All things in moderation…
Well, wouldn’t you know it. On the very day I decide to put down some candid thoughts on the business of moderation, a ruck kicks off between two of Slugger’s bloggers, comments are removed and a row ensues about free speech on Slugger. Demonstrating that the Internet is ultimately a free space, Ignited has *some* of the original copy. He reports feeling “quite perturbed at the censorship of Turgon’s comments as it undermines what I believe was the strength of Slugger: that of freedom to contribute, and debate with fellow commentators”. Chekov feels a line has been crossed: http://url.ie/15bv.I don’t intend to comment directly on the events of the other night, except to say that on Slugger we try not to duck difficult issues. In this case we made an approach to interview Belfast City councillor and former MLA Billy Hutchinson, and it clearly caused some upset. That’s not unusual for Slugger. We have a very mixed audience and not everything we chose to cover is comfortable for all of our commenters.
I would make three remarks on the general principles involved.
One, moderation is something that by and large has fallen to two or three experienced bloggers. Often it’s a fairly easy call, but at other times, the surgeon’s knife is called for. Understanding how to moderate with a light touch is a skill to be acquired and not something that comes as easily as it may seem.
Two, the purpose of light touch moderation is primarily to improve the general level of debate. In general that is how we go on. Personally I am much more likely to clip abuse hurled at some third party than any given criticism of me. But the rule should be that so long as it is civil it should stand.
Three, we are serious about finding new ways of developing the comment zone to encourage higher level discourse here, but strong and adept moderation will likely always form the backbone of good online engagement. As I have said before we need greater bluntness in our exchanges combined with greater civility.
I hope we will be able to arrange for and publish the interview with Billy Hutchinson within the next week or so.
In the meantime we’re going to do some in-house work on this to develop more of a common code and try to make sure there are more than just the core team of moderators. In the meantime, let the conversation continue…
Damn…i hate it when i miss a good handbags session
Watched pot and all that…
Wasn’t it Kissinger who said that ‘academic fights are more brutal than our fights in the real world because the stakes are so low’?
I think this can also be applied to the internet.
Another apposite statement might be: ‘bald men fighting over a comb’.
Well I’m going to say something here. Firstly when I contacted Billy hutchinson it was to interview him surrounding his time in long kesh, his experience there and loyalism generally as well as the pup. Nothing like that was to come into it. That stuff about hurting and killing people would be for a much more experienced blogger than me and I didn’t want to touch it.
That was the reason for removing some of those comments.
Secondly, not everything is there. ?? called me terrorist loving scum for interviewing him, Mick Fealty said he was banned for it, but he was still commenting last night. His comment:
I’m just off the phone to mick… ………..
oh grow up and dry your eyes and suck round some more terrorist scumbags
Turgons comments were edited because they were outside my remit, all we have is his e mails to show what he wanted to say to me:
L:ets look at the attitude:
Kathleen,
I questioned the appropriatness of interviewing an individual who has no political strategy, no political support and no popularity. His only “claim” to fame is the noteority of being a terrorist murderer. I could probably with a few phone calls get you an interview with Torrens Knight the evil killer at Greysteel since I know a man who went to argue with him about the utter immorality of his actions. I would not, however, as Knight (like Hutchinson) has no mandate other than his own evil actions. One might as well do a political interview with the man who murdered those young women in Ipswich.
Interviewing Billy Hutchinson is different in that the PUP are a political party, Turgon doesn’t seem to get that:
Do not even pretend that you giving a mandate less criminal the opportunity to say his piece was going to get justice for the McCords.
The PUP are not mandateless, and if the McCord family didn’t want the questions posed or objected why write the questions out.
Like I said before this was above my pay grade as someone famously said. I merely wanted the experiences of the kesh and to look at loyalism generally as Billy had said previously it was a legitimate cause. That was my remit. That stuff of taking the life of loved ones is not for a beginner like me, I simply wasn’t going to touch it.
Ho hummmmm
Its not right to interview terrorists but it becomes ok if they are elected? [text removed - mods]
Well at one point Billy was elected so doesn’t that make him a former politician?
