To “The Last Democrat In Georgia” And The Rest Of The Peach Pundit Community

We tend to have a live and let live attitude towards the comments and the commenters in the community that has grown and fostered here.  While there was never a grand plan for Peach Pundit, it has evolved into the kind of place where people from different backgrounds and ideologies can civilly discuss issues of the day with those they wouldn’t normally have political conversations with.

As this community has matured, it has also become mostly self-policing.  MOST member of our community obey a minimum level of civility and display some general understanding of what we are trying to do here, and treat others with respect and strive to foster a higher level of discussion in a meaningful way.

Others, unfortunately, have found this as a place for constant griping, ax grinding, or to generally display a constant dissatisfaction with politics and/or their life.

While some walk a fine line with these concepts, commenter “The Last Democrat In Georgia” seems to take this to a new level.  Despite repeated warnings, the negativity continues, there is entirely too much combativeness, and frankly – there is too much volume in your comments without bringing anything constructive to the table.  Please rest assured that this is not my sole opinion, but that received from many of our front page contributors and others who have contacted me as well.

Please note that a front page warning to a particular member of our community is rare.  I’m not sure one has occurred in the 2+ years that I’ve been editor.  So congrats, you’re unique.  This means that if you choose to continue posting here, it would be to your advantage to pay close attention to the instructions below:

For LDIG only:

1) If you choose to continue to comment here, your comments will be limited to 2 sentences or 50 words, whichever is shorter.  We will delete anything longer.

2) If you don’t have anything positive to say, then you won’t say anything at all.  You may want to reread your own comments a few times before you post to avoid violating this one.

3) Any griping about these rules will be done in your last comment here.  This property is a private domain and as such you do not have rights that trump those of us who strive to foster a community of those who wish to exchange ideas without the burden of those who cannot stop themselves from detracting from the conversation and the user experience.

4) These rules are in effect until we tell you they are not.  There will not be a negotiation about ending this.  When we think you’re ready, we’ll tell you.  Until then, it’s best you don’t bring it up.

As for everyone else:

There are a few others of you who are either overly combative in the vast majority of your comments or believe that no plans/policies will ever work because we’re all doomed and nothing is salvageable.  If that’s your worldview then so be it.  We’re not going to try to change your mind, but in exchange, we’re going to ask that you find another place to peddle your doom and gloom.

The rest of us here are going to continue to strive to discuss news of the day and ideas to move our State and Country forward.  If you can’t be part of that, then we wish you luck in  your future endeavors elsewhere.


  1. AMB says:

    Hemmorhoids acting up? Prilosec prescription ran out?

    You get this upset about a poster and give the yahoo politicians in this state a big pass?

    You sir and this “forum” are the joke. Enjoy your increasing irrelevance as the rest of this state moves into its future.

      • Trey A. says:

        You could always make us all use our real names… that tends to ratchet up the constructiveness/civility with alacrity.

        I imagine you and the front pagers have had that discussion from time to time. I’d be interested in your pros and cons.

        • IndyInjun says:

          Nope, I would explain why but would need special dispensation from the 50 word limit. Of the above, I suspect that one will shoot Peachpundit in the foot, but its his site.

          • analogkid says:

            Assuming I’m not limited to two sentences, I’ll give my reasoning for opposing that idea. First, as grift points out, I’m not even sure it’s possible to require commenters to use their own names without requiring them to submit a copy of their driver’s license. However, even if there was a less cumbersome way to do it, is it a good idea? I suspect many of the people that post on this site are not hiding their identities by choice. It is likely because their employer frowns upon political speech. I would assume that goes double for the people who are insiders, and those are the people that make this site entertaining/ not a ghost town. (No disrespect to the front page posters. Y’all do nice work.)

            Besides, anyone who reads PP regularly should be able to quickly discern which commenters are trolls or sock puppets.

          • Stefan says:

            @Indyinjun, the 50 word limit is not an overall rule, just an LDIG specific limitation. I take the comments here very seriously and I respect the commentariat, however, after writing a relatively long and well researched post only to be told that my opinions are a joke and I should shutup, I trend to agree some limitations are warranted.

            • IndyInjun says:

              I dunno why, but when I started posting on blogs, I took on a very calm, reasoned demeanor on the one most actively frequented. To the commentariat, I was the one poster that all sides seemed to admire.

