It's time for comment moderation at Sound Politics.
Increasingly, comment threads denigrate to ad hominem attacks, off-topic rants, threats, and completely baseless assertions. All the while sprinkled with the random, thoughtless venom that only the cover of anonymity can provide.
Jim Miller does moderate his comment threads somewhat. And often he turns off comments, which is welcome when he simply wants to make an announcement like "Happy 4th of July." This is a great start, and much needed for a readership that simply can't contain itself to rational decorum. As bad as it gets here at Sound Poltics, it's even worse at other local blogs. But that's no reason to be content. Sound Politics should elevate itself by simply weeding out the garbage to begin.
And there is precedent for such comment moderation. One of the top science blogs, Watts Up With That run by meteorologist Anthony Watts, recently won the WebLog Awards as the top reader voted Science Blog on the WWW. I believe that one of the reasons Anthony does so well, is that he rigorously enforces comment moderation, which in turn raises the level of discourse to a much more useful, and harmonious state. It's just more pleasant to go and read a blog without the endless temptation to respond to trolls, weed through long rants, profanity, and otherwise lunacy that haunts most blog comment threads.
Sound Politics should do two things right away:
1. Require all posters to register with an actual email address, that is then verified before they can comment. This alone would do away with so much of the random garbage we see from antagonistic commenters here like "demo kid" and "hellpig." I understand the need of some commenters to protect their identity somewhat. However, if one is not willing to even be traceable, one is far more willing to write things that are over-the-top.
2. Appoint some loyal readers and/ or SP bloggers to moderate comment threads. Approval would be required before any comments are actually viewed by anyone but their authors. As at other major blogs, the intent is not to censor everything to a moderator's view of discourse, but instead simply to remove the ridiculous over-the-top threats, profanity, off topic rants, baseless accusations, and ad hominem.
I realize that for some blogs, such as Horses Ass, requiring this level of filtering would effectively reduce comments to zero. But here at Sound Politics, there are quite a number of more rational commenters, and those who can write and adhere to some modicum of sane discourse. It would be great to see and read more of that and less of the filth.
And yes, I will be moderating the comments to this post.
Posted by JeffB. at July 06, 2009 08:16 AM | Email ThisBut rational decorum? I'm laughing at THAT one. When I present an alternative opinion here, do I get respectful, honest, and sincere rebuttals? No. What DO I get? Some idiot calling the Democrats the "slavery party" and an "abortion". Classy. Another fellow that seems to capitalize every second word for no reason whatsoever resorts to baseless slander when dealing with what I have to say. And that's not even mentioning the times when people on this board have suggested that liberals should be shot and killed, and implied that I should be executed for my beliefs. I've also been called a "libtard", a "moonbat", "ignorant", "traitor", "brainless", etc... not because of the truth behind what I'm saying (which seems like it's rarely refuted with unbiased facts here), but because the positions I take dare to differ from the peanut gallery.
But hey, I'm still waiting for that quote of mine where I told you to "commit suicide". You know... the one that you thought I should apologize for? The least you can do is to show me the context it was in, as opposed to merely claiming to be the victim here and leaving it at that.
Posted by: demo kid on July 6, 2009 12:36 PMI think "War and Peace" would be more interesting.
Keep your comments down to 50 to 100 words. These 500 worders make for boring discourse.
Posted by: swatter on July 6, 2009 01:23 PMThe requirement for all posters to register with an actural email address and be verified as traceable before they can comment is over the top. To be able to comment with anonymity is a safety issue. There are subject matters on this board which can be highly volatile. You have various nutcases out there who might want to take action directly upon a commentator. Commentators that have pointed remarks against certain Government actions can also, be putting themselves at risk to Government scrutiny. No, let the Freedom of Expression be protected by Anonymity.
Your number 2 position to appoint some loyal readers of SP bloggers to monitor the comments is putting the forum at multiple risks to individual tastes as to what needs to be deleted or not. Only, the author of the subject of the post should have that responsibility. If he proves to be too severe, too much of a strict schoolmarm then, the lack of commentary on his forum will reflect that and will be his responsibility alone.
