TRACY said:
Damn, man. You are GOOD (and fast).
I'll se if I can round up some of dem' dare common-taters.
I'll se if I can round up some of dem' dare common-taters.
Aaron Lynch said:
You didn't HAVE to (there was a link to activate your comment), but we're sure glad you did! Welcome to InstantSpot.
TRACY said:
Yeah, I think they want you to get a blog.
I think I skipped filling that out, and it registered me anyway.
Now if it just had the damned 'remember my info' button.
Oh bother.
Aaron, are you dubya?
Hope you don't mind us evil libs infiltrating.
I think I skipped filling that out, and it registered me anyway.
Now if it just had the damned 'remember my info' button.
Oh bother.
Aaron, are you dubya?
Hope you don't mind us evil libs infiltrating.
Predestined said:
Well, LOL on me!
Sorry, I'm multi-tasking this morning and obviously not doing it well. :(
What's up, Tracy?
Sorry, I'm multi-tasking this morning and obviously not doing it well. :(
What's up, Tracy?
Aaron Lynch said:
No, I'm not Dubya I am one of the co-creators of InstantSpot.com.
And yes, we do want you to get a blog :)
And yes, we do want you to get a blog :)
Julie said:
It's a conspiracy man. You gotta register and get a blog before they let you comment. It's just the man trying to make us do stuff.
Ok, my tinfoil hat is off and the above was sarcasm.
Ok, my tinfoil hat is off and the above was sarcasm.
Predestined said:
I can't keep up with the blogs I already have! We won't even talk about my mysterious MySpace page that doesn't bear my name, pic, or any other identifying info except where I went to high school. I am NOT a MySpace person. Too darned old for that.
Vaughn Tolle said:
For those interested, go to cnn.com and read the latest articles on the flap over the U.S. Attorney firings. Looks like the AG is in some hot water over how this was handled; and, interestingly, it appears Karl Rove was involved, although per him, as a "conduit".
CapnAmerica said:
Dear WEBlog editors—
Thank you for setting up this public blog in which readers can post their views. It is an excellent concept.
But in practice, it needs serious improvement.
As it is now, a poster can steal people’s nicknames and seem to make them say things totally contrary to their beliefs. This has resulted in many misunderstandings and angry responses.
A poster can use a variety of nicknames and seem to be more than one person. Because nic-switching is so easy, any check on the truth of what a “pop-up” poster is saying is virtually impossible.
Profanity, racial and ethnic slurs, homophobic rants, and insults of the most vile nature are hurled with impunity. Some posters have even followed through on trying to meet another who has offended them . . . and it wasn’t to shake hands.
The Eagle must take more responsibility for the monster it has created. It could monitor IP addresses and ban trolls and nic-switchers. It could pull posts that are profane or racist. It could ban posters whose intention is only to insult and annoy.
We the undersigned have opted to boycott the WEBlog as a demonstration of our desire for change in the way the WEBlog is managed. We look forward to time when the WEBlog can be as edifying and educational as it was meant to be.
Sincerely,
Tracy, WSClark, Mary Caruso, WichiWoman, KSFrmGrrl, Steven Davis, gdub, political-mom, Ben Huie, XXX, .morg, Julie, CapnAmerica
Thank you for setting up this public blog in which readers can post their views. It is an excellent concept.
But in practice, it needs serious improvement.
As it is now, a poster can steal people’s nicknames and seem to make them say things totally contrary to their beliefs. This has resulted in many misunderstandings and angry responses.
A poster can use a variety of nicknames and seem to be more than one person. Because nic-switching is so easy, any check on the truth of what a “pop-up” poster is saying is virtually impossible.
Profanity, racial and ethnic slurs, homophobic rants, and insults of the most vile nature are hurled with impunity. Some posters have even followed through on trying to meet another who has offended them . . . and it wasn’t to shake hands.
The Eagle must take more responsibility for the monster it has created. It could monitor IP addresses and ban trolls and nic-switchers. It could pull posts that are profane or racist. It could ban posters whose intention is only to insult and annoy.
We the undersigned have opted to boycott the WEBlog as a demonstration of our desire for change in the way the WEBlog is managed. We look forward to time when the WEBlog can be as edifying and educational as it was meant to be.
Sincerely,
Tracy, WSClark, Mary Caruso, WichiWoman, KSFrmGrrl, Steven Davis, gdub, political-mom, Ben Huie, XXX, .morg, Julie, CapnAmerica
CapnAmerica said:
The above is the second draft for your perusal.
Let me know if you know of any other signers.
Let me know if you know of any other signers.
CapnAmerica said:
RD--
You aren't one of the signers of the letter yet, are you?
Would you like to add your voice?
You aren't one of the signers of the letter yet, are you?
Would you like to add your voice?
TRACY said:
Aaron, cool. I like your format.
I do wish it would store my name and addy.
A lot of us blog from work, so streamlined is a must.
Like mentioned above, mean ol' Mr. man.
Capn...second para from bottom, The eagle must take..
how about we respectfully request, petition or sumpin' like that?