              However, when I came to PP, I decided to be a lot edgier and much more blunt. I sort of miss Erick – he could take it as well as he dished it out.

              This blog has a variety of viewpoints and a lot of good debate. Thanks to all for that.

        • Charlie says:

          The logistics of verification who is ‘real’ and who isn’t have been covered.

          From a concept standpoint, though, we have made a conscious decision to allow people to remain anonymous here in the comments section so long as they’re playing fair.

          I wrote here for about 3 years under a pseudonym. While I’m in a position where I can accept the blowback for my opinions many others are not. So we’re generally going to allow the anonymous to remain so, and we do rely on the rest of the commenting community to cry foul when people are trolling so that those of us who moderate don’t have to use the “heavy hand”.

          • Trey A. says:

            Thanks for the answer, Charlie. As you know, I’m a reformed pseudonymer, too. As you noted, the logistics aren’t all that difficult. As a personal preference, I like real names, but PP’s comment threads are relatively tame/sane. Plus, PP doesn’t claim to be doing original reporting. It’s a blog–an informed one with great content, but still a blog. Mandatory real names in the blogosphere are pretty rare.

            It boggles my mind that the AJC and a certain newspaper from our hometown allow anonymous comments beneath their news stories. That’s a whole different can of worms. And their commenters make “Last Democrat in Georgia” look like a girl scout.

  2. “…a place for constant griping, ax grinding, or to generally display a constant dissatisfaction with politics and/or their life.”

    You’re talking about me in the subtext, aren’t you?

  3. Greg S says:

    Thanks for calling out someone who doesn’t know how to converse without negativitiy. I don’t know whats happened to civil discourse in America. Why can’t people simply debate ideas and not personalities? Why must I lose for you to win? Don’t let this blog become a mini version of the US Congress where sound bites and cute “put downs” trump governing the nation.

    Kept this bastion pure for debating competing idea.

  4. D_in_ATL says:

    Glad to see that you have taken this seriously. I find this site to be very informative about the state of Georgia politics. When the discussion trends toward issues of a national level I think ‘not so much’ mainly because of the behaviors you cited. Keep up the good work and thanks for being vigilant.

  5. Dave Bearse says:

    Ouch. Rules 1 and 2 are a bit draconian, but what’s to be done when repeated prompts weren’t seeming to have lasting effects?

    I hope Rules 1 and 2 don’t last long in their current form, i.e. longer comments being allowed soon. They limit comments to little more than “I agree”, and I’ll miss LDiG’s comments on railroads.

  6. chamblee54 says:

    Peach Pundit says 50 word comment maximum.
    Chamblee54 thinks 44 words is plenty.
    RedState banned Chamblee54
    Gave Chamblee54 the 601 Database redigestation error bug
    The computer had to go to the shop.
    To ban a commenter is blogowner privilege.
    Passing hate code is a rotten practice.

  7. GAPolitico says:

    It is very easy to get around all of the “blocks,” Blog4Democracy spent some time trying to block me when I called them out on some stuff.

    The other easy thing to do would to be make everyone verify themselves using Facebook. Most people have it now. :)

  8. Scott65 says:

    Now…if you can channel that over to the Saporta Report…he’s just as bad there. Gotta love private property…and regulation…

  9. Rick Day says:

    Can one point out potentially negative things about a person’s words or actions in a positive way?

    Will I be persecuted for my giving you all the business over how you use your religion to make an illusion of being on a high road?

    I rarely type over 50 words here anyway. Sometimes the stupid just sucks the brain out of me.

    And Rise Up!™ but never ever shut up!

    • seenbetrdayz says:

      In theory, adding “with all due respect” at the end of any insult or demeaning statement renders any perceived negativity null and void.


      I get tired of listening to your bull crap Rick . . . with all due respect.

  10. Charlie says:

    Couple of things:

    1) We have received a couple of emails from The Last Democrat in Georgia with sincere apologies. They are accepted. It is also our hope that the commenter can remain a part of our community with the standards for direct exchange as we outlined above.

    2) The rules above are/were intended for LDIG only, with the exception of noting that those who are only here to spout constant negativity and pronounce the end is near need to move on. Adjust your tone/outlook or we’ll facilitate that movement.