Kathleen,
Seems the whole thread has now gone? Why?
Also, whatever about things being beyond your remit, it is imcomprehensible to me that Turgon’s comments were actually removed. I have read them on Ignited. There was no man playing, insults or anything else.
I myself have said some pretty harsh things to Turgon on this site. None of the comments has ever been removed nor has he asked Mick to remove them.
You were at liberty not to put the questions Turgon asked to Billy Hutchinson if you wanted. But why remove the comments? I think this was a DISGRACEFUL act of censorship.
??’s comments were unpleasant from what you have posted but they are not to be conflated with Turgon’s which it seems to me you are doing in your post here.
This is nearly worse than removing Turgon’s comments in the first place. You are now trying to put him on a par with a poster who has personally insulted you. Turgon did not and in my opinion would never do that.
The murder of Thomas Devlin was an obscene act. I personally feel that it is perfectly legitimate to ask Billy Hutchinson questions about this murder. He is a public representative for this area and has clear associations with the murder gang who carried out this bold operation.
Not to ask him questions about this whilst the murderers go unpunished is imho lily livered. Just my opinion. I seem to recall him criticising the family on one occasion for their actions in trying to seek justice. This alone means that he should be asked over and over about this killing until he comes up with some answers.
O and before I head off,this comment from the serpent:
Only on Slugger….
West Belfast Catholic Conservative protects Liberal Loyalist Murderer from Bible Bashing Polemicist from Middle Earth !!
Mick Fealty said:
Yep. We owe him as much to enforce the site rules. More than happy to do that for that thread.
Thats owed to everybody, it wasn’t in this case. Neither was it shown to me. If interviewing people like Billy Hutchinson is terrorist loving scum somebody better tell NI journalists.
So who is in charge of who gets interviewed?
Name calling to that extent – thats not questioning my reasons thats personal. If some stuff was removed that in some opinions should not have been removed put it down to learning on the job, I didn’t know learning on the job would involve those kind of jibes….
I hope we will be able to arrange for and publish the interview with Billy Hutchinson within the next week or so.
What and take more insults for my trouble. And what of the interview of Dawn Purvis from the PUP?
Are they out of bounds?
Mick Fealty said don’t just grab what is around you, reach accross to unionism… look what I got for my trouble.
Do it again… gimmie one good reason why I should?
Seems the whole thread has now gone? Why?
Nothing to do with me….. I didn’t close it.
Well at one point Billy was elected so doesn’t that make him a former politician?
He’s in a political party work it out cynic…
Kathleen,
?? has been banned, but he may be posting under another IP. He’s been banned for just those remarks you’ve replicated above.
Let me be clear, if you see someone you know to be banned persisting with posting on Slugger, please report it to me and I will take action.
I cannot take action if I do not know about it. Hearing about it in the comment zone first is far from ideal.
Right, now I am going to clip this thread as a demonstration of what I mean by light touch moderation.
I don’t think the thread should have been removed but Turgon was clearly man playing. The relevant bits should ahve been cut and thread locked if need be, rather than a complete nuke.
Turgon is an experienced blogger. He was at liberty to contact mick about anything I proposed to do. I simply didn’t want to fight in house on line. That was a mistake, I should have taken him on, but prefered to take it behind the scenes….
Mr Hutchinson had responded angrily to Thomas’ parents’ claims that Mount Vernon was harbouring their son’s killers and to their criticisms of Bertie Ahern’s decision to give a grant to the loyalist area
Ms Holloway believes the ex-UVF killer should have been focusing on appealing for help to catch Thomas’ killers.
“Billy Hutchinson had a really good opportunity last week to urge those close to Thomas’ killers to come forward and tell police what they know,” she said.
“Someone like him has a lot of influence in that community and it would have been helpful if he had come out and said that if anyone had information they should share it with the police, but he did not do that.
“Instead he accused us of attacking an entire community.
“If he had listened to ourselves and the police, he would have known that we were appealing to those closest to the murderer to come forward with crucial information.
“Instead, he insisted that no one in the area knew anything about the murder and warned that we should be careful what we say, which I found quite threatening.