And Aaron, if you haven't been exposed to this bunch of godless(kidding)heathens, THEN YOU'RE IN FOR A TREAT!
I eat flaming dragon farts for snacks, and I believe each one of us has our own particular (and equally as valuable) talents!
Gee, after posting the letter to the eagle, you kinda' figgered out what was up, huh? HA!
I do wish it would store my name and addy.
A lot of us blog from work, so streamlined is a must.
Like mentioned above, mean ol' Mr. man.
Capn...second para from bottom, The eagle must take..
how about we respectfully request, petition or sumpin' like that?
And Aaron, if you haven't been exposed to this bunch of godless(kidding)heathens, THEN YOU'RE IN FOR A TREAT!
I eat flaming dragon farts for snacks, and I believe each one of us has our own particular (and equally as valuable) talents!
Gee, after posting the letter to the eagle, you kinda' figgered out what was up, huh? HA!
TRACY said:
Oh sorry RD, er I mean predestiny?
We're looking at a drft of a letter about the reasons for boycotting their troll magnet.
We're looking at a drft of a letter about the reasons for boycotting their troll magnet.
Predestined said:
I posted the following earlier, but it didn't go through. Then I posted it to our loop (I thought), but sent it to Sandra only, so I REALLY have to stop mutli-tasking and stick to one thing.
I'd rather not have my name or nic added to the manifesto, and here's why:
I think the Manifesto is well-written, but the WEBlog is an open forum. I
can imagine the editors shrugging their shoulders over it. After all, we
are free to post or not post. I also doubt they have any control over what
blog program is used. Perhaps they can make suggestions to the PTB (Powers
That Be) or the GIS (Guys In Suits), but that doesn't mean making demands
will get us anywhere. Getting too pushy and creating an internal war could
get the entire blog removed. I doubt that's what they want and it certainly
isn't what we want.
My concern isn't about the format. My concern is the language and context
in which posters are posting. I would think the WE would be concerned, too.
After all, it does reflect on them and Wichita.
I'd like to see the Left be adult about this. I'd really like to give the
boycott a try. I feel we're boycotting the insane posters, not the WEBlog
or the editors. If we give it a try and it doesn't work, THEN let's hand
the problem over to the eds. KISS.
For those who don't have a problem with signing the manifesto, go for it.
I'd rather not have my name or nic added to the manifesto, and here's why:
I think the Manifesto is well-written, but the WEBlog is an open forum. I
can imagine the editors shrugging their shoulders over it. After all, we
are free to post or not post. I also doubt they have any control over what
blog program is used. Perhaps they can make suggestions to the PTB (Powers
That Be) or the GIS (Guys In Suits), but that doesn't mean making demands
will get us anywhere. Getting too pushy and creating an internal war could
get the entire blog removed. I doubt that's what they want and it certainly
isn't what we want.
My concern isn't about the format. My concern is the language and context
in which posters are posting. I would think the WE would be concerned, too.
After all, it does reflect on them and Wichita.
I'd like to see the Left be adult about this. I'd really like to give the
boycott a try. I feel we're boycotting the insane posters, not the WEBlog
or the editors. If we give it a try and it doesn't work, THEN let's hand
the problem over to the eds. KISS.
For those who don't have a problem with signing the manifesto, go for it.
darwinsdisciple said:
Anytime one recognizes a troll, that troll wins.
I hope J R is able to come here and post. I fear that his "we must stay and fight" is a good deal like Bush's "stay the course" rationale for Iraq. Understandable, but ultimately self-defeating.
I agree with the Capn's letter to the Eds regarding the blog. I further agree with an email from KFG which stated we don't want moderation, but instead want the anonymous troll problem addressed. This does not seem like we are asking too much.
Appreciate ddub's hosting of us here. I also put up a site:
http://refugeesfromtheweblogasylum.blogspot.com/
Just like this hosting format, the blogspot folks ask you to register and create a site. You can delete yours after doing so and still post, I am pretty sure.
It takes a little bit of effort to post at blogspot and here, but I think the effort results in less grafitti - which is an ultimate goal.
I would be willing to trade advertising at the WE Blog for increased limiting of trolls/graffitti. My expectation is that if there is no revenue as a result of the blog, they won't be able to justify increased person-power to monitor it.
Over there at the "refugeesfromtheweblogasylum" I will be posting some photos of a recent vacation. Look forward to seeing you all here or there...
Take care, Steven
I hope J R is able to come here and post. I fear that his "we must stay and fight" is a good deal like Bush's "stay the course" rationale for Iraq. Understandable, but ultimately self-defeating.
I agree with the Capn's letter to the Eds regarding the blog. I further agree with an email from KFG which stated we don't want moderation, but instead want the anonymous troll problem addressed. This does not seem like we are asking too much.
Appreciate ddub's hosting of us here. I also put up a site:
http://refugeesfromtheweblogasylum.blogspot.com/
Just like this hosting format, the blogspot folks ask you to register and create a site. You can delete yours after doing so and still post, I am pretty sure.
It takes a little bit of effort to post at blogspot and here, but I think the effort results in less grafitti - which is an ultimate goal.
