Today I had intended to announce I was shutting down the comments at Peach Pundit for two weeks.
For the past few months things in our comment threads have really gotten out of hand. It seems like every year and a half or so we have to re-calibrate. This is one of those times.
I’m got pretty thick skin. And I am used to more and more people jumping into the comments here to knock me for things I do at RedState. The blurring of lines has happened more and more — some of it my fault and some of it not. But, and this is only a working theory, allowing the shots at me seems to have given some people the impression they can take shots at others too.
The result has been a free for all in the comments. They have descending into ad hominem chaos.
We’re going to work on cleaning things up.
Those of us who write here know many of you cannot post under your real names. While we all encourage you to, it’s rather foolish of us to ask it of you when some of us cannot write under our names. For the record, Erick Erickson is my real name.
So, first of all we’re going to let the community participate in rating comments up or down. Then we’re going to add some comment moderators. Lastly, we may start turning off a few accounts and blocking a few IP addresses.
I’ll do a better job of getting back to covering things as straight as I can. You guys need to do a better job of being respectful to one another.
Let’s see how this works out.
{ 101 comments }
You need to turn off all front page posters except yourself.
Mission statement:
“latest in unfiltered, raw politics from the Peach State. We cover state and local politics, as well as Georgia’s national impact as a part of the deep south electoral block.”
Definition:
1 a : the art or science of government b : the art or science concerned with guiding or influencing governmental policy c : the art or science concerned with winning and holding control over a government
Of course, Erick is right. Once any discussion devolves to the level of name-calling, it is no longer a useful discussion. It’s all well and good to disagree civilly on substantive issues, but probably best to keep personal attacks off for this blog to remain productive. Of course, for some, the level of antipathy is what makes a site like this fun, so you may lose some posters…
Of course, for some, the level of antipathy is what makes a site like this fun, so you may lose some posters…
What a tragedy that will be. (not!)
Those of us who write here know many of you cannot post under your real names. While we all encourage you to, it’s rather foolish of us to ask it of you when some of us cannot write under our names
Why can those of you who post here not under your own names NOT post under your own name?
Transparency is the key to the best governance, is it not?
If Earl Ehrhart can post here under HIS own name, there is no reason why any other legislator or Gold Dome worker cannot.
Erick…I think you’re giving too many people a pass on the basis of “well, I can’t say the truth under my OWN name, Erick…” Bull-crappola.
And then, Bill, there are people who call for violence upon other people using their real names.
If you consider the politcos whose heads I want on pikes people.
And as someone pointed out, what prevents me from registering on this blog as “John Oxendine” and spouting nonsense? Just because you use a real name, doesn’t mean its _your_ real name.
Are there no ways to verify a poster’s name and whether it jobes with a known e-mail address?
or ip address
Or a phone call to verify the poster…
Follow-up: I’ll bet you a dinner, Erick, that if you require people to post under their OWN (real) names, none of these comment threads will “get out of hand.”
Very true. I’m seeing on other website discussion threads the same things happening — sock puppets pretending to “back each other up,” individuals telling bald-faced lies because they have the option of anonymity, etc. I think the Internet is the greatest tool ever introduced, but in politics, it should be just as open as in “real life”.
Bill
I can think of many reasons why people would not what to post under their own name. It is up to the reader (personal responsibility) to weigh the many factors in deciding the validity and or agenda behind the post/comment.
I have been harshly critical of Erick at times on his blog. As I said in the past I met Erick at the PP HH and he in no way seemed to harvest any hostility in fact he was very friendly.
At the end of the day it is tough call for Erick what is over the line personal and what is issue based. The part I find strange is Erick has posted the most provocative personal attack based posting himself. Yet it is his blog and he makes the rules.
The problem, Bill, is enforcement. Exactly how do I know that someone is who they say they are.
In fact, I know of at least six people on here right now that use their “real names” complete with a corresponding address for that name, but it’s still a fake.
And they have to do it because of where they work.
I don’t have the time to do all the verification, etc.
Erick,
Do you think the posts those 6 people make really add to the discussion value of the blog? Meaning, if they did not post, would PP wither and die?
So if we are using our ‘real’ names, can it can be dangerous? Will the politicians hold our comments against us? hmmmmm….
Maybe I’ll change mine.
moren likely
wow i go out of town for one week and it gets all crazy on the internet…
of which i may not be very savvy–b/c i do not get the point of voting comments up or down–does it serve some purpose?
If a comment gets voted down enough, it goes away.
.
Wow, he’s right.
THAT’S absurd.
It goes away? In that case, where do we go to vote on the threaded comments concept?
Clayton found a new way to bring in his love of Asteroids and blogging together in one place.
Yes. As I have seen it done elsewhere, people who ALWAYS get ‘thumbs down’ (because everyone else on the site thinks their input is not beneficial) get dropped. Even if you don’t go that far, it helps with the whole ‘caveat emptor’ concept…
If a person gets voted down enough will they go away?