The subjects on SP can be highly controversial and the resulting commentary makes for interesting and popular reading. It makes SP a success. Be very Careful, how you monitor the site.
Furthermore, I DO use a legitimate email address. Granted, it's for an ID that I use almost exclusively on SP and one that I only check peridically. Make up an ID and if it's not taken, Yahoo will give you a legitimate address. For that reason I don't think a 'legitimate' address will solve anything.
We all would like polite reasoned debate, but as we've learned at the knees of the MSM and their treatment of anyone Conservative (hello, Mrs Palin!) THEY don't want to play by those rules. It behooves us to be polite and reasoned and let our ideological and comment sparring opponents expose themselves for what they are,
AND if I can have fun mocking them while doing it, so much the better!
That said, I've had to walk away from politics for a while. As I said in a recent post:
I ACTUALLY BELIEVE THE GOP CAN TAKE BACK CONGRESS IN 2010... I SINCERELY HOPE THEY DO NOT.
I PERSONALLY HOPE THE GOP 'SHRUGS' IN 2010. I PERSONALLY HOPE THEY DO NOT FIELD NOR SUPPORT ANY NATIONAL CANDIDATES.
IT'S TIME TO LET THE DEMOCRATS OWN THIS BS. IT'S TIME TO LET THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA FIGURE OUT WHO TO BLAME IF THERE ACTUALLY IS ONLY ONE PARTY IN POWER ... AND THERE WILL BE PLENTY OF BLAME.
IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE THE MAINSTREAM DOGS WHO COVER FOR THESE PEOPLE EATING THEIR OWN WHEN THEY HAVE NO OTHER 'ENEMY' TO CHEW ON.
IT WOULD BE GREAT FUN TO SEE THE DEMOCRATS FIGHT EACH OTHER FOR THE POWER THEY CRAVE MORE THAN THEY CRAVE WHAT'S BEST FOR THE COUNTRY THEY CLAIM TO LOVE AND PURPORTEDLY TAKE AN OATH TO SERVE.
IT'S TIME TO REBUILD CONSERVATISM FROM THE GROUND UP... DOG CATCHER TO SCHOOL BOARD TO COUNCIL TO MAYOR TO STATE REPRESENTATIVE TO GOVERNORS... ***NOTHING NATIONAL***.
I WISH MICHAEL STEELE HAD THE FORTITUDE TO SAY TO THE NATION "WE WON'T PLAY Y0UR GAMES ANYMORE, BUT WHEN YOU ARE READY FOR US TO PICK UP THE PIECES, WE'LL BE READY. YOU WANTED IT AMERICA, YOU GOT IT: DEAL WITH IT. GOOD LUCK...YOU'LL NEED IT."
THEY wanted and have made politics a bloodsport, let them bloodletting their own.
Posted by: Ragnar Danneskjold on July 6, 2009 02:43 PMThe posts are too long, verbose and boring.
But, hey, demo and Daniel finally agree with something and they said it in less than 400 words. May wonders never cease.
demo, you whine in 1 above and then followup with 5. Go figure. Look in the mirror, my friend.
Posted by: swatter on July 6, 2009 04:02 PMAnd "whining"? I'm stating that if Jeff is complaining about bad behavior, it's not restricted to a few bad apples. Do you have a problem with that idea?
Posted by: demo kid on July 6, 2009 04:23 PMAs far as email registration goes, it's not something that is viewable by other commenters. It's only an electronic registration that makes sure that real email addresses are used to register. Having one's email address known to the system tends to cause people to be a little more careful with what they write. Other commenters have no access to the email addresses, and handles could still be used.
Nothing that anyone writes here should be so over the top or in need of protection that it can't be said in a comment thread. If someone needs to contact the bloggers privately about a sensitive matter, they can still do that through their private email accounts.
Lastly, I fully agree with demo kid. It's not about a few bad apples. It's about raising the level of civil discourse in general. We all do slip at times. But I think that's mostly a function of the anonymity. Check out the comments at WUWT for the example of what could be. You will see what I mean.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 6, 2009 08:21 PMIncidentally, those who want moderated comments -- and I can understand why many would -- should do a little back-of-the-envelope calculation about how much time that would add to the work of the contributors.