I would be willing to trade advertising at the WE Blog for increased limiting of trolls/graffitti. My expectation is that if there is no revenue as a result of the blog, they won't be able to justify increased person-power to monitor it.
Over there at the "refugeesfromtheweblogasylum" I will be posting some photos of a recent vacation. Look forward to seeing you all here or there...
Take care, Steven
TRACY said:
(In my best Nixon impression):
Let me make this perfectly clear.
My intentions for calling this boycott are, I believe honorable and have been fairly accurately stated, so far. But....let me reiterate what I believe are the main points.
1)Their format is not only prone to, but INDUCIVE of trolling.
2) The ONLY way to address the problem is SOME kind of registration. (not monitoring, banning or censoring)
3) We are in NO WAY making an indictment of the right.
(implied or stated)
4) We make NO DEMANDS. Period.
We only state the purpose of our boycott, and the results we would hope for. (registration)
5) IF things were to change, or promises of, any boycott could be called of by a simple vote.
FAIR NUFF?
Let me make this perfectly clear.
My intentions for calling this boycott are, I believe honorable and have been fairly accurately stated, so far. But....let me reiterate what I believe are the main points.
1)Their format is not only prone to, but INDUCIVE of trolling.
2) The ONLY way to address the problem is SOME kind of registration. (not monitoring, banning or censoring)
3) We are in NO WAY making an indictment of the right.
(implied or stated)
4) We make NO DEMANDS. Period.
We only state the purpose of our boycott, and the results we would hope for. (registration)
5) IF things were to change, or promises of, any boycott could be called of by a simple vote.
FAIR NUFF?
Predestined said:
Tracy,
Isn't the typepad thingy a type of registration? Would making that mandatory solve the nic stealing problem? I don't use it. Nobody cares about stealing my nic.
Isn't the typepad thingy a type of registration? Would making that mandatory solve the nic stealing problem? I don't use it. Nobody cares about stealing my nic.
Dubya said:
No problem on the invite; I'm glad you guys were able to find it. Now we just have to square away this whole "liberal" leaning and we'll be set...LOL :)
~Dubya
~Dubya
lindainks55 said:
I didn't see any of the loop although I understand some came to my defense. No need, honestly. Hubby wishes I were more of what that nic accused. I promise I'm only old not defenseless. lol
My idea of a troll differs from some here. When they post under their own nic(s) (doesn't even matter how many they use) it only reflects on them and all of us are really good at identifying the idiots who are dumb as a stump.
Now there are obvious bushbots or doesn't matter as long as the name is followed by an R who also show their stupidity with their posts. They aren't trolls (IMO) just so completely WRONG. Usually they make perfect fools of themselves just like their hero Bush manages to do. They don't even need our help, but we're there to point out the errors of their ways. And we need to pay close attention to what these folks say, study carefully so we can know what the inner workings of these aliens' ideas are and be prepared.
All that said. Thanks for inviting me here. I have little to say that adds anything but sure like reading all of you!
My idea of a troll differs from some here. When they post under their own nic(s) (doesn't even matter how many they use) it only reflects on them and all of us are really good at identifying the idiots who are dumb as a stump.
Now there are obvious bushbots or doesn't matter as long as the name is followed by an R who also show their stupidity with their posts. They aren't trolls (IMO) just so completely WRONG. Usually they make perfect fools of themselves just like their hero Bush manages to do. They don't even need our help, but we're there to point out the errors of their ways. And we need to pay close attention to what these folks say, study carefully so we can know what the inner workings of these aliens' ideas are and be prepared.
All that said. Thanks for inviting me here. I have little to say that adds anything but sure like reading all of you!
TRACY said:
The only thing typepad will do is verify that somebody named Tracy posted.
I've been around the block with typepad.
It's worthless. Can anybody here say they have been "protected" by typepad?
Capn' did it help you out? NOPE. Nope.
Now I know that a bunch of evil libs like us couldn't even decide on where to eat, even if I was to buy.
That's why I tried to boil it down to the bottom line, 3 or 4 points, no demands.
I certainly don't wanna keep anybody from all the blogfun happening over there.
If you're happy there, by all means stay.
The numbers of emails I've gotten over this tells me that almost nobody is happy with the way it is now.
I will do what I say. I always have. I will stay off the thing at least until after the 1st.
Like an old boss always told me, "Lead, follow, or get the hell outa the way."
In this case, I prefer to lead, and many good friends prefer to follow.
THANK YOU.
I've been around the block with typepad.
It's worthless. Can anybody here say they have been "protected" by typepad?
Capn' did it help you out? NOPE. Nope.
Now I know that a bunch of evil libs like us couldn't even decide on where to eat, even if I was to buy.
That's why I tried to boil it down to the bottom line, 3 or 4 points, no demands.
I certainly don't wanna keep anybody from all the blogfun happening over there.
If you're happy there, by all means stay.
The numbers of emails I've gotten over this tells me that almost nobody is happy with the way it is now.
I will do what I say. I always have. I will stay off the thing at least until after the 1st.
Like an old boss always told me, "Lead, follow, or get the hell outa the way."
