. Just wow. It's finally come to this - a comment policy, hard-core comment moderation and even a discussion thread about the comment moderation policy? It's a madhouse, A MADHOUSE! You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you! God damn you all to hell!; 12/15/11, 1:18 AM
caplight45 said...: Icepick
Oscar nomination worthy. Kudos.

However, the Oscar will have to go to Allie for her performance as the aging hippie chick in "Sunset Ripped", who finds love and acceptance in an online commune devoted devoted to free speech, raunchy humor and flirtation led by a charismatic aging guru. Somehow she finds meaning in the predations of the males of the communion all the while proclaiming her power in first wave feminist dialect (or is it diatribe).
It was that powerful final scene when after a night suffering at the hands of the guru she is in the kitchen where he has ordered her to make all the men breakfast despite the traumatizing of the previous night. As she looks over the griddle into the camera, the final words she speaks are, "They love me. They really love me!!" Then in child-like fashion she begins to hum/sing, "I am woman hear me roar..." as the camera fades. That is the scene that sealed the Oscar for her.; 12/15/11, 9:12 AM
ndspinelli said...: cap45, You simply inserted the wrong name in your soliloquy. It should be Ann, or the professor.

A good example of Real feminists are female sportswriters. They can wade into the toughest male enviroment[even for men, lockerrooms are no holds barred] and go toe to toe. Faux femininists surround themselves w/ like minded women, and weak men. That's why the only place they thrive well in the insular college campus. That same incestuous atmosphere rose its head w/ the Jerry Sandusky case. A real irony, don't you think?

The professor is used to controlling her enviroment and students w/ the ultimate hammer, the grade book. Based on this implosion, she's looking like a one trick pony. Or more like Captain Queeg, seeing plots among the commenters, when the the captain destroys his credibility and ship.; 12/15/11, 10:50 AM
shiloh said...: hmm, this thread has gone from blog moderation to attempted creative writing. Suffice it to say when Althouse writes her autobiography, she'll leave out the chapter re: this endless diatribe.

I am loath to close. We are not enemies, but friends. We must not be enemies. Though passion may have strained it must not break our bonds of affection. The mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield and patriot grave to every living heart and hearthstone all over this broad land, will yet swell the chorus of the Union, when again touched, as surely they will be, by the better angels of our nature.

Apologies to Lincoln.; 12/15/11, 3:01 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Portraits in Online Psychology, A Blog Comments Thread.; 12/15/11, 4:26 PM
ndspinelli said...: ABNORMAL Psych online course. Actually, Abnormal Psych was one of the best psych courses I took..or any course for that matter.; 12/15/11, 4:33 PM
caplight45 said...: I'd like to do a movie called "Being ndspinelli" in which I discover a secret passage way into spinelli's brain. That would be all the abnormal psyche I could handle in a lifetime.; 12/15/11, 5:38 PM
Evi L. Bloggerlady said...: Moo.; 12/15/11, 5:58 PM
shiloh said...: "Moo"

Less is more ...; 12/15/11, 6:02 PM
ndspinelli said...: cap45, I'm almost assuredly the most sane person you will ever meet.; 12/15/11, 6:04 PM
Evi L. Bloggerlady said...: I just want us all to get along. Like my hero, Ferdinand.

Moo.; 12/15/11, 6:39 PM
ndspinelli said...: EBL, How do I keep from being deleted w/ impunity? Do I need to become Ferdinand the Bull? Please direct me, noble cow.

Moo

Just sayn'; 12/15/11, 6:47 PM
Evi L. Bloggerlady said...: Cows sometimes do that. It is very sad.

Don't do it ndspinelli. Just eat the grass. Meade grows lawns and they look quite delicious.; 12/15/11, 6:57 PM
ndspinelli said...: Meade, Where are all my other comments. ARE YOU MOCKING ME IN MY GRIEF?; 12/15/11, 7:01 PM
Meade said...: Nick, when I'm convinced you are ready to post comments in good faith, I will stop deleting what you put up.; 12/15/11, 7:04 PM
ndspinelli said...: EBL, Your comments and hilarious posts are going to save my life. Unless Ann and Meade continue to hurt me by deleting my heartfelt comments. Thanks, EBL..it means a lot to me. Ann and Meade, PLEASE, PLEASE, don't continue to marginalize me, and my thoughts and feelings. I put a lot of thought into my comments. The one where I said what type of people I thought we needed was very sincere. And, now it's gone. All that's left was my cry for help, and you posted only that one to mock me.