Posted by: Jim Miller on July 7, 2009 02:04 PMI can understand why some would like the comments moderated. But those who desire that change should do a back-of-the-envelope calculation on how much that would add to the work of the contributors. Since I am retired, I have enough time to moderate comments, and can often do it in close to real time, but that would be much more difficult for the other contributors.
I'd favor starting with something easier, such as the comment message used at the Volokh site.
Posted by: Jim Miller on July 7, 2009 02:27 PMThere was a reason newspapers verified the identity of those who wrote letters to the editor.
One cannot help but notice that the most filthy posts on S/P are nearly always from the left side of the political spectrum. Back them into a corner with logic and they swear at you, call you names, and sometimes threaten you. I've played this game with these lovely people countless times. The result is alarmingly predictable. The left is a sinkhole for creepy people that in the end expect us adults to pick up their garbage. We did during the Reagan years and we will have to do it again very shortly. It is not coincidental that leftists deposited a massive amount of trash for other people to clean up at the Obama inauguration. That was simply an indication of who these people really are. Check out any leftist blog you choose to. It is always a sewer of profanity directed at conservatives.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on July 8, 2009 11:25 AMPersonally I don't get it. No one has ever shoved a gun in my face for using my own name. I would not think of using some anonymous handle.
Posted by: Bill Cruchon on July 8, 2009 12:54 PMThis isn't Iran. And comment registration does not require one to post under a visible email address or a full name. You can still be "Daniel." The only thing it does do is make sure that there is a real person, with a real email address, who is aware that their comments are at least expected to be kept civil. The uncivil parts would be snipped out.
As for Jim's comment, yes, it requires a fair amount of work. Major blogs have appointed people who do that work quite easily, and in return, they get a high quality product that increases their visitors because the content is worth reading. There are plenty of unbiased moderators with nothing better to do that you could find that you trust, and would be willing to sign up to help you. That's how other blogs do it.
At very least, we should require the registration. It's not going to be used against anyone, but it definitely makes people think twice before they post something that they might post from full anonymity.
If you've got something to hide, you shouldn't say it in the first place.
And there's no question, that the left leaning blogs are worse than the right. That doesn't excuse the bad comments from those on the right, and there are some. But dk, it would very easy to go to Huff Po, HA, Daily Kos, etc. and show you plenty of pretty bad stuff.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 8, 2009 02:57 PMLike Daniel said, if someone is going to "think twice" about posting certain things, doesn't that imply that their identity might be used in a punitive kind of way?
Posted by: demo kid on July 8, 2009 03:57 PM"Worse than the right"? According to someone that disagrees with what they have to say? That's not really unbiased proof. I can go to Free Republic or scads of other right-wing websites, TV shows, radio programs, etc. and find "bad behavior" there as well.
Now, I'm not denying that the left can be douchebags at times, or that people on the right may be respectful. But don't delude yourself that your side is "better" simply because you're on it.
Posted by: demo kid on July 8, 2009 04:27 PMI do agree with Jim that moderation does add overhead for the contributor. I am sorry he had trouble with one of the people who commented on his blog. While I may not agree with Jim some of the time, I find he is always respectful in his responses.
Posted by: tc on July 9, 2009 09:00 AMYou are not identifying yourself. You are tying your comments to an email address. That can still be anonymous. But, if you said something egregiously offensive or made threats, then you would know that there would probably be a way for legal authorities to use the address to try and find you. That little seed of restraint is why other blogs don't have near the nastiness of some of the comments we see here and much worse at HA. It's a subtle distinction, I've given you examples above on where to look at the other blogs to compare their much more rational, civil and productive debates.
Free speech doesn't mean you can yell "fire" in a crowded theatre. And it doesn't mean you can post profanity, threats, and ad hominem on a blog. It's about the exchange of ideas.