In this case, I prefer to lead, and many good friends prefer to follow.
THANK YOU.
TRACY said:
ESC research supporters:
No. 5 • March 12, 2007
Member Update
Last week, Arlen Siegfreid, chairman of the House Federal and State Affairs Committee, announced that he would postpone hearings on two bills that would prohibit promising stem cell research in Kansas.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Updates
HB 2098: The bad definitions bill
HB 2255: A ban on SCNT at state institutions
Both these bills were originally approved by the House Health and Human Services Committee and sent to the full House for consideration. With your help, we successfully discouraged the House from debating or voting on either bill. However, the House leadership then reassigned both bills to the Federal and State Affairs Committee.
Your quick action has helped to ensure that any stem cell research, therapies, and cures allowed under federal law remain legal in Kansas and available to Kansas patients.
The legislature begins a short break April 3, and it is important that your Representative continue to hear about your strong support for stem cell research. When lawmakers return to Topeka for the wrap-up session on April 25, we’ll ask you for a final push to keep restrictive legislation at bay.
Please share this alert with your family and friends. Ask them to join our coalition and to contact their legislators.
The Kansas Coalition for Lifesaving Cures
info@kansascures.com
www.kansascures.com
No. 5 • March 12, 2007
Member Update
Last week, Arlen Siegfreid, chairman of the House Federal and State Affairs Committee, announced that he would postpone hearings on two bills that would prohibit promising stem cell research in Kansas.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Updates
HB 2098: The bad definitions bill
HB 2255: A ban on SCNT at state institutions
Both these bills were originally approved by the House Health and Human Services Committee and sent to the full House for consideration. With your help, we successfully discouraged the House from debating or voting on either bill. However, the House leadership then reassigned both bills to the Federal and State Affairs Committee.
Your quick action has helped to ensure that any stem cell research, therapies, and cures allowed under federal law remain legal in Kansas and available to Kansas patients.
The legislature begins a short break April 3, and it is important that your Representative continue to hear about your strong support for stem cell research. When lawmakers return to Topeka for the wrap-up session on April 25, we’ll ask you for a final push to keep restrictive legislation at bay.
Please share this alert with your family and friends. Ask them to join our coalition and to contact their legislators.
The Kansas Coalition for Lifesaving Cures
info@kansascures.com
www.kansascures.com
lindainks55 said:
I get their (Kansas Cures) emails too Tracy so received this one recently. We need to keep paying attention 'cause those guys in the legislature might not be bright but they are sneaky.
TRACY said:
Also everyone could spread the word about this boycott to any other blogs you frequent.
Give them your reasons for participating!
Give them your reasons for participating!
lindainks55 said:
"Now I know that a bunch of evil libs like us couldn't even decide on where to eat, even if I was to buy."
----------
Tracy, that's why we could still debate, even have some spirited argu.. discussions. We're all wise enough to know NONE of us is alike and each has an opinion -- usually darn good ones too!
In yesterday's White House Watch column by Dan Froomkin someone he quoted said, "Another day, another scandal. This administration sure seems to have a lot of friends in trouble. And, it's fun to watch this bunch unravel."
But that is the one thing we might all agree on! And who will we have to remind of their predictions, their failings? Shouldn't we get to rub their noses in it?
Oh, and the other day I was wondering IF the Republicans get morally-bankrupt Gingrich or Giuliani as their candidate for '08 THEN will they stop yelling Clinton, Clinton at every turn? Will they have to stick to the issues, job performance, leadership, health of the country instead of who is in bed with whom?
----------
Tracy, that's why we could still debate, even have some spirited argu.. discussions. We're all wise enough to know NONE of us is alike and each has an opinion -- usually darn good ones too!
In yesterday's White House Watch column by Dan Froomkin someone he quoted said, "Another day, another scandal. This administration sure seems to have a lot of friends in trouble. And, it's fun to watch this bunch unravel."
But that is the one thing we might all agree on! And who will we have to remind of their predictions, their failings? Shouldn't we get to rub their noses in it?
Oh, and the other day I was wondering IF the Republicans get morally-bankrupt Gingrich or Giuliani as their candidate for '08 THEN will they stop yelling Clinton, Clinton at every turn? Will they have to stick to the issues, job performance, leadership, health of the country instead of who is in bed with whom?
CapnAmerica said:
With all due respect to those who fear too much control of content by The WEBlog, Democratic Underground is an excellent example of how a WEBlog can be well run.
1. You have to log into a permanent account using a real e-mail address. Further, the e-mail account cannot be a free account like yahoo or hotbot etc.
2. The rules are clear. The rules are enforced both by moderators and by user "alerts." You can hit an alert to warn moderator of suspected trolling. You break the rules, you're warned. I've been warned a few times. Once I said that in regards to Israel in the "Holy Land" that "it's no wonder the Jews killed Jesus, he's Palestinian."
You're not allowed to say that Jews killed Jesus on Democratic Underground, and that's probably fair, even though the traditional Christian perspective is that the Jewish patriarchy did kill him. That brought a stern rebuke from the mods, heigh ho.
