home

Site Update on Comment Rules

Since 2006 when TalkLeft moved to Scoop, more than 9,200 readers have registered with the site, enabling them to comment. More than 1,000 comments a day are posted here.

Here's what I've learned: The greater the number of comments on a post, the greater the drop in the quality of the discourse. It's one reason we cut comments off at 200 per thread. (The other is it's a giant drain on our bandwidth, slowing the site to a crawl.)

I'm concerned about the poor quality of the comments, particularly by those who disagree with any particular post. They usually consist of little more than childish insults like "What about X" (who through the primaries was Hillary and now is Obama). Or they are off-topic. They degrade the level of discourse on the site.

So, here's the deal: [More...]

For my posts (Big Tent Democrat makes his own rules for comments on his threads): If all you have to contribute is "What about Obama?" or "What about X?" or "It's sexist" when I write about a candidate, for example, Sarah Palin, your comment adds nothing and will be deleted. Think about chastising a child for an act and having them respond, "But Georgie did it too." It's childish, besides the point and off-topic.

Respond to the topic of the post, not the topic you wish I wrote about. If you want to pick the topic, get your own blog or wait for an open thread.

Unlike Big Tent Democrat, I rarely if ever write about sexism. It's not my issue. If I write about an issue regarding Sarah Palin and you respond with a comment about sexism, particularly as it pertains to Hillary, you're off topic and your comment is a distraction. Your comment will be deleted.

Drive by insults are deleted. Name-calling and insults to other commenters, the candidates, media personalities, other bloggers, other blogs or the authors of this site are deleted. There's a vast difference between saying "I disagree with you (or X) because...." or "I think you are wrong here because...." and "You are ridiculous" or "He's an idiot." I don't care whether its Maureen Dowd, Obama, McCain or me. Such comments lower the level of discourse on the site. Words like "idiot" and "jerk" speak to an inability to communicate effectively. They reflect poorly on commenters which in turn reflects poorly on this site .

It takes a long time to delete comments one by one. It takes only a few seconds to erase a commenter's account and with it, all of their comments to date. People who sign up, comment and don't read the comment rules are likely to be vaporized in short order for violations. So will older readers who ignore this warning.

I have a day job. Blogging is a hobby and a very time consuming one. This blog exists as a place for me and the other site authors to express and share our opinions. Commenting is not a right, it is an entitlement we offer.

As during the primaries, I've reached my limit with those who disagree with my views and express it in an insulting or childish manner. Rather than spend valuable hours of my time deleting off-topic, insulting, childish comments or comments with false information, or comments by Republicans posing as feminists or former Hillary supporters,or those by real Hillary supporters or Obama haters who still can't get over her losing and think everything is about sexism or race, I'm going to be much more inclined to just delete the commenter's account and all of their comments to date.

I am convinced fewer commenters will improve the quality of discourse, which is what I want people to come here for.

Thoughtfully expressed disagreement is fine. Opposition for the sake of opposing, particularly when expressed repetitively or insultingly, is mindless chatter and not worth anyone's time.

I'm leaving this thread open to comments. If the comments of the past month are any indication, it's a sure-fire way to get the faux commenters to out themselves and for me to get them off the site.

The internet is a wide and vast place. If you don't like what I write, read the posts by Big Tent Democrat or TChris. If there are none, visit a site where you find yourself nodding along in agreement. It's much healthier for your mind and your spirit.

Again, the comment rules set out here apply site wide on posts by all authors. What I've added above applies to comments on my threads. But keep in mind, once banned, you can't comment anywhere on the site.

< Expectations on Gov. Palin's Speech Tonight | Sarah Palin: More Spiro Agnew Than Dick Cheney >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Maureen Dowd (5.00 / 2) (#1)
    by DCblogger on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:36:27 PM EST
    "He's an idiot." I don't care whether its Maureen Dowd, Obama, McCain or me.

    I take your point, but it is very difficult to resist the urge to call Maureen Dowd an idiot, and few of us can do so with the wit of Bob Somerby. Jus' sayin'

    I was thinking (none / 0) (#13)
    by Makarov on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:07:46 PM EST
    of posting exactly the same thing. Hilarious it's the first comment.

    Parent
    FWIW: I support your site rules and vigilance. (none / 0) (#45)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:57:32 PM EST
    Well said, TL! (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by scribe on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:44:20 PM EST
    I've liked coming here for well over three years now, and enjoy being able to share my opinions, professional-related and otherwise, on the topics.