“But we will never stop appealing for help in seeing those responsible for Thomas’ murder behind bars.”
Mr Hutchinson had hit out after it was revealed Thomas Devlin’s parents had written to Taoiseach Bertie Ahern criticising a grant to a Mount Vernon community group with which he is involved.
They had asked that the Taoiseach put pressure on community leaders, including Hutchinson, to use their influence to deliver the killers.
Said Mr Hutchinson: “I understand that the woman is completely devastated by the murder of her son, but what she has to do is recognise that what she is doing is branding a whole community. I am on record as saying anyone with any information about the murder of Thomas Devlin should give it to the police.”
(from Belfast Telegraph:http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/sunday-life/news/mothers-fury-at-hutchinson-smokescreen-13904717.html)
There we have it: Billy Hutchinson feels free to threaten the parents of Thomas Devlin. If I ever got the chance to interview this man, this is the very first line of questioning I would take with him.
Kathleen,
I don’t mean to be harsh, but you seem hell bent on continuing to point the finger of blame on Turgon. Personally I have no problem with you interviewing Billy Hutchinson as I think it could be very interesting. That aside you are going to have to get used to harsh criticism and diatribes against you and your subject.
Let it rest and move on.
The murder of Thomas Devlin was an obscene act. I personally feel that it is perfectly legitimate to ask Billy Hutchinson questions about this murder.
Absolutely, like the questions from the McCord family I was bringing that with me:
Have you talked with the parents of Thomas Devlin?
If so and without betraying confidence, did you offer them hope or gloom?
With respect to the murder of Thomas Devlin, who needs to come forward and what needs to be said?
With respect to the murder of Thomas Devlin, are, or have, the PSNI or other security services acted in such a way as to protect their intelligence ‘assets’?
posted by somersetroadresident,
Kathleen,
I think it was a great idea to interview Billy Hutchinson. And Turgon’s comments were legitimate. You were at liberty to disagree with him or point out that you would not ask those questions. Removing his posts was bizarre and Kensei, I cannot see how his posts were man playing.
Mick,
AS it appears that you removed the entire thread… why?
dub
The issue isn’t Billy Hutchinson. The questions Turgon asked were fair game. His point is made effectively. He went beyond that and played the man, both Kathleen and Billy Hutchinson.
The complaint about “democratic discussion” while trying to shut down debate is a veritable irony explosion.
At the end of the day he should not be making difficulty for other bloggers, accusing them of bad faith or jeopordising their relationships. If he has serious issues he should take them offline.
There we have it: Billy Hutchinson feels free to threaten the parents of Thomas Devlin. If I ever got the chance to interview this man, this is the very first line of questioning I would take with him
Then you do that. Meanwhile I was taking questions on both those issues.
That aside you are going to have to get used to harsh criticism and diatribes against you and your subject.
And thats fine too. But Turgon was clearly on a mission here. From Turgon..
Not busy because not interviewing Billy Hutchinson?
You will forgive me if I do not cry for you. I will state again, however, that in no way did I prevent you interviewing Hutchinson. I said I disapproved of it and accused you of a vanity project: that was all. I have no doubt that you do not regard it as man playing: you just do not like being criticised and man playing was your sob strategy. I am afraid being a blogger means you get criticised: that is life.
Now I see from the emails that you have been complaining to Mick: that is fine. It is immaterial to me to whom you complain or what happens. I believe in democratic debate and as such one can criticise other’s decisions. You clearly do not.
In addition the spurious suggestion that you were going to help the McCord family by asking questions is pathetic. The McCord family seem not unreasonably to want justice. Do not even pretend that you giving a mandate less criminal the opportunity to say his piece was going to get justice for the McCords.
Now by all means continue whinning to Mick and anyone else you wish to: the reality is that you removed comments because you did not like them. We all get comments we do not like and the rest of us just get on with it: you are not special. You deserve no special status: telling me you are a middle aged mum cuts no ice with me.