Anyway, you break them repeatedly, you're banned. You have to set up a new account. It can be done, but it's a hassle, and it does discourage abuse.
They don't get the satisfaction of causing trouble (posts are usually pulled in ten minutes) and they get "tombstoned" (banned).
3. I don't see this as a "free speech" issue. Free speech is what you can say on a public sidewalk. This is a blog owned and operated by a corporation the same as the newspaper is. None of us have a "right" to post there, any more than any of us have a "right" to post here or have a "right" to have our letters to the editors published.
4. I get the feeling that some of us are downplaying the potential for confrontation that can spill off the BLOG. I am still getting junk mail sent to "Cal Thomas" at my address after my two line e-mail complaining of Thomas's column (after the death of Peacemaker Team Member Fox) was run without my knowledge as a Letter to the Editor.
I myself have already gone to a meeting place to physically confront JM who threw down the gauntlet. He didn't show, lucky for him. But lucky for me too. Nobody wins when one resorts to intimidation. You can't have people throwing this kind of hate and vituperation around on a daily basis without an unfortunate end resulting eventually.
1. You have to log into a permanent account using a real e-mail address. Further, the e-mail account cannot be a free account like yahoo or hotbot etc.
2. The rules are clear. The rules are enforced both by moderators and by user "alerts." You can hit an alert to warn moderator of suspected trolling. You break the rules, you're warned. I've been warned a few times. Once I said that in regards to Israel in the "Holy Land" that "it's no wonder the Jews killed Jesus, he's Palestinian."
You're not allowed to say that Jews killed Jesus on Democratic Underground, and that's probably fair, even though the traditional Christian perspective is that the Jewish patriarchy did kill him. That brought a stern rebuke from the mods, heigh ho.
Anyway, you break them repeatedly, you're banned. You have to set up a new account. It can be done, but it's a hassle, and it does discourage abuse.
They don't get the satisfaction of causing trouble (posts are usually pulled in ten minutes) and they get "tombstoned" (banned).
3. I don't see this as a "free speech" issue. Free speech is what you can say on a public sidewalk. This is a blog owned and operated by a corporation the same as the newspaper is. None of us have a "right" to post there, any more than any of us have a "right" to post here or have a "right" to have our letters to the editors published.
4. I get the feeling that some of us are downplaying the potential for confrontation that can spill off the BLOG. I am still getting junk mail sent to "Cal Thomas" at my address after my two line e-mail complaining of Thomas's column (after the death of Peacemaker Team Member Fox) was run without my knowledge as a Letter to the Editor.
I myself have already gone to a meeting place to physically confront JM who threw down the gauntlet. He didn't show, lucky for him. But lucky for me too. Nobody wins when one resorts to intimidation. You can't have people throwing this kind of hate and vituperation around on a daily basis without an unfortunate end resulting eventually.
Predestined said:
Tracy, I like your points!
Brad, would it be possible to revise the Manifest to show Tracy's points? Or revise it as Manifest II? Then maybe we can choose between them? (I know, we can't agree on where to eat, but hope floats, ya know. ;) )
Brad, would it be possible to revise the Manifest to show Tracy's points? Or revise it as Manifest II? Then maybe we can choose between them? (I know, we can't agree on where to eat, but hope floats, ya know. ;) )
CapnAmerica said:
Okay, how's this:
The Eagle must take more responsibility for the monster it has created. It could require registration with a real e-mail address (not a free account) and only allow one registration from that address at one time. It could pull posts that are profane or racist. It could ban posters whose intention is only to insult and annoy.
The Eagle must take more responsibility for the monster it has created. It could require registration with a real e-mail address (not a free account) and only allow one registration from that address at one time. It could pull posts that are profane or racist. It could ban posters whose intention is only to insult and annoy.
darwinsdisciple said:
"It could ban posters whose intention is only to insult and annoy."
To me: this guideline clearly applies to fleetwood, SOB, Kahn, Hank (often). But this criteria may not be so clear to others. And, I am not sure how this could be fairly applied.
To me: this guideline clearly applies to fleetwood, SOB, Kahn, Hank (often). But this criteria may not be so clear to others. And, I am not sure how this could be fairly applied.
CF said:
OK, folks. The Capn's message didn't get to CF earlier: work firewall and all. Plus, CF was out gallavantin' around. It's a beautiful day and all.
In terms of the proposal, I don't like the wording of 'The Eagle must take more responsibility for the monster it has created.' I don't agree that it's a monster. Rather, it is a situation that can be managed. I also don't agree that they've evaded responsibility; after all, those of us who showed up for the meetup were adamant that the less managerial interference they exercised, the happier we'd be. So they can legitimately respond that by doing nothing, they're just doing what we asked.
I did get the sense, from them, that they were interested in fostering discussion, and they went so far as to solicit our suggestions. At the meetup, the editors mentioned that they were considering moving to a different program than Typepad, although they didn't have a sense of whether such a change would be imminent or longer term.
It seems to me that our proposal--or 'demands,' whichever you prefer--would be best posed in reference to their stated willingness to take our suggestions regarding the management of the WeBlog. My guess is they are probably a bit frustrated as well.