    It's been quite distressing to me to see some of the stuff which has plagued the comment threads these last couple months.  I am often reminded of an insight I received some time ago:

    There's a world of difference between being thought intelligent because you learned and incorporated well the lessons/propaganda you were spoon-fed and are able to rehearse it on cue, and being able to think independently and communicate that thought effectively.

    My dog (and most other trained animals) can do the former.  Only real people can do the latter.  Sadly, our educational system is designed - quite intentionally - to produce the former and eliminate the latter.  This site stands in opposition to that, and it's distressing when people don't understand or, worse, do, and go about tearing it down.

    Thanks again, TL!

    it is not an open thread (5.00 / 1) (#6)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:45:53 PM EST
    it is about the comment policy

    In response to a deleted comment (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:48:22 PM EST
    I will not allow TL to serve as an organizing ground for those who oppose the Democratic ticket. So you will have to do your own researching of e-mail addresses and other sites to congregate at.

    May I make a comment about the updated rules? (5.00 / 5) (#10)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:01:50 PM EST
    Jeralyn:

    I respect your site, your right to run this blog anyway you want, and respect the fact that you spend a lot of your time trying to keep a civil and thoughtful place in the wilderness of the internet. In fact it was the main reason I was drawn so strongly to this place, and returned after an exile.

    But I have to tell you, I do not view myself in any of the categories you listed above. I am not a "republican troll," I am not a Clinton supporter who can't "get over it" (I am over it), and 99% of the time am above childish and "what about x" comments. But lately I just find myself disagreeing with some of your analysis, and only try to post if I believe it adds something.

    But I have to say I am somehow deeply offended by this thread. I can't even tell you exactly why yet, I'll think about it for a while.

    I just feel maybe a subtle line has been crossed and honest and thoughtful people are now being thrown out along with the rest. And all may remain is a chorus of "yes" and "amen" which may be soothing right now, but I would guess may ring hollow after a little while.

    I stated twice that disagreement is fine (none / 0) (#12)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:07:11 PM EST
    and it is welcome here. It's how it's expressed and whether it is germane to the topic.

    If you read it again, you will see I'm referring only to some commenters, and if your comments aren't indicative of those I've used as illustrations, it's not directed to you.

    Parent

    I read it very carefully (5.00 / 4) (#14)
    by Marvin42 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:10:30 PM EST
    And the reason I decided to comment (after thinking for a while) is that I do believe it is directed at me. It is directed at me because if I disagree I should shut up, or risk crossing an amorphous line that I do not want to cross. Not because I am worried about the consequence, rather because I am really trying to respect your wishes at your blog, your house as it were.

    I guess another way of saying it is that I feel like a guest that must constantly be on guard not to offend the host, and as I am sure you can understand this self policing is not a healthy path for any discussion. And I don't believe that is what you really want, though I may be wrong.

    Parent

    i changed a couple of words in the (none / 0) (#16)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:17:18 PM EST
    disagreeement paragraph, does that help?

    It's not a lot of rules. It's be on topic, don't constantly repeat the same point and don't be insulting.

    Parent

    This is the best summation thus far. (none / 0) (#56)
    by Iphie on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:28:37 PM EST
    Maybe that last sentence should be the rules and the rest can follow as clarification? I think that I do know what it is that is objectionable or offensive -- but without specific examples (and I can understand why you wouldn't want to provide them) a lot of the other words get in the way. And I also understand why you've written as extensively as you have on the topic, but sometimes the explanation muddles the main point, which may be why some people continue to be unsure.


    As with others, I am grateful for the space you provide here and the opportunity to be a part of it; I also want to make sure that I do not offend my host.

    Parent

    Yes, I might steal that (none / 0) (#61)
    by lambert on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:38:28 PM EST
    'be on topic, don't constantly repeat the same point and don't be insulting. "

    Works for me.  

    Parent

    Thank you for hosting this blog, Jeralyn. (5.00 / 2) (#11)
    by inclusiveheart on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:05:39 PM EST
    You have invited people into your "house" and I think it is completely fair for you to rules about how we behave.  I hope I don't annoy you too often.  I do try not to.

    Thank you again especially because it is clear that your role here isn't always easy or probably even fun at times.

