Community Blogs
Censorship
As a consequence of a ridiculous war of words in comments and blog posts--other than this one--certain commenters have been banned by the blog administrator. They use the ID's bamaphd, sirlaughsalittle and spalin. There has been much discussion of phantom and duplicate ID's, threats and profanity, which interests me not at all. Frankly, I wish everyone would just use their names, but I understand the reluctance in the light of the present poisonous atmosphere.
You all know there have been some problems with uncivil comments on Eagle's Eye, but I believe we have established an atmosphere of at least some degree of mutual respect, such that the commentary recently has been almost always civil and devoid of direct personal insults. I congratulate my regular and occasional commenters for their compliance. For what it's worth, I am pleased.
Therefore, I am not in sympathy with the banning of the selected commenters. Banning cannot be isolated to selected blogs, so these folks are banned from all blogs, including mine. I do not want this, as I am determined to maintain an open forum for any and all ideas that are thoughtful and presented in a civil manner. I firmly believe that respect breeds respect in response. There has been a woeful lack of mutual respect in other areas of this blog site, with near disastrous consequences. I have avoided involvement, but would hope at some point everyone would step back, wipe the slate clean and start over. Wounds that fester never heal.
We bloggers all have a comment control page where we can accept or reject individual comments. Banned comments show up as pre-rejected. The blogger, I, can flip the status of individual comments. Therefore, I will as frequently as possible review this page and flip the pre-rejected comments from the village of the banned (assuming civility) so they will be posted. I think this is a pain in the ___, but it is the only way I can continue to maintain an open forum.
So, comment away, folks. Rest assured that your comments will appear, perhaps just a bit late.
It all comes down to respect, both on the LLC blogs and also on the broader political scene.
We encourage your comments but will strive to remove discussion that contains personal attacks, racial slurs, profanity or other inappropriate material as outlined in our guidelines. We post-moderate comments on most content, but may choose to pre-moderate some comments so please be patient if you don't see yours appear right way. We also ask for your help by reporting comments you think are inappropriate.
30 Comments
referee33 - Oct 18, 2011 4:55 PM
bamaphd - Oct 18, 2011 5:21 PM
Hats off to you sir!
MGarber - Oct 18, 2011 5:52 PM
jhayett - Oct 18, 2011 8:21 PM
Tell me what more can i do?
sirlaughsalittle - Oct 18, 2011 9:24 PM
responsible for starting that war. Let's keep in mind you folks set the tenor. For a
blog host to do an entire post openly attacking another is not only in violation of the
discussion guidelines, it's an unconscionable, despicable act. Yet he suffered no
consequences. There's clearly a double standard at play here.
http://www.livinglakecountry.com/blogs/communityblogs/45018077.html
bamaphd - Oct 18, 2011 10:08 PM
Who is "we"?
reformed trucker - Oct 18, 2011 10:17 PM
Wow, I can't believe you would go after MC like that... he's not even here anymore. ;)
aneuhauser - Oct 19, 2011 1:09 AM
P.S. I thought you were on the ????-list too. Apparently I was mistaken.
Jim: I don't pretend to be the father confessor here. Is it possible you didn't get replies because they're banned? Why don't you just try allowing their comments without conditions and see what happens? Also, yes, LLC (Debi Eimer) says they were banned for"repeated violations." I'm not sure who actually does it.
Bama: Who really cares? I think there's been altogether too much "who is whom" speculation, mainly by two individuals, with no discernible constructive purpose. Another "tempest in a teapot."
All: I've stuck my nose into this only because I think this community blog idea was/is a good one. Unfortunately, it's become poisoned by this war of words that's been going on for I don't know how long. It probably started as a liberal-conservative thing and escalated. It may not work for everyone in every situation, but I try to see the other person's point of view and accord it a degree of respect. It is possible to respectfully disagree, even diametrically. You just have to assume the other person is not the Devil's spawn.
sharpaxe - Oct 19, 2011 7:08 AM
Tom Bal - Oct 19, 2011 7:39 AM
SLA: I’ll tell you something I came on this blog for fun I don’t know how many months ago and asked a simple question about High school teachers and how they controlled what my daughter learned.
It was a simple question having never posted here before I was shock at your response to me about my parenting skills and My Bleeding Heart liberal daughter.
You made a point to attack me and say derogatory things about myself and my daughter for months.
That pretty much set the tone as to how I would be treated on my view points.
I tried numerous times to make peace and took it in the face every single time I did. Well now your reaping what you sowed whether you like it or not.
Finger pointing is one thing the truth is another.
sirlaughsalittle - Oct 19, 2011 7:51 AM
Yes, because he was banned. Why was he banned? Well, for repeatedly violating
the discussion guidelines. At least that's the easy answer. But when you scratch
the surface you discover it's a bit more complex. The reason he was banned is
because he dared to stand up to the bullies. You see, the bullies set out to
purposely provoke you with their incendiary rhetoric. When you respond they
insult and belittle you. Then you fight back. Maybe you get a bit nasty. What do
the bullies do? They do what immature bullies do best, they cry and complain to
the authorities. And what do the authorities do? They respond by wiping their
tears.
jhayett - Oct 19, 2011 8:19 AM
How many more times would you allow someone to post these type of comments? Even ones that are clean but attack someone with zero content about the blog topic.? All I'm doing is following the rules. Am I wrong for doing that AL?
sirlaughsalittle - Oct 19, 2011 8:25 AM
referee33 - Oct 19, 2011 8:40 AM
bamaphd - Oct 19, 2011 8:51 AM
Hold me responsible for what I, bamaphd, post and not what others have posted past or present.
I am who I am and no one else but who I am.
WFB resident - Oct 19, 2011 2:23 PM
you calm down a bit , but why are you attacking GLB ? Just like the wsp coalition you
are focusing on the wrong front .
aneuhauser - Oct 19, 2011 4:34 PM
WFB, MG, et al: The key to civil discourse is to avoid derogatory references to individuals. (I would say that again, but you can just re-read it.) You can criticize someone's arguments or assertions, but not the individual making them. Ideas can be debated, even heatedly, without personal references. This should be a forum for ideas, not personalities.
Everyone: Please, just bury the past. Yes, some hot fires were stoked, but continuing to throw fuel on them simply increases the heat until the whole house burns down. Why don't all of you just go out, stand on the corner, face the four cardinal compass points and shout, "I'm sorry!" four times. Then go in, pop a beer and watch the Packer game.
aneuhauser - Oct 19, 2011 5:09 PM
bamaphd - Oct 19, 2011 7:39 PM
MGarber - Oct 19, 2011 8:20 PM