The only things I'm willing to endorse trying to control are:
-Name stealing trolls
-Those who post under multiple ID's and then deny having done so.
-Racist / sexist language
-Threats of violence or harm
-Violations of privacy or confidentiality
Beyond that, I don't think the editors should be in the business of deciding which posts and posters rise to the standard of having only "the intention...to insult and annoy." They don't have the time for this kind of maintainance, and I think it is too slippery a slope for me to be comfortable. After all, this is precisely what the Wingnuts say about CF when they have no substantive response.
But I do agree, at least in principle, with the goal of trying to cut down on the sorts of 'hit and run' troll tacits that an anonymous weblog invites. I also agree with darwinsdisciple that it makes sense to accept ads. Hell, Philip basically said that ads would be coming down the pike, so we might as well try to leverage what we can in response for the ads(increased monitoring) while we can.
A final point: the editors DO care about the Weblog. They get props within the McClatchy newspaper chain for having (what I believe Philip said) was the most active political blog in the entire chain. It gets them bragging rights with their peers. This isn't a huge deal, but it isn't nothing, either. They like having it, and they like having us. And we like being there for the fighting, else we wouldn't be there.
So, with respect to the boycott, CF is in. He also thinks it may be a good idea to tell the Righties that we've had enough of the multiple identities and name-stealing. If the Wingnuts really are interested in having a civil discussion, they're going to have to prove it to me.
And beside, two weeks of writing I don't do on the Weblog is two weeks of writing that might actually advance my career.
In terms of the proposal, I don't like the wording of 'The Eagle must take more responsibility for the monster it has created.' I don't agree that it's a monster. Rather, it is a situation that can be managed. I also don't agree that they've evaded responsibility; after all, those of us who showed up for the meetup were adamant that the less managerial interference they exercised, the happier we'd be. So they can legitimately respond that by doing nothing, they're just doing what we asked.
I did get the sense, from them, that they were interested in fostering discussion, and they went so far as to solicit our suggestions. At the meetup, the editors mentioned that they were considering moving to a different program than Typepad, although they didn't have a sense of whether such a change would be imminent or longer term.
It seems to me that our proposal--or 'demands,' whichever you prefer--would be best posed in reference to their stated willingness to take our suggestions regarding the management of the WeBlog. My guess is they are probably a bit frustrated as well.
The only things I'm willing to endorse trying to control are:
-Name stealing trolls
-Those who post under multiple ID's and then deny having done so.
-Racist / sexist language
-Threats of violence or harm
-Violations of privacy or confidentiality
Beyond that, I don't think the editors should be in the business of deciding which posts and posters rise to the standard of having only "the intention...to insult and annoy." They don't have the time for this kind of maintainance, and I think it is too slippery a slope for me to be comfortable. After all, this is precisely what the Wingnuts say about CF when they have no substantive response.
But I do agree, at least in principle, with the goal of trying to cut down on the sorts of 'hit and run' troll tacits that an anonymous weblog invites. I also agree with darwinsdisciple that it makes sense to accept ads. Hell, Philip basically said that ads would be coming down the pike, so we might as well try to leverage what we can in response for the ads(increased monitoring) while we can.
A final point: the editors DO care about the Weblog. They get props within the McClatchy newspaper chain for having (what I believe Philip said) was the most active political blog in the entire chain. It gets them bragging rights with their peers. This isn't a huge deal, but it isn't nothing, either. They like having it, and they like having us. And we like being there for the fighting, else we wouldn't be there.
So, with respect to the boycott, CF is in. He also thinks it may be a good idea to tell the Righties that we've had enough of the multiple identities and name-stealing. If the Wingnuts really are interested in having a civil discussion, they're going to have to prove it to me.
And beside, two weeks of writing I don't do on the Weblog is two weeks of writing that might actually advance my career.
Predestined said:
CF,
I agree 100% with your comment about the part regarding the word "monster". The WE didn't create the monster, nor did the editors. We, the posters did.
Capn asked what kind of revisions, so I did a few. Here's what I have. Feel free to rip it to shreds and add whatever is needed. After all, that's why we're here, right?
Dear WEBlog editors:
Thank you for setting up this public blog in which readers can post their views. It is an excellent concept.
But in practice, it needs some attention.
As it is now, a poster can steal other posters' nicknames and seem to make them say things totally contrary to their beliefs. This has resulted in many misunderstandings and angry responses.
A poster can use a variety of nicknames and seem to be more than one person. Because nic-switching is so easy, and check on the truth of what a "pop-up" poster is saying is virtually impossible.
We believe the ONLY way to address the problem is SOME kind of registration. (not monitoring, banning or censoring)
We request that the Eagle look into a way the problems stated above can be corrected.
We the undersigned have opted to boycott the WEBlog as a demonstration of our desire for change in the way the WEBlog is managed. We look forward to time when the WEBlog can be as edifying and educational as it was meant to be.
Sincerely,
YADA YADA
I agree 100% with your comment about the part regarding the word "monster". The WE didn't create the monster, nor did the editors. We, the posters did.