Fine. I can take a hint.
LOL
Kellie
I gave you a “thumbs down” for your LOL, not because I had a strong opinion of Dash’s comment, but, rather, I felt your reaction to the level of humor was, perhaps, a little too much. However, since I didn’t feel strongly one way or another regarding Dash’s comment, I abstained from judging his particular comment.
Kellie
Not sure if that was your thumb or not, however, I’m tempted to neutralize the “thumbs down” with my very own “thumbs up”, in effect “thumbing myself” which would actually be new territory for me. But where would it end? It’s not something I want to take sitting down. But I have to think about ethical standards too.
Game
I raised your thumbs down with my thumbs up which put me at “zero” then I gave you a thumbs down for my thumbs down. Got it? It has nothing to do with anything I just felt the need to click on the thumb.
Kellie
I’m glad it was your thumb and not Dash Riptide’s.
Kudos Erick. I hope this will generate more productive discussion and bring PP back to where it was in its glory days.
Doubt it. Doubt it very seriously. When people can randomly vote up- or down-, they may not be voting on the basis of the post, but more so on their personal feelings about the poster.
Perhaps if some posters only reason to exist here was to criticise and bully other posters, people wouldn’t have strong negative feelings towards them.
Just a thought.
Icarus,
I don’t exist to bully other people. Perhaps those people who feel that way should try toughening-up their political skin rather than whine about what Mean ‘Ole Bill Simon says to them…which, more often that not, is the brutal truth.
Oh…that’s right…people hate the truth. They’d just rather wave a Bible in people’s faces as if to bolster their “truthiness.”
The “truth” is oftentimes subjective to one’s perception and sometimes people need to re-tune their perceptions.
I’m not pointing fingers…I’m just sayin…
“Bill”, it’s interesting that you thought that Icarus was posting about you.
Well, “Demonbeck”, one truth I do know: I post under my own name, and people like you do not. So, any “perception of truth” you think you may have starts off by being askew, does it not?
Byte,
Icarus has accused me of similar types of posts in the past. I was in his mind for that post.
I don’t know why Bill,
It could be because in the last post where you specifically addressed me “using your real name”, you called me a “whiney b*tch”, while at the same time were making phone calls asking people who you thought might have influence over me to quit picking on you.
Perhaps if you would just try to find something constructive to say around here, instead of just trying to push everyone around, then people could see these truths you keep talking about, and everyone else wouldn’t have this whole “perception” problem about you.
If it adds to Bill’s argument, I first imagined Bill after reading Icarus’s comment.
See, Byte? It pays to be perceptive.
Who knew?
Are we back in “glory days” yet? Make sure to bring back Silence Dogood again…
Ooh! And let’s not forget “Maverick.”
Perhaps someone will be so kind as to start blogging under “Maverick Returns” ’cause he was “glorious” in the old Peach Pundit days, wasn’t he?
Demon,
Welcome back. I think the only way to return it to the glory days would be with fewer users. I think once a blog reaches a critical mass of sorts, it is doomed to turning into a cesspool without serious moderation.
The problem with moderation is that it too can get out of hand and turn this site into an echo chamber.
Demon,
Welcome back. I think the only way to return it to the glory days would be with fewer users. I think once a blog reaches a critical mass of sorts, it is doomed to turning into a cesspool without serious moderation.
The problem with moderation is that it too can get out of hand and turn this site into an echo chamber.
Case in point.
Demon,
Welcome back. I think the only way to return it to the glory days would be with fewer users. I think once a blog reaches a critical mass of sorts, it is doomed to turning into a cesspool without serious moderation.
The problem with moderation is that it too can get out of hand and turn this site into an echo chamber.
Oops, I accidentally voted this one up.
The problem with moderation is that it too can get out of hand and turn this site into an echo chamber.
The problem with moderation is that it too can get out of hand and turn this site into an echo chamber.
The problem with moderation is that it too can get out of hand and turn this site into an echo chamber.
chamber chamber chamber……
Quack
http://www.snopes.com/critters/wild/duckecho.asp
Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American.
Pretty sure the Puritans used that method, which makes it pretty distinctly “American”.
If a commenter floats, he’s a witch, and must be burned.
If he sinks, we’re probably all better off anyway, and his mom can finally have her sewing room in the basement back.
his mom can finally have her sewing room in the basement back.
It’s actually a knitting room, for your information.
Hey!
I met Icarus once, had a wonderful conversation and respect his ability to write well about difficult subjects. Plus, I usually agree with his viewpoints.
One thing that came out of our discussion — that stuck, is that for some, PP and what is said and happens here is very, very real. I view PP as a conduit to share my opinions under the assumption that our lawmakers read this stuff.
