Comment policy
Rabett Run has adopted Kevin Drum's policy
If I or my bunnies get sufficiently annoyed with you, we will delete your comments. If you don't like it, tough.If you piss Ms. Rabett off, hide. If you are selling something we won't buy and we will trash your comment. Irrevocably.
OTOH, we intend to maintain our open door even to Czech trash if they behave themselves.
Posts
15 comments:
Wow, what inspired that?
Was it a comment from that famous Czech singer "String"? ("Bring on the Fight", "Don't calculate so close to me", "Message in a 10-D bottle" etc)
Don't the anonymice get a vote on this issue? We've been good little mices.
Mus musculus anonymouse
Well, there was that one little "incident" a while back when somemouse called somebody an "idiot".
But I think we pretty much resolved amongst ourselves (all 3 of us) to control our emotions (and our mouse finger) in the future (or at least to use coded insults) and, I am happy to report that there has not been an outbreak of that type since.
There was a NY Times article yesterday "A call for manners in the world of nasty blogs" and it kind of exploded. Kevin Drum had, as I said about the simplest and clearest line, but it got taken apart by John Scalzi, Luis Villa, and in detail by Tristan Louis. The upshot is that the media (papers, tv, etc.) are unhappy that they are not controlling commentary anymore, and continually call for a bloggers code of ethics and panels thereon.
Eli is very happy about what is developing here, and other than a few ads has not had to chop out much nasty nuttery.
The mice pretty much deserve the run of the place, we are happy to nibble on carrot cake with them especially if they bring it. The thing with the malodious Czech is the usual niggle, niggle shove. Pay it no mind.
I think what they are most unhappy about is that people on blogs are pointing out the bias, dishonesty (and yes nuttiness) of the newspapers' own commentary/editorials.
It used to be that a journalist/columnist could get away with printing half-truths and outright lies on the pages of the NY Time, Washington Post and elsewhere as long as their piece was in line with the views of their editors.
There was no possibility for challenge, since even the letters to the editor are censored.
Now these journalists/columnists find themselves immediately called to the mat on their BS and they don't like it. They whine and complain like a bunch of two year olds. "Play fair. Liar's now a nice name. You can't say that. It's hurtful."
Mr. O’Reilly said the guidelines were not about censorship. “That is one of the mistakes a lot of people make — believing that uncensored speech is the most free, when in fact, managed civil dialogue is actually the freer speech,” he said. “Free speech is enhanced by civility.”
That sounds like NewSpeak: "War is peace", "Lies are truth", etc.
Who decides what is civil and what is not, by the way?
> Who decides what is civil ...
If it's not criminal, it's civil. Simple matter of jurisdiction.
"Managed civil dialogue is the freer speech"
And "managed cattle are the freer cattle."
And "managed health care is the freer health care"?
pielke speak: everybody does it, so it doesn't really matter.
Kevin Vranes, industry consultant.
http://www.point380.com/staff.html
This might explain his constant attention-seeking posts. Needs to make a name for himself to draw in clients.
This particular bit of (1/8) Czech trash will try to be on his best behavior.
You sir, are Czech Pilsner, maybe Budvar.
Let me get this straight.
Is this Eli's blog policy? --
"Czech your trash at the door"
I think Kevin got it right even more succinctly with the blogger code of conduct: "Spare me."
Post a Comment