    Yeppers (5.00 / 1) (#58)
    by lambert on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:34:13 PM EST
    Of all the tasks I have in my life, comment moderation is one of the least pleasurable.

    Parent
    My concern for the past 30 years (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by JSN on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:27:01 PM EST
    has been the overuse of incarceration but I did not have time to do anything about it until I retired.

    I agree the caliber of this blog has declined but mostly on the political side. The quality on the criminal justice side seems to be holding up. Because it is an election year the pickings on the CJ side have been thin. Is it technically possible to split the blog into political and CJ segments? If not what is your recommendation should we wait  until the election is over or try some other blog? I read a number of other law blogs and I think many are of high quality but none of them have your mix.

    Thank your all of your hard work. I hope you will consider my comments to be constructive.

    It happens every major election cycle (5.00 / 1) (#26)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:39:09 PM EST
    It was the same in 2004 and 2006. Given the end of 8 years of Bush this year, it's critically important who gets in from a criminal justice standpoint. Even though there are few crime issues in the election, it's still vitally important.

    After November, less than 2 months to go, there will be an equal balance again until the 2010 elections -- and probably more crime/civil liberties coverage than political coverage, if for no other reason than we have two crime writers and one political writer. I'm not going to do separate blogs since it will settle down. If you use an rss feeder, you will easily see the title of the last ten or so posts at once and can click on only those that interest you.

    Parent

    And remember, people (5.00 / 2) (#25)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:38:52 PM EST
    This site isn't free to run for Jeralyn.  If you're sucking up bandwidth and want to suck up more, then make a little financial contribution.  I've been coming here since almost the beginning, had my disagreements and a few deletions, but the site is a real blessing in so many ways, much of them having nothing to do with electoral politics.

    Nickels and dimes help pay for the time.

    P.S.) Just sent an overdue contribution, J.  Keep up the good work.  Always appreciated.

    Where do you contribute (5.00 / 1) (#28)
    by sher on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:44:00 PM EST
    if you do not want to use Paypal?

    Parent
    You could do it on Amazon, too (none / 0) (#30)
    by Dadler on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:49:37 PM EST
    But I only see a PayPal link now.  Jeralyn, what say you?

    Parent
    you can donate through (none / 0) (#31)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:10:05 PM EST

    If you'd like to donate anonymously, or other than through Payapal, here's the Amazon link.

    Parent

    thank you (n/t) (3.00 / 2) (#40)
    by sher on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:31:23 PM EST
    Thank you Dadler! (5.00 / 0) (#33)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:12:52 PM EST
    It's been months since I've put out a donation request, particularly since I didn't have airfare or travel expenses for the convention in Denver....but the time invested in this site (and the expenses I pay) are substantial, and all donations are appreciated.

    Parent
    Hear Hear (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by JasonS on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:46:06 PM EST
    As the managing editor on a conservative leaning site, we have struggled with  exactly the same problems you describe here.  Our comments policy looks pretty much the same as yours now.  This is one area where reasonable people on left and right can agree.

    Thanks Jeralyn (5.00 / 0) (#34)
    by AF on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:15:09 PM EST
    I appreciate all the work you do in policing the comments.  It is a service to those of us commenters who are looking for real conversation.  

    I also appreciate your consistency and transparency in applying your comment policy.  Whether or not we agree with it (and I basically do), the rule of law prevails.

    Good for you Jeralyn (5.00 / 0) (#35)
    by john horse on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:19:17 PM EST
    Blogs aren't like talk radio.  They require a little more effort.  One of the advantages of having to write out your thoughts is that it is a more deliberative process than when you verbally argue with someone.  That is why the level of discourse should be higher.  

    Some blogs ARE like talk radio. . . (none / 0) (#63)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 09:01:43 PM EST
    in fact, I think there's a direct correspondence between some of the left blogs and the role that talk radio plays in the political discourse of the right.  That is, they simply throw anything and everything out there and see what sticks.

    My personal dilemma is that I recognize that the left probably needs this kind of response to the right -- at the very least the right needs to be convinced that anything they do will be met in kind in order to induce some kind of truce -- a policy of mutually assured personal destruction.

    But I myself am not interested in participating in it, and I don't want to be made to feel that the low discourse that transpires at some places reflects on me.  While I think some of Jeralyn's decisions are further than I myself might go (and also feel sometimes she's waited too long to put the kibosh on certain things) I appreciate TL as an oasis of sanity in left political discussion.

