The rule is: My site; my rules…

Here’s an interesting story, which that I have written about elsewhere. The need to keep the comments zone civil; and the right of the blog proprietor to set the rules of engagement and enforce them

  • joeCanuck

    It has worked pretty good, Mick, although as you say, there have been some serious lapses by commenters from time to time.
    Your own biggest mistake (and really not that serious), I think, was the attempt to ban certain words. That was doomed to failure from the start, given the ingenuity of the general public.

    Cheers; keep it up.

  • canadian

    Mick,
    How come we never see you and joeCanuck at the same time?

  • edward

    seems you have a fan joe

    lets hope he doesn’t become a stalker

  • Thanks for that Mick.

  • Mick Fealty

    No bother Red. Forgot to add that this was a classic case of journalist following a single line without taking care to try understand the issue at stake…

    Joe,

    My ban on the words bigot, scum and vermin using an automatic filter was to slow people down rather than stop them outright. By and large it worked.

  • Canadians 4 beardy bloggers

    Red Mum is cramping Slugger, she should just go away and be a goosberry somewhere else. Me and a certain Mr Mick have plans, you see.
    (red mum should be added to the filter, IMHO)

    Go Mick!!!!

  • wondering

    i watched a jerry springer interview and he said when you see me up there you know its not working. the show is best when you dont see me. you always seem to be up there now mick running a two or three man show? why is that?

  • Ha @Canadians 4 beardy bloggers, I didn’t realise I was shopping a meeting, I’ll knock the next time 😉

  • Canadians 4 beardy bloggers

    Utterly useless bloody filters!

    No worries red, a cough would do.

    Mick,
    Do you hate stoops? It would be great if you did. The two of us could make “top 10 worst stoops ever” lists and then see if we got them in the same order! That’d be lovely. And later… well…who knows?
    But if you like stoops then it wouldn’t matter to me at all. We could just make a different list, like “worst 2 canadian slimers ever” or something. What do you think?

  • OC

    In the US, malls and other “private” venues attempted to arbitrarily shut out protests by various groups, claiming that the 1st Amendment right to free speech only applied to public spaces.

    Iirc, the Supreme Court ruled that malls, etc, have become the new “public square”, and that people had the right to be heard there. This was later amended to giving the separate states the choice to do this, and several have.

    Now comes the internet, on-line letters-to-the-editor, blogs.

    Particularly for well-known, famous, or otherwise notorious blogs, and especially political blogs, I forsee the day when these, too, become part of the public space that malls have.

    ============================================

    Blogging has come a long way from the early Belfast Telegraph “On-line Letters To the Editor” (where close moderation resulted in 24-hour posting delay, but zero obscenity, zero ad hominem attacks, zero spamming, and zero slander/libel). But a very civil level of discourse. Not as sophisticated perhaps as Slugger, but remember, this was ten years ago.

    At the same time, the NY Daily News had a new online comment section, totally unmonitored – it was sink or swim, baby!

    From these two extremes, I think that if I had a blog, I’d create at least one permanent thread where posters could literally write anything that they wanted, with no moderation whatsoever. (Except perhaps a legal action of some kind).

    Then I would try to keep the other threads on a more dignified plane. No naughty words, even.

    Visitors could then choose what they wanted to read, or otherwise participate in.

  • a message board/forum/playpen might allow the trollish commenters of slugger to duke it out in an infinite loop of “he said, she said, slabberin” but out of sight, out of mind. leaving the comments zone free for healthy discourse etc etc etc

  • ArchiePurple

    You can still libel Willie Frazer on slugger but don’t mention the terror convictions of any Republican as the comment will be moderated….so Gerry was never in the ‘RA !!! Conwell was never in the INLA !!

  • joeCanuck

    Archie,

    You do often talk a lot of twaddle. But, if Mr. Frazer has been libelled, as you suggest, he does have a legal remedy. Are you Willie?

  • Mick,

    I have only been commenting here for a few months. I have to say that its a great service.

    The pooling of people with different strands of political thinking certainly helps people to rationalize people’s opinions, whether they decide to change them or not.

    I dont think anybody really has any idea what the magnitude of impact that this site will have on political thinking and voting behaviour. My hunch is that over a period of time, it will be huge.

    I give you my heartily felt congratulations. This may embarass you slightly but dont be surprised if you get an invite to meet the Queen.

  • Canadians 4 beardy bloggers

    Seymour,

    “This may embarass you slightly but dont be surprised if you get an invite to meet the Queen.”

    I can safely say that we are not a bit embarassed, a trip to the mainland to see The Queen Of Northern Ireland is every civilised Northern Irishman’s one true dream. It’s a sign of our maturity and sophistication that we can toady, lickspittle and crawl with the best of them.

    “Lady” Canadians 4 beardy bloggers! Who’d have thought?

  • kensei

    Seymour

    This may embarass you slightly but dont be surprised if you get an invite to meet the Queen.

    Surely that’d be the least wanted thing ever for running this site; accept it and alienate half the people here, reject it and alienate the other half.

  • Claudy in areas

    “…accept it and alienate half the people here, reject it and alienate the other half. ”

    The eternal SDLP dilemma: we love baubles but can’t accept them. Was ever a Greek curse so cruel?

  • OC

    “But, if [Mr. Adams] has been libelled, as you suggest, he does have a legal remedy.”

    Gerry Adams has been linked to the IRA by incredibly credible sources. Ain’t heard of a slander/libel suit by G.A. yet.

  • Claudy in areas

    “Ain’t heard of a slander/libel suit by G.A. yet.”

    Ain’t heard of him whining on slugger either, or anywhere else for that matter…maybe he’s not bothered.

    “incredibly credible sources”. Oh dear.

  • Comrade Stalin

    Mick,

    I’d be interested in knowing why Mark McGregor’s recent blog on anti-social behaviour was pulled. I appreciate that the comments zone had to be cleaned up (I did not see the comments) but I do not understand why the blog itself had to go. It looked to me as if it was discussing a serious real-world issue that effects the daily lives of people, even more so than the current world economic situation.

    It’s not a case of me not respecting the “my site, my rules” part, but I’d like to know the background of the decision to pull this. Either way, I do of course respect that decision – whatever it was – and I am sure there were reasons for it.

  • Billy

    Archie

    “You can still libel Willie Frazer on slugger”

    As someone else pointed out, if Frazer feels that he has been libelled, he can sue. Anyway, Mick is on the ball and would remove any libellous comments.

    You may not like what people such as myself say about Frazer but, frankly, tough shit. The problem (from your perspective) is that Frazers comments about “loyalist” terrorists etc are all in the public domain.

    He can hardly accuse people of libel when they repeat what he said in public.

    I suspect what you don’t like is Frazer being exposed as a hypocrite – well, again that’s tough shit.

    Frazer’s actions and comments speak for themselves. The truth hurts – doesn’t it?