Saturday, October 02, 2010

Comments... sort of policy

Normally I would simply ignore and move on, but today I received nine emails about the "change" in comments policy.

How odd.

The whole visual format has changed but, policy? No.

The policy has always been that if you choose to attack the author of a post or you are just some kind of dirt bag prick we don't think offers anything to the discussion, you get deleted. Sometimes, permanently.

We have that power. I kind of like possessing it. This is our free speech arena. You can have one just like it. It's free, by the way, and you'll find that if I cannot regularly agree with your views, I will never leave a comment. I might not even link to you.

More than once we have offered our pages to opposing views. There are times when we are unsure of any position. We welcome those who can offer clarification and I should not have to explain this, but the commenters who debate with clarity, conviction and respect receive the same in return. In that regard we have been reasonably generous in offering a space for reasoned, intelligent and respectful rebuttal of our often one-sided view.

Sometimes that involves protecting the identity of the person presenting that view. Sometimes it means admitting the errors we have made in a, perhaps, snap judgment. And sometimes, we regret rushing to admit an error when our original instincts proved to be correct.

There are those who would like us to tackle the worst element of the Harper propaganda machine and then let the comments flow. That is translated into us reading the Blogging Tories, producing a link back to them and letting them suffer the damage.... and them trying to destroy the persons who contribute here. We've watched that happen and know that the opposition, unable to defend their position in a debate, feels compelled to win by attacking their opponent at a personal level. How courageous.

We all have to face it; that is the only defence they have for their position: Kill off the people who are exposing the truth of their inane scribblings. We all encounter writer's block and fill the page with words; they aren't there yet.

Which suggests, to me anyway, that they are not worth acknowledging. And why would I read them anyway? I view them with a kenspecle disdain.

So, yes, you have to sign in to a "system" to be allowed to comment. And you have to type in a verification. You don't get to be "anonymous".

But you can be "synonymous" if you're willing to go to the effort. I know that means that Stephen Taylor's election machine has to do more work and expose themselves to shit hitting a spinning fan but, hey, that's life.

If you don't like the process for leaving comments I am either playing My Heart Bleeds For You on the world's smallest violin or my heart is pumping purple panther piss for you.

I don't have to make this easy for the lazy narcissists.

So, go ahead. Tell me what you think.


chris said...

Comment policy? Didn't know you had one, but if the attack gerbils are emailing their outrage it must be working. Good stuff!

PS: "kenspecle" must one o' them elitist liberal code words, it's not in the dictionary but I second your disdain.

Dave said...

I suspect the sudden flood of emails came from one or maybe two people with various different email accounts.

We don't really have a comment policy. That's why I found it all rather humourous.

Kenspecle: Scottish origin meaning "conspicuous" or "distinctively remarkable". In this case, "singularly focused". A word I learned from my long dead Scottish Grandfather, who I think was a highland sheep thief at one time.


Alison said...

Agreed engaging the BTs is a complete waste of time. It's not exactly as if they are honing their arguments over there.

Holly Stick said...

I learned a new word today; thanks! But wiktionary spells it kenspeckle.

And Alison, LOL!

chris said...

Kenspeckle is in the dictionary. Cool. Thanks Holly.
Alison, somewhere, someone is honing the argument that the bull goose sheep thief at TGB is censoring free speech. Should be fun.

Dana said...

They can have all the free speech they want in the town square or in their house.

This is neither.

So why don't you go stand up with a loud hailer in the centre court of the biggest shopping mall in your town, on a Saturday afternoon, and tell your neighbours what you really think.

Or start a nice safe anonymous blog of your own where you can defame and slander to your hearts content from the comfort of your closet.

But you won't do either will you?

Because the last thing you're willing to do is own your own words.

The only thing you're willing to do is anonymously dribble your toxic drool into someone else's blog where it's harder to trace it back to you. Especially if you do it from a public computer - in a library or an internet cafe.

Isn't that right?

As Frank Zappa said, "If your children ever find out how lame you really are, they'll murder you in your sleep."

Unknown said...

I always thought our comment policy essentially boiled down to "don't be a douche bag" - which doesn't mean you have to agree with what the poster has said, it means that in disagreeing with them, please don't take a whiz on the carpet while you're here. The inkstained wretches are (mostly) housebroken, we expect no less from the guests.
As for getting down in the mud to wrestle the Blogging Tories, no thanks. Its like trying to teach a pig to sing: You never get anywhere, it annoys the pig and you end up covered in mud. No, better to leave the likes of Dodo and Hunter and Dr. Roy to fester in their own little fact-free cesspool than to try to shovel out that augean stable.

kootcoot said...

Jeepers, there's a change in policy - the only change I notice is youse guys apparently don't read the House of Infamy anymore............but I still follow youse guys.

BTW, near the end of your recently replaced template's life, your blog was driving my browser cuckoo with frequent script issues etc. Now all seems to be back to normal, sorry about the loss of old comments though. Unfortunately we're all at Google's mercy......