Capn asked what kind of revisions, so I did a few. Here's what I have. Feel free to rip it to shreds and add whatever is needed. After all, that's why we're here, right?
Dear WEBlog editors:
Thank you for setting up this public blog in which readers can post their views. It is an excellent concept.
But in practice, it needs some attention.
As it is now, a poster can steal other posters' nicknames and seem to make them say things totally contrary to their beliefs. This has resulted in many misunderstandings and angry responses.
A poster can use a variety of nicknames and seem to be more than one person. Because nic-switching is so easy, and check on the truth of what a "pop-up" poster is saying is virtually impossible.
We believe the ONLY way to address the problem is SOME kind of registration. (not monitoring, banning or censoring)
We request that the Eagle look into a way the problems stated above can be corrected.
We the undersigned have opted to boycott the WEBlog as a demonstration of our desire for change in the way the WEBlog is managed. We look forward to time when the WEBlog can be as edifying and educational as it was meant to be.
Sincerely,
YADA YADA
CF said:
Predestined (for...greatness? ignominy?),
Sounds about right to me, both with regard to substance and tone. However, in the case of Ian Santiago, the editors have already taken it upon themselves to ben as they see fit. If a certain IP address is associated with serial trolling/name-stealing/racist comments, I'd assume that their perogative will be to ban, and I'd endorse it as their decision.
Also, on the 'look into any problems,' perhaps a we could offer to consult with them in the development of guidelines. I mean, no they don't have to, but it could be a good idea for a bipartisan group of regulars to be willing to consult in the development and implementation of the policy. The editors are free to refuse; it is their weblog. But seeing as how we have a bunch of lawyers and academics in the pool of regular posters, our input may come in handy.
Other thoughts, folks?
Sounds about right to me, both with regard to substance and tone. However, in the case of Ian Santiago, the editors have already taken it upon themselves to ben as they see fit. If a certain IP address is associated with serial trolling/name-stealing/racist comments, I'd assume that their perogative will be to ban, and I'd endorse it as their decision.
Also, on the 'look into any problems,' perhaps a we could offer to consult with them in the development of guidelines. I mean, no they don't have to, but it could be a good idea for a bipartisan group of regulars to be willing to consult in the development and implementation of the policy. The editors are free to refuse; it is their weblog. But seeing as how we have a bunch of lawyers and academics in the pool of regular posters, our input may come in handy.
Other thoughts, folks?
CapnAmerica said:
Writing by committee . . . I knew this would happen!
Actually, these are great suggestions. I agree that editors pulling posts based on "intention" is too vague. And the threat of "outing," payback, or violence MUST be among the taboos.
But the best change that ever happened to the Blog IMHO is when Ian was banned. Intelligent people shouldn't be subjected to hate speech. He doesn't have right to post it on the WEBlog anymore than he has a right to print it on the editorial page.
Third draft to include changes coming up . . .
Actually, these are great suggestions. I agree that editors pulling posts based on "intention" is too vague. And the threat of "outing," payback, or violence MUST be among the taboos.
But the best change that ever happened to the Blog IMHO is when Ian was banned. Intelligent people shouldn't be subjected to hate speech. He doesn't have right to post it on the WEBlog anymore than he has a right to print it on the editorial page.
Third draft to include changes coming up . . .
mrcontroversy said:
Maybe it's because my ox was being gored at the time, but I believe the line was crossed when Williams called me a child rapist. He should have been banned at that point. If it had been a conservative poster, I'll bet you he would have been. As it was, it took a copy of a letter my attorney sent Williams just to get the hateful posts pulled.
That kind of stuff cannot be tolerated.
That kind of stuff cannot be tolerated.
CapnAmerica said:
Dear WEBlog editors—
Thank you for setting up this public blog in which readers can post their views. It is an excellent concept.
But in practice, it needs serious improvement.
As it is now, a poster can steal people’s nicknames and seem to make them say things totally contrary to their beliefs. This has resulted in many misunderstandings and angry responses.
A poster can use a variety of nicknames and seem to be more than one person. Because nic-switching is so easy, any check on the truth of what a “pop-up” poster is saying is virtually impossible.
Racial, ethnic and homophobic slurs of the most vile nature are hurled with impunity. Some posters have even followed through on trying to meet another who has offended them . . . and it wasn’t to shake hands.
We believe the ONLY way to address the problem is some kind of registration. For instance, if post-ers were required to provide a real e-mail address (not a free web address such as yahoo or hotmail), The Eagle could insure that only one user name would be registered for each e-mail account.
Areas of particular concern are as follows:
-Name stealing trolls
-One user posting under multiple ID's
-Racist / sexist / homophobic language
-Threats of “payback” in real life
-Threats of violence or harm
-Demands to meet “in person”
-Violations of privacy or confidentiality
We request that the Eagle look into a way the problems stated above can be corrected.
We the undersigned have opted to boycott the WEBlog as a demonstration of our desire for change in the way the WEBlog is managed. We look forward to time when the WEBlog can be as edifying and educational as it was meant to be.