    Parent

    I can't grasp that oasis of sanity (none / 0) (#65)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 09:08:44 PM EST
    concept.  Seemed pretty insane here since the Palin announcement on Friday [speaking for me].  

    Parent
    I guess I wasn't around Friday. . . (none / 0) (#67)
    by LarryInNYC on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 09:13:49 PM EST
    but I think Jeralyn is recognizing that things have gotten out of hand.  In fact, my personal view (of no relevance to management, of course) is that things have been pretty bad since around the time Clinton conceded.

    But TL has the concept of being an oasis and clearly Jeralyn is trying to get back there.

    Parent

    Avoiding Kossification (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by WakeLtd on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:19:27 PM EST
    Jeralyn is obviously, to me anyway,taking the long view here and it is sound. TalkLeft is an oasis of decency in a blogosphere that has frankly lost its bearings. You look at what happened over at Daily Kos this weekend...I suppose many of them had good intentions. I am being generous here. Yet in all their support for the Democratic candidate, he finally had to step forward and to paraphrase what he said, it was,  "Please just shut up. Just stop. You are killing me." This site is known for a different level of discourse. Boring perhaps to some, I suppose. But civil and decent, while still being relevant and interesting.

    I am banned from commenting (5.00 / 1) (#37)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:23:29 PM EST
    but could I make one last comment regarding confusion about the comment policy and commenter bans?

    Yes (5.00 / 1) (#59)
    by Dr Molly on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:34:20 PM EST
    But I'll be reading and following along here, so keep up the good work, and see you on the other side.

    Parent
    A lot of us miss you, too (5.00 / 1) (#70)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:55:20 PM EST
    and your name has come up in discussions.  Of course, it's among the most memorable monikers here.:-)

    Parent
    Molly you can email me (none / 0) (#39)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:27:05 PM EST
    with your question

    Parent
    Doc (none / 0) (#71)
    by Capt Howdy on Thu Sep 04, 2008 at 05:00:22 PM EST
    contact me at

    red_vlx@hotmail.com

    there is an alternative newgroup made up of all the people who have been driven out of here.
    you would fit right in.


    Parent

    Banned from commenting? (none / 0) (#72)
    by ChuckieTomato on Mon Sep 08, 2008 at 05:09:23 PM EST
    When did this happen?

    Parent
    Thanks for all your hard work Jeralyn (5.00 / 0) (#38)
    by Democratic Cat on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:24:15 PM EST
    Will throw some scratch your way too -- I don't always agree with you, but you are one of the most decent bloggers out there, and I appreciate your efforts.

    Obviously (5.00 / 0) (#47)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:59:52 PM EST
    I fully support these rules. As a poster who was against the common wisdom of TL for many months and had more than a few comments deleted, I was always respectful of the rules. The rules don't only apply when I want them to. As some know I post at RedState as well. However I won't do that during the election season. The passions are too high and I know that I would simply get banned for comments against the spirit of that blog. This is a crucial election, the most important in my lifetime I feel. Whereas in the past I have been ambivalent towards the Democratic candidate, this year it wouldn't have matter who the Democrats selected. Whether it was Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Wes Clark, Bill Richardson, John Kerry, Al Gore, or Joe Biden, I knew I would be a vocal supporter. There is too much at stake. And while they all have their flaws, their flaws pale comparison to McCain, a man who has sold his integrity for a last chance to be President.

    Darn it (none / 0) (#48)
    by flyerhawk on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:00:41 PM EST
    The HTML formatted pull is auto-selected and messing up my formatting. Sorry about the congestion.

    Parent
    Loving these newest rules! Woot TL! (3.50 / 2) (#32)
    by Thanin on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:12:29 PM EST


    Hilarious (2.00 / 0) (#20)
    by Exeter on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:25:48 PM EST
    We can't even disagree on disagreeing without getting deleted?  Wow.

    If you'd like your account deleted (none / 0) (#5)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:45:03 PM EST
    send me an e-mail, don't leave it in comments here.