I know the Machiavellian plan is to link me w/ J. And, while J being gone is good, I am crushed and asking for your mercy. I know linking me w/ J was a way of saving face and also providing cover. But, in this restroom all of the complaints were about J, not me. Only you resent me for speaking truth. Please hear my plea.; 12/15/11, 7:13 PM
ndspinelli said...: Good faith should be a 2 way street. You deleted comments that in no way were in bad faith. And now you mock my anguish. Do you have a heart or soul?

You better talk to your bride on this one. You're playing w/ fire here.; 12/15/11, 7:17 PM
ndspinelli said...: Deleting all my comments and then putting up a comment I made in anguish, and deleted in minutes, is deplorable and maybe actionable. I am ashamed of my pain and anguish, and you leave it up and mock my pain, not allowing me to delete a comment I already deleted. Are you goading me. Do you want me to die??; 12/15/11, 7:22 PM
Toad Trend said...: "ndspinelli said...
If I continue to be deleted w/o any reason or explanation I'm going to kill myself.

12/15/11 6:49 PM

12/15/11 6:52 PM"

What do you do with an unrepentant narcissist??? Drain the pool or take away the mirror...?; 12/15/11, 7:40 PM
shiloh said...: With all the "grief" being heaped on ndspinelli, good thing he's the sanest person you'll ever meet.

Just sayin'

One wonders if ndspinelli understands the concept of diminishing returns ...; 12/15/11, 7:48 PM
Toad Trend said...: "One wonders if ndspinelli understands the concept of diminishing returns ..."

That's what I've been thinking. Some people don't know when to give up. I have no idea who the guy is but his one-man crusade to apparently provide guidance for commenting commenters is funny; the thrashing about over the deletions of his posts is unbecoming at best. Know when to walk away.; 12/15/11, 7:56 PM
cliff claven said...: i have read this blog a few times and made some comments. it is an interesting forum but pretty angry. however, in reading these recent comments from ndspinelli, not knowing who he is, i would suggest you have the decency to remove the comment that he asks. if he made a comment in pain and haste, erased it, and then you keep it up, you are being insensitive at best. at worst you are culpable if something happens to him. i have worked in the mental health field. you can't be cavalier about these things. plus it's just the right thing to do.

what is going on in this blog?; 12/15/11, 9:40 PM
Anonymous said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 12/15/11, 10:13 PM
Beta Rube said...: How the hell did things get so intense around here?

It's a f**king blog after all. Ann and Meade are not passing judgment on your soul.; 12/15/11, 11:07 PM
Steve Koch said...: Moderation takes time but it really improves blog quality.

I read this thread for the first time just now. Wow!

Self deleting comments from the past is kind of like 1984. It is revising history but is a good way of backing out words that, in retrospect, you wish you hadn't said.; 12/16/11, 2:49 AM
caplight45 said...: Beta Rube said...
"How the hell did things get so intense around here?
It's a f**king blog after all. Ann and Meade are not passing judgment on your soul."

Point well taken. Ann and Meade are not passing judgment on your soul. Rinse and repeat as needed.

I will also venture that since the "Night of the Long Knives" or whatever some seem to think it is the blog itself has been better with a number of commenters returning had dropped off. I think that will increase as we move closer to elections.; 12/16/11, 8:49 AM
Meade said...: Joe said...
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
There's a rule in there somewhere that you can use whatever you want if you don't play it in it's entirety. I don't recall the exact language, but it was the reason we could use anyone's music without authorization for bumpers coming in and out of breaks, music beds under our own breaks, etc, in radio
Don’t try “Facts” on me, Mr. Dreddy McDredleSTEIN….
If you aren’t careful I’m going to call you a Boomer-New Age Cultist, LDS Sock-Puppet Byro who take s money from Zionist Financier-Imperialists…..
I’m surprised that PETA didn’t file a complaint about the shrimp on a tread-mill, myself…had the shrimp been cleared for physical activity, by a Doctor? Did they receive compensation or extra ration?
12/19/11 2:04 PM

Calypso Facto said...
If you aren’t careful I’m going to call you a Boomer-New Age Cultist, LDS Sock-Puppet Byro who take s money from Zionist Financier-Imperialists…..
Don't do that, or Meade will be forced to haul you off to the recently established comment gulag.

