A reader has written offline to ask that NewMexiKen delete a comment — “It’s not adding anything at all to anything, and it’s just ruining a nice post.”
As a blogger who encourages comments (and requires medication whenever comments are too few), I am troubled at the thought of deleting comments — though I do reserve the right to do so and have, on occasion, done so. (Rather arbitrarily I might add.)
I thought maybe I should ask you, my seven readers, what you think. Do you come to this website seeking diversity of discussion, or do you visit here because it is a sanctuary for correct, intelligent political thinking?
Update: I decided I wasn’t comfortable with the personalization of the poll and have deleted it. I think the comments to this post have been unusually good though, and hope there will be more. Sorry about the change of heart.
Your question is flawed. Ephraim’s comments don’t increase any kind of “diversity of discussion.” They are poorly-conceived, poorly-worded half-thoughts.
I don’t think anything Ephraim has ever posted has been truly thought-provoking (or fully sensical). Surely he’s never actually intended to start a real dialogue about anything.
I would never agree that you should delete an interesting, well-put comment from someone who disagrees with you. But what, exactly, do Ephraim’s “na na boo boo” comments add to the conversation?
My problem with him isn’t that he differs from you, ideologically. My husband and I differ ideologically on a lot of issues. It’s that Ephraim doesn’t have anything to say except that we are all stupid.
Blog comments are a tricky thing. Often thought provoking, supportive and proof that yes, someone does read what I wrote….but it can also be abused.
I guess my thought is that if the person is being openly abusive (which I haven’t seen) they should be 86’d.
Otherwise, give ’em enough rope…yanno? Generally fools out themselves.
Just my .02, doesn’t have to be yours.
First of all, NMK, we’ve had this conversation privately about problem commentors and here’s the conclusion I reached after seeking your counsel: I haven’t deleted a legitimate comment yet from F/A. (Spam doesn’t count; people can find their own Viagra.) I have a number of problem commentors — defined, by me, as people who never tire of relating everything on the blog to the same at-least-mildly-offensive point of view, or who in some other way inhibit the participation of others.
My own conclusion was that they’re tiresome, but people can skip over their comments and go on with their lives.
I have not been confronted with truly offensive comments. I’ve had little name-calling, for example, and my own language is racier than that of my commentors.
All of that said, I’m in general a big believer that offensive remarks of any kind are self-defeating. For example, I don’t censor racism because it’s so unattractive that those who post racist comments defeat their own cause.
All of that said, I have no real idea who Ephraim is or what he has said, and I read your blog several times a day. Perhaps I’ve become so skilled at skipping over useless crap that I don’t notice what he’s written. Maybe his remarks are sufficiently banal that they don’t lodge in my memory. Maybe I’m simple minded and forget everything 30 seconds later.
There are few benefits to operating a blog. One of them is that the blog is yours, and you can do what you want with it without justifying it to anyone. So screw him. If you want to cancel him out because you don’t like what he says or how he says it or the cologne he wears or the color of his hair, go ahead and do it. Crush him like a bug if you feel like it, and enjoy the crackling sound he makes as he dies. We bloggers gotta take our joy where we can find it.
I assumed Ephraim is an AI, albeit not as seemingly-curious as Eliza. If he is a human, it is best to ignore him. (You should delete this particular entry, poll and comment thread — it only feeds such a troll.)
I wish someone who says we’re easily fooled were capable of elaborating intelligently — how was Obama’s speech fooling us? Please find an adult to answer that.
peace,
mjh
PS: SEVEN readers! I remember when there were only 3 of us. I envy you.
“Freedom of the press only belongs to those who have a press.”
Banal and inane. That is what Moya’s commentary has been here. Harmless. He repeatedly proves my point about people with his mentality. I read his comments for the entertainment value.
But I have yet to read anything of substance posted by Moya. If he posses the ability to craft an articulate argument he has yet to demonstrate it in NewMexiKen. But is that any reason to ban him?
And one thing about trolls. If you feed the troll you have to take it home. Don’t take the bait. Ignore him if he offends you. But don’t censor him, even though you can.
There’s a brilliant and hilarious glossary of flame warriors, describing many various online personality types, at : http://redwing.hutman.net/~mreed/
As you can read from the update to the original post, I decided after 13 votes or so that it wasn’t right to personalize the poll. I have over the years directly, or through the use of spam filters, deleted thousands of comments.
I intended this post to be funny — for all I know the person that provoked the poll intends to be funny. I don’t think my effort at humor was much better here however, than his usually are. Criticize the words, not the writer.
Much of what I write (or link to) I hope stimulates thoughts or emotions or concerns or your imaginations. I assume just about all of it can be refuted, bolstered, corrected, negated, applauded. I understand the nature of the web both encourages that kind of reaction and yet limits it. So be it. I can keep asking.
And you-know-who can keep commenting.
Though the proprietor reserves the right to refuse service to anyone.
Well, I saw that there were six comments, so I figured I’d better check in as reader #7, but NMK was number six, so someone else still needs to check in….
I learned a long time ago to apply a couple of old adages to whatever I read or hear. One is, “Consider the source,” and the other is, “Take it with a grain of salt.” When someone makes what I consider to be an idiotic comment, that’s what I do. (I’ve made a few idiotic comments myself, no doubt.) I generally just let the crap float past. I may shake my head, or get a chuckle, or whatever. But then, there is usually a follow-up comment from Jill, or SnoLepard, or someone who is aware and intelligent, that I can read and agree with, and I like that part. So, unless a comment is especially abusive or offensive, I’d say leave it. I enjoy the responses that result from the inane comments. If we all agreed on everything, we’d just be preaching to the choir, eh?
#7!
I just delete any comment that is different from my immediate point of view. Makes things easier.
Just kidding. I only delete the most egregious examples of bad commenting (personal attacks or racist attacks or the like). Mostly because no one ever comments over at my blog.
I seriously doubt I can add more to what’s been said here: commenters here are much more prolific than at my place (thanks though Karen!). Maybe I need to respond more often? That seems really weird to me…
Back on topic: for me, when it takes more energy to figure out what to do with a comment than to ignore it, that’s my clue to let it be.
And we’re up to eight now!
I’ve only deleted spam.
I get so very few comments that I almost feel like printing every single comment I get on paper suitable for framing. Then again, my blog is so small that it can’t afford a troll-bridge of its own.