How many times??? Mick Fealty knew who was being interviewed.. If there was a problem he should have said…
Who I interview shouldn’t be an issue for anybody else but mick fealty. Forgive me but isn’t this HIS space…
If Turgon had problems with that, he ought to have sought clarification from behind the scenes (mick) first, before putting up his fists and preparing to fight on an in house issue on line.. At least thats my take of the situation.
Ignited
The point missed is that in order to get the interviews personal relationships have to be made. That is complicated when threads are filled with bile or moralising and compromises the ability to get further interviews. There is a certain amount of acceptable flack. But just like the people that get escorted off Let’s Talk or Question Time for being ranting or beign disruptive, Slugger has to enforce a certain amount of civility regardless of who the subject is.
Kathleen,
Really? A email between yourself and Turgon? Now that is pretty pathetic if I’m honest.
Big bad Turgon eh?
Stop digging the hole.
Kathleen,
Really? A email between yourself and Turgon? Now that is pretty pathetic if I’m honest.
Big bad Turgon eh?
Stop digging the hole.
What hole is that? The laying out of the situation is not digging a hole. I didn’t put the thread up…. Mick Fealty needs to state his position on what goes on here. Unless somebody died and theres someone else in charge about here?
Who is a legitimate subject to interview for slugger o’toole,and if a person agrees will they be afforded the commenting policy or not?
Then again who is going to risk jibes like that to interview for slugger o’toole….
Or shall we stick to recording what on the telly..?
It’s not as simple as that Ken. Wasn’t it you who said that in giving Pete some needle that you were ‘only throwing rocks at your betters?’
If bloggers on Slugger have to sign an oath of Omerta against criticising other bloggers on Slugger, we might as well pack up and go home. Mostly it increases the value of the comments zone. Sometimes it doesn’t. So long as the engagement is civil, I don’t see a problem.
We are not a single party signed up to the same aims, though we are signed up to a common means: civil discourse. There is no, nor should there ever be, a party whip.
Okay, why did I take off the thread? Easy. My wife is at 40 weeks today, and I have even less time to fact check every contribution on that thread to feel secure enough to put it back up online.
If I can just remind people, all of the output on Slugger happens because people volunteer their time. I would like us to move towards tighter and more consistent handling of comments that fall outside the commenting policy. We’ll look at up dating and fine tuning that policy too.
I am unhappy about the sharing of private correspondence on this thread and elsewhere on the site. That is a matter I will deal with separately to the ongoing question of moderation.
I’m not personally worried about being quoted on anything I’ve written privately, but others may not feel the same way. It’s a breach of confidence I am not prepared to tolerate by commenters or bloggers.
He went beyond that and played the man, both Kathleen and Billy Hutchinson.
Kensei,
I honestly cannot see that he did that. He stated unpalatable facts about Billy Hutchinson, yes. I cannot see that he has played Kathleen anywhere.
Kathleen,
I think it is very sad that this interview is not going ahead. I would have loved to have seen it. And it was entirely up to you what you asked Mr Hutchinson. I just cannot understand why you cut Turgon’s comments, nor can i understand why you are not going ahead with this.
Turgon,
I completely disagree with you when you imply that by interviewing Billy Hutchinson that one would be somehow condoning his actions in the past, present or future. I do agree that you have been gravely wronged here. I think you comments about “whining” fall below your usuual standards of high taste. But then you are angry and I would be in the same situation. Also I support you in your wish to see Hutchinson taken on fully in relation to the murder of Thomas Devlin. His on the record threats to Thomas Devlin’s family are shocking.
Mick I’m in a position where I have to defend myself. I have a legitimate right to do that.
Pete
It’s not as simple as that Ken. Wasn’t it you who said that in giving Pete some needle that you were ‘only throwing rocks at your betters?’
Yup, but I would not do so if it was likely to jeopordise Pete’s ability to do what he does. There is a difference between chucking a rock and trying to blow someone up. And Pete has been doing this a lot longer than Kathleen.
And note, I’ve stopped more or less because I don’t want the shit involved.
If bloggers on Slugger have to sign an oath of Omerta against criticising other bloggers on Slugger, we might as well pack up and go home. Mostly it increases the value of the comments zone. Sometimes it doesn’t. So long as the engagement is civil, I don’t see a problem.