    Same question. I got summoned for jury (none / 0) (#7)
    by Teresa on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:46:53 PM EST
    duty today in criminal court and I'm dying to ask questions of our lawyers here.

    we'll have an open thread up shortly (5.00 / 1) (#9)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:48:47 PM EST
    i think we can all agree (none / 0) (#18)
    by isaac on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:21:41 PM EST
    that maureen dowd is an idiot

    because..

    oh, she attributed rovian behavior by mccain not to recently hired rove thugs but - yep - hillary clinton.

    or, because, even when criticizing the desperately cynical palin pick, she manages to blame ferraro for sexism and minimize the very real sexism clinton faced during the campaign.

    or, we could just call her a twit instead

    I was clear I was referring (none / 0) (#19)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:23:22 PM EST
    to the one sentence drive by comments that change the topic from whom I am writing about to someone else.

    I left the Ritter stuff up even though to me  it was off topic because I could see how readers might find it relevant.

    What I'm referring to is when I write an entire post about someone in a particular context and rather than addressing it, someone leaves a one liner about sexism or "Neither does X" and proceeds to change the topic to X.

    There are plenty of threads on everyone here, including whoever the X of the day is, and there are multiple open threads.

    I want my threads to be a discussion of the topic I chose to write about.

    Deleting comments vs. using Scoop's mojo (none / 0) (#24)
    by jerry on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:33:50 PM EST
    Jeralyn,

    I can't imagine the amount of time it takes to police comments.  But I also worry about the effects of deleting comments made in good faith and for whatever reason, interpreted poorly.

    Is there some way you can use Scoop's "mojo" and comment rankings to allow your users to rank the posts and then only display posts above a certain threshold? ?  That would allow people to display interesting posts, protect your time, and reduce bandwidth.

    I always prefer solutions that enlist users and the community rather than just the wholesale deletion of comments.  (I've had way too many comments deleted for no justifiable reason whatsoever (at other sites -- I almost always understand why you deleted my comments.))

    /offtopic, I am loving Chrome, but Chrome is not loving filling in the text boxes here.  Silly Chrome.

    The difference (none / 0) (#42)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:40:30 PM EST
    is Daily Kos and My DD are one sided communities, all progressives. I try to allow all points of view here. If I let the users control rankings to the extent of deciding what appears on the site it would end up with those on one side low-ranking users on the other side. It already happens with people abusing the "1" ratings. So no one is allowed to hide comments.

    I'm far from enamored of Scoop. But to have the site rebuilt on another platform is a $15,000 expense, minimum (I've priced it) and I can't do that.

    Parent

    Now I'm confused. Is this a change (none / 0) (#44)
    by Cream City on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:50:30 PM EST
    to all points of view from the previous update that it is only for those voting for Obama?  It has been interesting to hear from conservatives, undecideds, etc.

    Parent
    no, it's not a change (5.00 / 0) (#46)
    by Jeralyn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:58:07 PM EST
    those supporting McCain/Palin or a third party candidate -- or opposing the Democratic ticket -- are limited to four posts a day expressing that support or opposition.

    Their viewpoint will be in the minority but it will be heard.

    And there's no limit on their comments that does not express such support or opposition. For example, there's no limit on disagreeing with policies or stratgies.

    It's the "I'm voting for McCain" or "I'll never vote  for Obama" that's limited to four a day.

    Parent

    Abusing the "1" ratings... (none / 0) (#64)
    by jerry on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 09:07:49 PM EST
    It already happens with people abusing the "1" ratings. So no one is allowed to hide comments.

    And I generally think that's a really good/wise decision on your part.  Well, I still don't envy you your choice of pruning comments.  I'd sooner eat razor blades.

    Are you near a local community college, state college, or even a high school?  You might be surprised what interns can do for a relatively low cost and a chance to put "Redesigned, reimplemented TalkLeft, a top liberal law blog.  Moved it from Scoop to..., increased scalability and reduced hosting costs by $X" onto their resumes.

    You might be able to create a group of unpaid TL commenters who can discuss this on a forum, discuss the requirements and goals and various tasks, and then act to see if they can do that for you, or oversee an intern's work.  Why?  Cuz we love TL?

    Parent

    it relates specifically to issues in the threads is welcome. I won't say what Indie candidate I'm thinking of supporting if I vote that way.  I nearly always vote democratic (sometimes for lack of a choice and sometimes because they are the best choice for me).  But, I hold out signing up (though I admit I did in 2004 to unsuccessfully defeat Bush in our closed primary here in Oregon) because I am working for what I feel is a more representative democracy away from the current 2 party system and back closer to the coalition model we had long ago. I also volunteered 2 to 6 hours daily for Hillary and contributed to her campaign. Like many here, I perceive the notions of the far right as something to shield your children from.  