12/19/11 2:49 PM

Joe said...
(The Uncredentialed, Crypto Jew)
Don't do that, or Meade will be forced to haul you off to the recently established comment gulag
After that are we “Unpersons?” Is that why “J” isn’t so active?
12/19/11 3:01 PM

Calypso Facto said...
After that are we “Unpersons?” Is that why “J” isn’t so active?
Exactly. J, Trooper, RogerJ, sorepaw, Allie...all gone. Some missed more than others, obviously. Pasta and ndspinelli on notice, apparently. Spinelli's crime? Posting horrific "clutter" comments that "add nothing of value to the discussion", like "ScottM, We think the same a lot! I was going to do a similar post but couldn't think of a way to put the German accent on paper. You nailed it."
Read quick! This O/T discussion will probably be deleted soon too.
12/19/11 3:56 PM; 12/19/11, 6:30 PM
Calypso Facto said...: Called it!; 12/20/11, 8:53 AM
Meade said...: Called what?; 12/20/11, 8:55 AM
Calypso Facto said...: Meade said: Called what?

Read quick! This O/T discussion will probably be deleted soon too.

For the record: I'm not a fan of the new arbitrary censorship. Were J's comments idiotic, vulgar, and scurrilous? Yes. Was I dismayed that people would bother responding to him? Yes. Did I personally find it easy to just skip over the whole blather? Yes.

By placing yourself as the final arbiter of which comments are inappropriate or too-mean-spirited, you've set yourself for accusation by others (ala Claire Potter) for any disagreeable comments that are allowed to stand. Now we know that any rude or gross comment left intact has your tacit approval.

And by throwing in the additional capricious hurdles of whether a comment is clever enough or sufficiently on-topic, you're tinkering with the very substance of what makes this blog entertaining: the open interplay between the commenters. I've already found threads confusing where comments have gone missing, and the discourse diminished by the loss of some of the entertaining and insightful former participants.

It's your blog, obviously, do what you want. But know that your readership also has many options. I Christmas shop almost entirely through Amazon, and I've chosen to do it through a different portal since this dustup. And I'll continue to weigh the entertainment value proposition of spending my time here vs. sticking to other sites and just meeting Garage Mahal for a beer now and then.

Hopefully you'll eventually put the petty tyranny aside and settle agreeably into only deleting the most egregious/heinous comments, because I'd love to see the blog continue to succeed.; 12/20/11, 11:05 AM
sorepaw said...: Were J's comments idiotic, vulgar, and scurrilous? Yes. Was I dismayed that people would bother responding to him? Yes. Did I personally find it easy to just skip over the whole blather? Yes.

I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with Calypso on this one.

"J" repeatedly did things that should never be tolerated in any online forum.

Nothing good could have come of allowing him to keep posting on Althouse for 10 months.

Sure enough, nothing has. Fortunately, it was just other commenters who complained about J being ushered into the penalty box. We're all damn fortunate that the sick puppy hasn't done a Cho Seung-hui.

I can understand how so many of the regulars became desensitized to J over time. Those repetitive barrages of utterly witless verbal abuse led them to made fun of him or ignore him.

But I really hope no one forgets what J was actually saying.

Here's how J responded on May 25, 2011, when Seven Machos challenged him to lay out John Edwards' wondrous plan to permanently end poverty:

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/05/justice-department-plans-to-indict-john.html?showComment=1306347073380#c4587585747069600956

Good luck ducking when the red laser hits yr forehead, you sad bag of human trash.

A death threat doesn't even deserve a warning.

The best policy would have been to run "J" from the blog (i.e., delete that post, delete all of his old posts, delete all future posts, and report him to the server administrator should he keep trying to post).

Right then and there.

If you just scroll up and down, and read J's comments on that single thread, you'll see challenges, addressed to two other commenters, to fist fights to the death, and a threat to trace the IP address of a commenter.

Far as I'm concerned, the fight invitations should have gotten "J" run as well.

And the threats about IP addresses, maybe one warning before running him.

While we're on the subject, what else...

J in effect accuses other posters of serious criminal offenses, the most egregious being his comparison of Seven Machos to John Wayne Gacy.

Meritless insinuations that another poster has committed child rape and murder might get one warning before the poster gets subjected to permanent future deletion—or so I should think.

Such really gross slurs as "yid" and "yidwhore" (in this same, umm, rich collection of J-blasts) are at a lesser level, but I'd be more than comfortable with a policy that forbade them, too.

"J" wasn't just an obnoxious troll.

Not just obnoxious troll who obviously hated Althouse, her articles, and the people who commented on her blog.

He gave every impression of being an extremely disturbed individual.