Sincerely,
Tracy, WSClark, Mary Caruso, WichiWoman, KSFrmGrrl, Steven Davis, gdub, Ben Huie, XXX, .morg, CapnAmerica, gster, Julie, CF
Thank you for setting up this public blog in which readers can post their views. It is an excellent concept.
But in practice, it needs serious improvement.
As it is now, a poster can steal people’s nicknames and seem to make them say things totally contrary to their beliefs. This has resulted in many misunderstandings and angry responses.
A poster can use a variety of nicknames and seem to be more than one person. Because nic-switching is so easy, any check on the truth of what a “pop-up” poster is saying is virtually impossible.
Racial, ethnic and homophobic slurs of the most vile nature are hurled with impunity. Some posters have even followed through on trying to meet another who has offended them . . . and it wasn’t to shake hands.
We believe the ONLY way to address the problem is some kind of registration. For instance, if post-ers were required to provide a real e-mail address (not a free web address such as yahoo or hotmail), The Eagle could insure that only one user name would be registered for each e-mail account.
Areas of particular concern are as follows:
-Name stealing trolls
-One user posting under multiple ID's
-Racist / sexist / homophobic language
-Threats of “payback” in real life
-Threats of violence or harm
-Demands to meet “in person”
-Violations of privacy or confidentiality
We request that the Eagle look into a way the problems stated above can be corrected.
We the undersigned have opted to boycott the WEBlog as a demonstration of our desire for change in the way the WEBlog is managed. We look forward to time when the WEBlog can be as edifying and educational as it was meant to be.
Sincerely,
Tracy, WSClark, Mary Caruso, WichiWoman, KSFrmGrrl, Steven Davis, gdub, Ben Huie, XXX, .morg, CapnAmerica, gster, Julie, CF
gster said:
Is anyone else having problems posting?
I had one take off somewhere; it can't be operator error.hhmmmmmmmm???
I had one take off somewhere; it can't be operator error.hhmmmmmmmm???
Predestined said:
Two different times that I've posted, the posts haven't shown up. The system seems to be as perfect as I am.
Predestined said:
Please add my name (RD) as a "we the undersigned".
Good work, guys! (and gals, too)
Good work, guys! (and gals, too)
darwinsdisciple said:
As from the beginning, I am in.
An alternative to this site, not that I would complain about our host's efforts here, is:
http://refugeesfromtheweblogasylum.blogspot.com/
See you guys and gals,
Steven
An alternative to this site, not that I would complain about our host's efforts here, is:
http://refugeesfromtheweblogasylum.blogspot.com/
See you guys and gals,
Steven
TRACY said:
Man, you guys gotta see some of the pathetic baiting going on. No don't look.
Some desperate nutball is posting farmer in the dell, DESPERATELY trying to invoke a response from Wally O'dell.
Hilarious and pathetic at the same time.
Some desperate nutball is posting farmer in the dell, DESPERATELY trying to invoke a response from Wally O'dell.
Hilarious and pathetic at the same time.
TRACY said:
Capn, looks good to me.
They already know what the problems are.
I'm in for the signing.
When you send, and to who is up to others.
Thanks, Tracy.
Gotta go. Da Man wants me to actually work today.
They already know what the problems are.
I'm in for the signing.
When you send, and to who is up to others.
Thanks, Tracy.
Gotta go. Da Man wants me to actually work today.
lindainks55 said:
I visited the site steven set up and found it easy to use.
In case you missed it upthread Capn, I also would like to be included as a signee.
In case you missed it upthread Capn, I also would like to be included as a signee.
WSClark said:
Good (late) morning fellow refugees! Hot times over on WE Blog this morning. They are taking bets on when we will be back, and cut 'n' pasting some of our return fire. Other than that, it looks pretty boring.
I like this site, but I really don't like getting an e-mail everytime I post, but I could see the value in that.
I was a little peeved that our draft to WE Blog editors was posted on the Open Thread, but that's life.
Anyway, I have some things to take care of, so my participation will be limited. Seems someone "filed" my tax returns "for me" and had my refund deposited in their bank account. Nothing like a little identity theft to get you worked up. Not only did they "file" my taxes for me, but they cheated on my taxes as well!
Hope you're all doing well.
We'll see you around.
William Stephenson Clark
I like this site, but I really don't like getting an e-mail everytime I post, but I could see the value in that.
I was a little peeved that our draft to WE Blog editors was posted on the Open Thread, but that's life.
Anyway, I have some things to take care of, so my participation will be limited. Seems someone "filed" my tax returns "for me" and had my refund deposited in their bank account. Nothing like a little identity theft to get you worked up. Not only did they "file" my taxes for me, but they cheated on my taxes as well!
Hope you're all doing well.
We'll see you around.
William Stephenson Clark
lindainks55 said:
Will,
That's terrible! Anything anyone can help you with?
FYI, our host seems to be providing a new Open Thread daily so everyone is hanging out at an Open Thread upstream.
That's terrible! Anything anyone can help you with?
FYI, our host seems to be providing a new Open Thread daily so everyone is hanging out at an Open Thread upstream.
Loading....