    You are striving for something more akin to Firing Line than the McCaughlin Group.  And, while I loved Bill's logic, I could rarely agree with his conclusions, but he always had respectful discourse and debate which made us all more intelligent,capable,and empowered beings.

    To have the privilege and the benefits of blogging on TL, I commit to being more mindful to comment with respect and stay on topic (sooo hard sometimes!).  I can't say I'll vote for Obama, (there's some District 13 issues that worry me deeply).  But, if it becomes a close race, I will once again support a democratic candidate that is closer to my values and issues than a republican candidate that is usually not.  In large part, being willing to set my concerns aside in the hopes of averting a continued republican disaster will be because of the threads and comments I have found here on TL.

    So,thank you, Jeralyn, for defining the parameters and returning TL to a site for critical thinking rather than for just criticizing.

    As good as the posts and comments often (none / 0) (#41)
    by pluege on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 07:33:41 PM EST
    are on this blog, I can't believe the amount of time and effort spent here on the comment rules. (I've been here regularly since early February when the progressive blogosphere self-destructed and I deleted dkos, TPM, Open Left, and Yglesias)

    I know cursing, rudiness or excessive snideness, or off-topicness aren't allowed, which is all fine   by me (not that anyone should care what's fine with me). Other than that, I post what I want and if it gets deleted because I haven't memorized all the rules, so be it - life is short.

    I think Jeralyn, BTD, and TChris should delete whatever comments they feel like deleting. If the deleting is over the top, people won't comment - simple.
     

    Good Guidelines for Comments (none / 0) (#49)
    by santarita on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:02:21 PM EST
    I am in favor of trying to keep bandwidth open for intelligent discussion as opposed to simple cheering or jeering.  Although I hope the occasional snark is permitted.  

    And could there be some rule against comments that stereotype other  commenters here as PUMAs or supporters of John McCain?

    As a fairly new participant..... (none / 0) (#53)
    by NYShooter on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:23:32 PM EST
    ....I can't tell you how aqppreciative, and timely, this update/claification is. As a refugee from Kos, HuffPo, Salon, etc, I started to believe that there were NO sites where simple manners, respect, and open minds were welcome. After the last couple of weeks, I tuned in here, saw the food fights, and clicked off in sadness more than frustration.
    So I'll just wrap it up....Thank you Jeralyn, from the bottom of my heart.

    (does it mean "great minds think alike" that on the night you made this anouncement, I gave this site one more shot before deleting it from my "favorites" folder?.....lol)

    Well done (none / 0) (#55)
    by s5 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:28:14 PM EST
    I've managed a few online communities over the years, and it's no different than gardening. Sometimes you have to pull out the weeds or even pull out an entire crop if you're not getting the results you're happy with.

    Heh (none / 0) (#62)
    by lambert on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:41:09 PM EST
    Indeedy.

    Of course, mildew can take down an entire garden, so that needs to be avoided too.

    Parent

    Diminishment of discourse level (none / 0) (#57)
    by Kitt on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:31:51 PM EST
    I am convinced fewer commenters will improve the quality of discourse, which is what I want people to come here for.

    I've been coming here, reading, and commenting for a few years.  The level of discourse has diminished greatly.  I don't have the time or patience to sift thru the multitudes of comments that go back & forth.  It's probably THE reason I've all but stopped commenting.

    Comments (none / 0) (#68)
    by Gmama on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 09:34:50 PM EST
    This is my first comment.  Thank you for both the rules and the site.  I came here daily during the primaries because I was an Obama supporter and I wanted as fair and even a view of the other side as I could get.  This was the best I found.  I never changed my candidate of preference but I changed my mind about alot of the various issues being discussed.  Please keep deleting the hysteria.  I know I am not alone in just shuting off when I read it.

    Email is your friend (none / 0) (#69)
    by CoralGables on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:09:59 PM EST
    If you find one of your comments deleted, I believe you will find Jeralyn to be quite friendly and straight forward if you drop her an email with your question as to why.

    As someone that has pushed the envelope at times, I have found her to be very straight forward as to where the comment was in violation of the house rules.

    Arguing by way of the comment box isn't the route to go. Send her a friendly email and you will probably have an answer in short order if she isn't off blogging a convention.