I will post a bunch more links to "J"'s output, if this comment doesn't get me run out of the penalty box.; 12/20/11, 2:01 PM
Calypso Facto said...: sorepaw, I would have no problem with a moderator deleting a comment made by J or anyone else that contained a death threat. I think that easily falls within the scope of egregious/heinous. I frankly wouldn't have had any problem with deleting every comment J made; he could (and perhaps has) become persona non grata like Mary and it wouldn't hurt my feelings in the least. We certainly don't need any more examples of his hateful stuff (that was curiously mostly left posted).

But deleting comments by ndspinelli or you, or RogerJ for teasing Allie, or me for explaining to Joe that this thread existed...BS. YMMV; 12/20/11, 2:15 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: Thread of Misplaced Ego.

And that's not a reference to Althouse or Meade.; 12/20/11, 4:05 PM
Calypso Facto said...: Certainly blog comments are so catty precisely because the stakes are so low, right?

As a businessman it just strikes me as odd to go out of your way to alienate loyal customers, but hey, y'all are the entertainment professionals. Maybe like the watching the Kardashians, the dysfunctional drama IS the attraction.; 12/21/11, 10:45 AM
Freeman Hunt said...: What drama?

There's a lot of whining about J. Memories of Jeremy, Dave, and others come to mind. Most people don't read J. That's why most people don't even know what he says.

There's a lot of "I can't believe you deleted that!" about throwaway comments. I've had throwaway stuff deleted before. Didn't occur to me to care because it was throwaway stuff. And if I had cared, I wouldn't have tried to pretend that there was now some kind of comment jihad going on between myself and Althouse. If I'd disagreed, I would have considered a simple misstep by Althouse, said so publicly, and left it at that. None of this, "You must meet my standard of perfection, or I'm going to hate you and your blog!" Or, "If I don't get my way, I am going to post dozens of comments bitching about it for days and days."

Anything substantive deleted? Anything any commenter was really proud of writing that's been called clutter? No. If that happened, it would be mockable. But this blog isn't one where you get deleted because you post something especially witty or intelligent that the blogger doesn't agree with.

The blogger here is saying, "The throwaway back and forth is driving away some of my best customers, so I've decided not to allow that anymore. It's a blog, not a chat room." Big deal. There are other places for chatting.

I don't see drama. I see a few people being dramatic, but that's about it.; 12/21/11, 12:32 PM
Freeman Hunt said...: And everyone has their dramatic moments, often around holidays, so that's no big deal either.

Merry Christmas. Peace on Earth. Good will toward men.; 12/21/11, 12:49 PM
sorepaw said...: There's a lot of illuminating material in the archives.

The following Google search

"J said" yid whore site http://althouse.blogspot.com

turns up 7 threads loaded with particularly choice remarks by the whack-job known as J.

Going back to April 6, 2011:

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/glenn-beck-will-transition-off-fox-news.html?showComment=1302112262104#c7812928075885463585

12:48 [traditionalguy]--that bother you, sodbuster? Beck-byatch one of yr role models, presumably.

come on out here and do something about it, white trash.

Beck shouldn't just be fired. He should be 5150'd (like most AA regs for that matter).

Not being from California, I had to look up 5150.

Being 5150'd means being involuntarily confined to a mental institution for up to three days, on account of posing a danger to self or others.

A process with which J may have some personal experience.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/glenn-beck-will-transition-off-fox-news.html?showComment=1302116303662#c1030218686026427713

I'm watching you, mormon-mason queersters. This site already listed with Feds as possibly terrorist. Like Jaredland.

Capichay, LDS trash?

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/04/glenn-beck-will-transition-off-fox-news.html?showComment=1302133095017#c3314390394067143593

4: 37 [Chef Mojo]. Heh heh. Projecting again, Moj? Yr the cocksucker here, Mojo yid. Then, that's family tradition--like yr whore mama. Ill kick yr teeth in personally bearbyatch. Already got a line on you, dreck.

Yo cedarford sounds nearly reasonable at times. Send these scumbags back to Rahm.com

****

So on April 6, J was already threatening bodily harm, claiming to have identified other commenters, and announcing he had reported them to law enforcement. And spewing anti-Jewish slurs. The only thing missing was the "red laser" reference.

Prompt action back in April would have run J from this blog before he had a chance to make a death threat.

What would it have cost?; 12/21/11, 1:06 PM
caplight45 said...: All of which is news to me because I figured out very early that J was a wackadoodle of the nasty variety so I stopped reading anything he wrote.

The insight of Freeman the Wise: "This isn't a chat room."