There is a fuzzy line here. The interview with Billy Hutchinson is both contentious, requires arranging and the establishment of personal relationships and has direct repercussions on future ability to get further interviews. If Turgon had a big issue, then it seems appropriate to me that he takes it offline and discusses it with you and Kahleen. I don’t see anything in the policy that says this is not allowed, or that Turgon can go off on one about “vanity projects”. There are other ways he can make his point. His questions are fair game. He has the capacity to post up something on relevant incidents. But if he really can’t support the site’s ability to be open to everyone, then I can’t see how he can continue.
If someone on Let’s Talk or Question Time starts yelling out questions about incident x to Gerry Adams, however fair the question that person will be removed as it jeopordises the overall enterprise. Similarly here. You might not like the person but you shut up and deal with the issues raised. The system cannot deal with a big argument everytime someone controversial is to be interviewed and Slugger does not need the online equivalent of Protestors outside the door.
I’m not personally worried about being quoted on anything I’ve written privately, but others may not feel the same way. It’s a breach of confidence I am not prepared to tolerate by commenters or bloggers.
On this I’d tend to agree unless there is an exceptional need e.g. public contradictory statements.
kathleen since she has arrived or forced herself on slugger has been a complete and utter disaster waiting to happen…
she posts threads and gets annoyed when her lack of subject knowledge is highlighted, takes the hump and retreats into the realms of threats and innuendo…
“Mick I’m in a position where I have to defend myself. I have a legitimate right to do that”
Kath, you asked Turgon to take things off-line, he does and then you publish him. Don’t know what one of the Slugger rules that breaks but it’s a breach of trust IMHO.
Kath, you asked Turgon to take things off-line, he does and then you publish him. Don’t know what one of the Slugger rules that breaks but it’s a breach of trust IMHO.
Be reasonable. There are now two threads up on two different blog concerning me. I have a legitimate right to defend myself in the face of that.
Veritas I didn’t force myself on slugger… I was asked and accepted.
dub,
It is fair to say that my emails to kathleen were sharp. I would not have said that on line.
I would like to point out, however, that the emails kathleen has posted are one side of what I took to be a private discussion. She initiated the discussion and indeed continued it; hers were the first and last comments. If necessary in order to defend myself I will publish the whole transcript. Kathleen asked me to delete it but I kept it. It might shed a somewhat different light on the discussion.
However, I would prefer not to put up the emails. If people insist I will do so but I feel that emails between two people should in general be kept confidential.
Kathleen,
I should not need to make my position public. Doing it privately should suffice. But here is:
“Who is a legitimate subject to interview for slugger o’toole,and if a person agrees will they be afforded the commenting policy or not?”
That is for *you* to decide, with my backing of course. The blog comments are an important part of the deal, but commenters comment, they do not set the editorial choice of the blog.
People may not like that choice? Tough. They have to live with it, but they are also, so long as they remain civil, entitled to argue with it.
Clearly the commenting policy gives us a lot of latitude to act without explanation.
We have become (or perhaps we have always been) a very closed society, use to being demonised, and as Lionel Shriver perceptively noted, demonising others in the way we ourselves have been.
The emphasis here is on openness. Open to voices that rarely get heard, be they civic leaders, or political dissents. They do not need a mandate to have something useful and interesting to say.
They should not expect an easy ride here either. All we can promise them that is that the criticism they will face will be made through rules of civil engagement.
Civility and bluntness is the top and bottom of this…
Kathleen asked me to delete it
I asked you to remove my name from your list… Yes I did have the last say, I asked you to stop.
Personally I couldn’t give a toss about personalities asserting themselves to stress a particular point of view of their own.
Here is a book:
http://booksxyz.com/profile3359099.php
It states:
‘Too frequently analyses have neglected to study the wider changes that have occurred inside and outside Northern Ireland. These have had profound effects in changing attitudes towards violence, paramilitaries, the position of women and ideas of nationalism and sovereignty. This book places the implementation of the Belfast Agreement in a wider context to provide an analysis of why implementation has been so difficult.