    • Harry says:

      Hey Pollyanna,

      Take off the rose colored glasses. We ARE in a bad situation in this country and society. Do you realize there are tens of millions of unemployed with absolutely zero hope of any future? Do you realize tens of millions of middle class who are being raped of their savings without any benefit. Do you realize the thieves and criminals in NY and DC are steering the country into third world conditions? Do you realize government unions and UAW are killing any possibility of competitiveness and equity? Do you realize that we are not even given the opportunity to exploit realistic energy solutions within our own borders, and must instead send billions of extortion payments to despots in the Middle East? Wake up and get real!!

      • seenbetrdayz says:

        Truth to that, Harry.

        It’s so bad that when you mention a 16 trillion dollar debt that will never be repaid (I mean, come on, does anyone really think so?), it isn’t even ‘doomsday’ talk anymore, because no one seems to give a darn.

        • IndyInjun says:

          There is absolutely no problem paying off the debt. The Fed’s master PC/tablet/notebook is equipped with Excel, which can accommodate an octillion dollars with just a few more punches of the Zero button. The Fed can buy the entire universe with its money-creation machine.

          They show every indication of doing just that.

    • Lea Thrace says:

      I appreciate that the fp posters care enough about the tenor of conversation to enforce some rules of decorum. Harry’s post above along with LDIG’s recent posts, is exactly why my visits to this site have decreased in the past few months. Constructive conversation had started to lessen.

      I like this site because its not redstate or daily kos. It’s a sane place for people to discuss topics intelligently (while still having fun). Not to shout in an echo chamber or condemn those whose views differ from yours.

      I sincerely hope this (your) post goes a long way towards helping foster that attitude.

  11. Andre says:

    Did this package of rules even go through the process? Were they referred to the Committee on Rules? I’ve got a few amendments I’d like to offer, before these rules go to the full floor for a vote.

        • Andre says:

          I move Peach Pundit do now resolve itself into a Committee of the Whole House to consider these proposed rules changes; that Ed serve as chairman of said Committee; that said Committee issue a recommendation of “do pass,” “do not pass,” or “no recommendation;” and upon conclusion of its business, said Committee shall be dissolved by a majority vote of all Pundistas present.

    • John Vestal says:

      Andre, there’ll be a bill coming up for an 11th-hour debate in a couple of weeks regarding PeachPundit trolling licenses. We’ll hold a quick, quiet meeting tacking your amendments on then we’ll tell the full PP community we didn’t really make any changes (as far as they know).


  12. notsplost says:

    I’m not sure what TLDIG did to provoke your wrath. I don’t claim to have read all his/her comments but from what I’ve read, they seem to be on target, even if delivered with a sardonic and biting tone.

    Perhaps that explains the reaction. Good luck building your echo chamber.

  13. saltycracker says:

    Personal attacks are always a bad move while some positions get a fast negative reaction that when reread could be MODIFIED or even deleted ……. If those were options…..

    • IndyInjun says:

      Yes, things can be read more than one way and sometimes the commenter does not see the others before posting.

    • Lea Thrace says:

      Are you proposing that maybe a MODIFY option be added to the commenting system?

      That is a Novel idea!


      • saltycracker says:

        Well, at the bare minimum, spellcheck, nothing like strongly disagreeing and noticing spelin’ misteaks or iPhone “corrections with the wrong word”.

  14. Napoleon says:

    Wait, so all I need to do to get myself banned is be negative and insulting and type in all caps?


    Can I be banned now?

  15. elfiii says:

    The discourse here is sedate (even at its’ worst) compared to the “Family Friendly, G Rated” board I am an Admin on. Whatever happened to “lively, spirited, passionate debate”? I haven’t seen anybody administering a virtual “caning” of anybody on the floor of Peach Pundit or did I miss something?

    My advice (worth solely the value of the pixels required to turn electrons into graphic representations of letters and words) is don’t clamp down too harshly. Under the heading of “Nobody is completely worthless. They can always serve as a bad example”, every message board needs a “misfit toy” or two if only to remind the other toys they aren’t quite so misfit after all. :)

  16. seenbetrdayz says:

    Not enough unicorns and rainbows.

    How can you have honest political debate without unicorns and rainbows?

Comments are closed.