Read out loud every four hours, rinse and repeat.; 12/21/11, 3:10 PM
shiloh said...: Blog moderation has and always will be a losing proposition. Which is why this thread is mostly pointless minutia.; 12/21/11, 7:42 PM
sorepaw said...: Disrespect for Althouse, Part 1:

Perhaps the cleanup after "J," the crazy troll, might also remove some items that express extreme disrespect for Ann Althouse and her blog.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/03/its-sad-that-brian-leiter-seems-to-put.html?showComment=1300379099995#c4495893070940155679

On the Nietzsche-o-meter, Frau Althouse definitely outperforms Leiter the U of Chi. frat boy-liberal. That doesn't make her correct-- I.e agree educators are in a trade, and Leiter, however f-ing obnoxious, has a point re the UDHR [Univeral Declaration of Human Rights] (though unlikely Nietzsche would agree.. as he hated socialists, as much as did ...englishmen and ...women).

Voonderbar, Annie she-wolf of the TP-blogger SS.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/05/justice-department-plans-to-indict-john.html?showComment=1306371173555#c1771282573284821679

Google it up Scottie MBA. Didn't they teach you that in Iowa st, or maybe you learned hands-on with yr apprencticeship with the John Birch society .

Let's reiterate: Gumphouse--too stooopid for blogging (e.g. endless rants about Edwards' marital problems/infidelity--who f-ing cares, except trash. He'll walk anyway)

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/05/its-not-that-obama-cant-speak-clearly.html?showComment=1306437298836#c8104015128820826818

1: 57. No, Scottie Tard, I mentioned the plan and said google up the details for your self. It's not the only plan. Then why explain it to you? I doubt you've ever written an econ or history or polisci paper in your life. Summarizing your favorite F-150 manual or tweek cook recipes doesn't count.

Keep the threats and insults flying, perps. Got that Scottie klan boy? I suspect we got a nice big bust in store--weapons, kiddie shit, tweek, Tim McVeigh shit. You're just shit ScottieTard--like the rest of the terrorists here

(Keep in mind Miss A--you're responsible for any terrorist acts/threats which go down in yr comboxes)

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/06/suddenly-it-appears-that-there-may-be.html?showComment=1307055443800#c6359768887697154660

Edu [Edutcher], wWhere's yr boytoy Segway Tommy [Shouting Thomas]? Yr the yid-faggot Edu here scum--just one with klan hood

Now fuck you, satanists

The new rules

Got that miss Althouse? Let the hicks yap away and youll see hell soon .

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/09/if-he-wont-run-for-president-will-paul.html?showComment=1315244398958#c5114643094796740849

This pro-Ryan post [i.e., Althouse's article] is probably via orders from RushBo, carney-perp-in-chief; 12/21/11, 9:06 PM
sorepaw said...: Disrespect for Althouse, Part 2:

J repeatedly accused Althouse of taking money from the Republican Party and from various supporters of right-wing causes.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/12/my-governors-jedi.html?showComment=1322766894043#c8219729634782062282

Violation of disclosure rules too (does Althouse receive money from WI-GOP-TP? Looks like it)

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/12/my-governors-jedi.html?showComment=1322767596911#c8819905668769857231

You should resign your professorship, AA, given your right-wing bias and profiteering.

The ethical thing to do.

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/12/my-governors-jedi.html?showComment=1322770427831#c7199098476514689173

Not about puritanicalness or partisanship, AA-- just a question about disclosure--ie, do you or do you not accept money from Walker/WI TP/GOP, or other powerful groups? Professors at public unis should be required to disclose that info IMHO (and they are, in some areas)

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/12/my-governors-jedi.html?showComment=1322774319540#c461993543892710102

So, what organizations/lobbies/groups are giving money to Althouse? WalkerCo? TP? Oil? Tobacco? Rush Limbaugh?

The UoW ombudsman wants to know (we wager). As does the Mad. paper.

***

J's 13 posts (on a thread of 71; every one of them still standing when I posted this) elicited a reaction from Fen (italics in the original):

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/12/my-governors-jedi.html?showComment=1322778581831#c7198859770612706614

J: You should resign your professorship, AA, given your right-wing bias and profiteering.

The ethical thing to do.

J is suddenly concerned with ethics...

I'm more interested in what Ann's press statement will be when J goes all Jared Loughner.; 12/21/11, 9:09 PM
sorepaw said...: Hmm...

The first link in Part 2 should be

http://althouse.blogspot.com/2011/12/my-governors-jedi.html?showComment=1322766894043#c8219729634782062282; 12/21/11, 9:14 PM