Kathleen is fully entitled to hold an interview with whoever she wants, just like the researcher in this book did, in an attempt to gain insights.
Just because he is a convicted murderer and doesn’t fit in with someone’s morals doesn’t mean he should be attacked outright when not on topic, but having said that on a point of fact it is correct and shouldn’t have been removed.
It shows a certain degree narrowness on both parties, but then this is Unionism and Nationalism whatever can we expect when it puts on its historical glasses and looks back all the time trying to score points.
It all got a little anal didn’t it.
Just to mkae it clear the quotation on #18 on the previous page is from a private email I sent in response to emails from kathleen. As I said I have no desire to publish transcript of all the emails but if kathleen continues to selectively publish parts of a discussion then I will do so.
Lets be honest, if the questions posed on the original thread had been used the majority of answers would have been “no comment” and hence a rubbish and pointless interview.
Turgon, has actually formulated a good question elsewhere for which I would like to hear Billy’s views.
It was in relation to the amount of support for loyalist\unionist paramilitaries within loyalism\unionism and possibly its ebb and flow and overall relationship, and as someone else added on the same thread, how it differs from nationalist\republican support for violence.
Billy was an obvious target for this style of questioning, however, there are senior unionist politicans who could rightfully be asked the same questions because of their actions in the past!
Kathleen
Since I started blogging on slugger I have made about 3 or 4 apologies for something I have done or said on a thread, works out about 3/4% of all my blogs on slugger. It taught me that the most sensible course when an error is made is to admit it is a fair cop and apologise.
It has also been my experience that all new bloggers face a tough response from commentors at first. It is test of their mettle and depth and a good opportunity to learn from and get through.
The alternative is to go into full justification mode. As my negotiation/mediation trainer crudely explained, justification is like masturbation, the only person who is getting screws is yourself.
“That stuff about hurting and killing people would be for a much more experienced blogger than me and I didn’t want to touch it.” – Kathleen
When why ‘touch’ such an individual at all? Would you interview Rosemary West about her love for her husband, Fred, but omit to mention their mutual interest in nubile females that brought both of them to public attention? I think it is unhealthy to place these people outside of the context wherein they operate and thereby allow them to be artificially recast as other than they actually are. But then again, that un-healthiness is at the core of your present peace process, so it’s perhaps understandable if we get to see the ‘cuddly terrorist’ persona on a pro rata basis. To paraphrase The Dubliners, “Thank g-d there’s a border between us.”
There needs to be consistency on Slugger…Willie Frazer and in recent days Jim Allister have both been subjected to personal abuse and in Willie’s case, in my opinion, lilbellous remarks from some of the Republicans.
I have pointed both of these out to Mick, both in postings and personally and nothing whatsoever was done about it.
I wonder why? I suppose Frazer and Allister are fair game, but the touchy rebels and terrorists have to be molycoddled least they go back to what they know best.
BTW Mick, I’m still awaiting the email of explanation. Not holding my breath I hasten to add !!
“My wife is at 40 weeks today, and I have even less time to fact check every contribution on that thread to feel secure enough to put it back up online.”
Cor blimey Mick,
You do allow trivialities to impact on your work, what next the snow?
Only kidding, I hope she is fine and all goes well, beside a new life all this is chicken feed.
Take care.
As my negotiation/mediation trainer crudely explained, justification is like masturbation, the only person who is getting screws is yourself.
eeerrrrrrrrrr….. Depends on how you feel about masturbation, whether you like it or whether you don’t
Maybe you should have asked him… 
I reckon you can never throw something like that open to the floor, not here. You pick any figure from Republicanism or Unionism and some people here are going to go for the throat. Civility is not universally likely.
The other thing I would say is that the removal of comments is always going to be siezed upon, and rightly so. Once you have the idea to throw things open to the floor, you have to weigh up what the possible outcomes are.
With a character like Billy, there was always a strikingly high chance that you were going to have people saying things like ‘Ask him why he’s a total?’ Not nice, not clever but hey, this is the internet where the not nice and not clever can foist their opinions onto other folk.