I am fascinated by weblogs–They have their own life, but more importantly, what I truly find fascinating is that blogs can, on occasion, meaningfully affect real life political outcomes. Having said that, I also think that some folks take their writings far too seriously.
My suggestion is to create a set of House Rules so that everyone knows certain activities are banned. For example, baiting, cuss words, falsehoods, non-disclosure of professional political stature, might be prohibited.
This forum has the potential to positively affect the quality of life for many
Georgians, andI think it is important to keep it both credible, tranparent, and humorous.
Can you vote down your own comments? Just trying to save you guys the work.
Yes but you can only do it once.
How many points to get an iPod?
There should be prizes.
Nobody understands our humor, Kelly….
Actually…that’s not
trueaccurate…you can clear-out your cookies and log back on and vote again and repeat the cookie procedure again and again….and again…Wow! Maybe in 2012, we can institute this voting mechanism for the REAL presidential elections! After all, it is soooooooo accurate and fool proof!
Bill – I can’t believe you took the time to figure that out.
Well, Kell, it wasn’t quite “fool proof” enough.
Don’t worry rugby, I scour the comments for all of your posts and religiously hit the (-), even on things I completely agree with.
Don’t worry Doug, I scour the comments for all of your posts and religiously hit the (+), even on things I completely disagree with.
I should also note that I too am religiously scouring the comments for all of my posts and religiously hitting the (-), even on things I completely agree with.
Then we are in agreement.
Bill,
Again, as I stated, the post I made was not pointed at you. I was merely stating that anyone’s perception guides what they believe as true. Arguing truths is often futile until you can change someone’s perception.
For example, I understand that I will never change your perceptions on the need for allowing pseudonyms, so I will refrain from arguing with you over it any further.
Pseudonyms? I thought Demonbeck WAS your real name.
A rule that I was working on for a blog that I was considering was to allow anyone who verifies their real name in some way gets free reign to post what they want (within reason) but those with pseudonyms have to be exceedingly polite and may not attack the character of another.
So fake names are going to be permitted? What about porn names like “Buzz Brockway?” I’ll change my log-in to that if you need me to…
love it!!
I don’t put any faith in the writings of those who cannot put their real name on their thoughts.
So basically this will continue to be Peach Pundit, but now you are adding an “Around the Horn” type scoring system. Will we each get a “Mute” button?
Once Max Kellerman left, ATH declined in quality greatly.
I’d like to think I’m the equivalent of Bob Ryan, who is our Jay Mariotti and Woody Paige?
You can view the results of having “moderators” at Democratic Underground. It’s a total joke. From what I saw was dissenting voices being shut down by people given power over others.
I agree with this. I used to read that site just to get a feel of what the other side thought, but stopped once it became a place where control freaks were given control over average posters.
Mike now that’s funny!
Just making sure I wasn’t purged.
yet…
Just did my part to help out.
I guess this means Im still on the island???
I agree that there should be some sort of bloggers code of ethics. Don’t tell an intentional lie. Try to make your points without name calling. Is there ever a really good reason to use vulgarity while making a point? Keep discussions on topic.
I understand that people do not post under their own name for work or other reasons. I don’t hide who I am, but I don’t use my name as my screen name. I wanted to make a statement on my philosophy and my goals. I’d like to see the Dem party on the back of a milk carton in Georgia.
While I enjoy the site, I will continue to speak my mind until I am banned. Erick knows I have one issue with him, but there’s no need to rehash it now. It is his site, but I will hold him just as accountable to what he posts as I would anyone else. There are some people who’s posts I just try to ignore. (This website is still free: http://www.Idisagreewitheverythingyouareabouttosay.com)
If that gets me banned, so be it. I thought the idea was to have a free and open discussion on politics in Georgia. A little humor is OK now and again. As someone else posted recently, “Lighten up, Francis.”
Is the scoring system like golf where -3 is a good thing or would one rather be at +3? just curious.
I know bloggers who moderate their blogs’ comments, but I’m used to the free-for-all at the Nashville Post’s Post Politics blog/blog aggregator. The editors, not the blogger, remove outright libel, but that’s about it. It works for us. It is the number one political news outlet in Tennessee now.
One other thing: I use my real name in posting, but I don’t have a problem with anonymity/pseudonymity, and I support a number blogs written anonymously.
So……Have I been voted off of the island?
Absolutely not. We need you around to remind people why not to vote for Ox.
How many negative votes does it take to get your comment hidden?
Let’s find out!
-5
Good to know!
but it only takes 3 licks to get to the center of a tootsie pop.
I thought the world would never know.
If a giraffe is doing the licking, I could see that. Do you have a giraffe’s tongue, Kellie?
I’ve already had more of my comments hidden than any other poster I believe!
“Bill Simon” and I are charging hard in the outside lane trying to pass you.
Comments on this entry are closed.