@21,
You really should read around more, and view talk shows, etc. The left leaning sources are always more puerile and profane. The left views that as a badge of honor. Take for example the jokes Letterman made about Palin's daughter. I don't recall any right leaning shows making jokes about Biden's kids? Are there examples, especially on blogs like Free Republic of righties unhinged? Sure. But it's far more common on the left. For one thing, the left dominates most media sources, so there's just more out there to go bad. Take yourself as an example. I never wrote anything to you like what you wrote to me, even though I often vehemently disagree with you. There's a line that is much more acceptable for those on the left to cross. Just like it's much more acceptable for people in Seattle to loudly proclaim their support for Obama. You might not like this, but it's true.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 9, 2009 10:51 PMIn the past year I have deleted 3 or 4 comments. And I identified that I did so and, in most cases, why, as I recall.
Regarding length: I think comments should be shorter than the original post - in column inches, not word count, so blank lines count. Get your own blog for your sermons. But I haven't done anything at all about length and haven't even threatened to.
Posted by: Ron Hebron on July 10, 2009 10:41 AM@25. Ann Coulter is one of the reasons I don't call myself a conservative. That said, I can find ten on the left for every one of her on the right. The shear derangement of almost all left leaning commenters regarding Palin was amazing. Constant references to her down syndrome kid, her looks, her family choices, her daughter's behavior, etc. All of that, the antithesis of the so called enlightened and tolerant left. This was everyone from Matt Lauer, to Letterman, to Huffington, Daily Kos, Goldy, etc. There's nothing like that on the right. And I am not a Palin fan. But that doesn't the excuse the caustic and irrational ad hominem, vs simply focusing on the political, social, etc. issues.
Same thing with Bush. Bush made many mistakes, and I would have chosen someone much more fiscally conservative, and much less socially involved were it up to me. But, the clear, unending unhingedness regarding Bush from the left, was just laughable. And that will forever cement the left as willing to fully inhabit the irrational side to get what they want. And again, there's nothing even remotely like that on the right regarding Obama. Remember the Bush effigies, the taunts, the threats, the deathwishes, the campouts, the outbursts from the gallery in congress, ad hominem about his education, etc. Nothing like that for Obama. Not even close.
If you can't see these differences then you are not looking.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 10, 2009 11:03 AMAs a side Note: Being a Conservative does not mean having a Blind allegiance to any Party. Being a Liberal is more meaningful of having a Blind allegiance to a Party. Being a Conservative does not automatically mean your a Republican, let alone, not finding any fault with the Republicans. Being a Conservative is a person of more Enlighten in depth thought. Being a Conservative is thinking before you feel. Being a Conservative is looking before you leap. Perhaps, you might be more of a Conservative than, you think. But, if you can't realize the importance of Anonymity...Perhaps, NOT!
And you wouldn't advocate that despite the depravities of gang violence in a given neighborhood, that the police simply ignore it and let it continue and worsen?
This is merely a suggestion to show what works on other blogs. That said. I am not the owner of this blog. So I am not implementing anything. But, at least, we should have moderation, so that the more ridiculous and over-the-top, profane, etc. comments are removed. Sometimes that does happen now. But there are still a lot of threads that could use some cleaning up and a ref to keep it clean. The back and forth attacks just waste the time needed for better discussions. The only people that lose are the one's that just post attacks, profanity, off topic rants, and in general garbage not germane to the discussion. If one relentlessly removes the junk, the junkers go elsewhere.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 11, 2009 10:20 AMSo far you have not said anything worth worrying about, so why are you so worried about your anonymity? And in today's world, anonymity does not exist. Anonymity to say whatever one wants on a blog is nothing but tedious and insignificant cowardice. If that's all one wants to protect, given being on multiple cameras, being way more traceable on the Internet than you think, being logged on highway toll sensors, and all of one's credit card transactions, etc. then one doesn't really recognize as you say, the real world.
And, religion is not needed for morality. All humans should do what is right because it is right, and not because of anyone else telling them to do it, or even because a god is telling them what to do.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 11, 2009 01:18 PMAs far as Religion being needed for morality...Well it certainly can help, depending on the Religion. Some Religions will tell you some things that are seriously Wrong. Understand this...There is only one God and one God's Truth. The reason for all these Religions is not because, of God...It is because of man. All men are born with a God given Conscience that intuitively allows them to know basic Right and Wrong. So, even without exposure from any Religion, man will still know basic Right and Wrong.