So the genie was out of the bottle there and at that stage any idea of censoring the questions should have already been off limits.
Speaking of genies getting out of bottles, I had a wee lad five weeks ago Mick. I think I’ve had about six hours sleep since then, if I were you I’d be getting some back up sleep at this stage…
“[i]Okay, why did I take off the thread? Easy. My wife is at 40 weeks today, and I have even less time to fact check every contribution on that thread to feel secure enough to put it back up online.[/i]”
Indeed Mick I have had occasion on the past to point this out to you privately and it is with a heavy heart that I do so now in the public forum.
You really must make your mind up, you need to prioritise things. What is it to be, a life in which your family and personal well being take centre stage or do you face up to your responsibilities to a bunch of sad losers who have nothing better to do than bitch and whine about politics and society in Northern Ireland with other similar deadbeats who revel in anonymous argumentation over the internet?
You need to get your priorities straightened out my friend.
(I don’t need sarcasm tags now do I? Best wishes to you and the missus, I will certainly be thinking about you in this very stressful – but exciting – time. Good luck).
Seconded Harry and he’s not even getting rich out of it. Hope all goes well Mick – “Dewi” is a nice name or “Gwenhwyfer” if a girl….
It is a common feature of the psychological illness known as “Borderline Personality Disorder,” that those associated with the person diagnosed with the problem, often feel that they have to walk on eggshells – living in fear that they may say something that will trigger off violent rage.
In many respects N.Ireland is a good example of a place that suffers from said Borderleine Personality Disorder (pun intended).
Most of us walk on eggshells all of the time; scared of saying the wrong thing should we be seen to upset the exisiting staus quo.
It does not require a PHD in psychology to know that this is not a healthy position to be in. We should not be prisoners in repsect of others peoples baggage.
Dewi,
I like the name Ethelbert: clearly I was not allowed to call either of my boys that.
Best wishes Mick
‘The emphasis here is on openness. Open to voices that rarely get heard, be they civic leaders, or political dissenters. They do not need a mandate to have something useful and interesting to say.’
Glad to see that reaffirmation of what slugger is about . The day it’s not will be the day this sometimes commentator will no longer feel ‘welcome ‘
As for people getting their knickers in a knot over interviewing Hutchinson ? He’s as entitled to be interviewed as any other former ‘war’ criminal? As the chap appears now to be committed to ‘peaceful ‘ political means what is all the hullabaloo about ?
DE WAR IZ OVER FINALLY .
I read the French Government has asked the Germans to send 1,000 or so German troops into Strasbourg to help the French army make up for it’s deficit in manning levels because of the need to reduce defence expenditures .
Now if 60 million French and 82 million Germans can bury the ‘hatchet ‘ why can’t Unionists and Republicans in Northern Ireland ?
Is there anything special about them ? Have they any greater claim to ‘morality ‘ in their local ‘war’ from either side of the divide
Like shite they have!
The problem is of course that there are still far too many Norn Ironers who would still rather bury the hatchet in the other side’s head than admit that there is more to morality than black versus white or orange versus green !
I complained about the moderation on that thread, but I think Kathleen was absolutely right to remove the remarks about the vanity project, if not some of the other ones. Turgon is a blogger whose I work I like and respect, but I do feel that was (wo)man playing.
I expect that Billy Hutchinson knew full well the type of questions that were liable to crop up when he agreed, and that there is nothing wrong with asking him – or any other politician – tough questions. I do think perhaps people were being over-sensitive on his behalf.
Nathan is a lovely name for a boy, as in:
‘Nathan derogatory may be said on Slugger about terrorists’
France and Germany, two nations that don’t insist on banging on about the war or make a big deal in dragging it to the surface every year.
Germany also apologised for the behaviour of its government and armed forces during the war.
Both are countries that look to the future and have pretty much carved the EU up among themselves.
Germany a divided country until a couple of decades ago ……………East Germany says YES
Comments attributed to me on Ignited where not made by me. They were made by Turgon.
Having said that I had comments deleted for absolutely no reason.
I questioned whether Hutchinson should get the same respect as any other person. That was deleted.