zenpundit.com » Blog Archive » Brief Word Regarding Comment Policy

Brief Word Regarding Comment Policy

Generally, the comment section here is a genteel place. Most of the commenters “know” each other (internet sense) or at least visit many of the same blogs, sites and social networking services. My general philosophy is one of free speech and welcoming contrasting viewpoints, including those that disagree with my own, because the expertise and questions that the readers bring to bear make ZP worth reading.

As a result, I moderate with a very light hand and 99.9 % of the time, the only comments deleted by me are spam ( though some get delayed due to the spam filter until I approve them). Yesterday, there were signs that the tone here was changing and I have had several complaints offline, so I would like to nip things in the bud.

ZP won’t be nearly as enjoyable if foodfights begin breaking out in the comments section and it would be better if we remember to exercise enough restraint to keep discussion civil. We’re all out of grade school, are reasonably experienced at life and have an acceptable command of English – criticism can be frank and blunt, but let’s try to keep our attacks to other people’s arguments and not the people making them.

If someone has difficulty, I will step in and remind them and show them the door if they persist. Charles Cameron and Scott Shipman will determine what is out of line in terms of comments on their own postings and I will remove comments or commenters as they request.

5 Responses to “Brief Word Regarding Comment Policy”

  1. deichmans Says:

    Wilf is a bit of a lightning rod, especially when he posits such a fresh idea like your Tuesday post.

    The good news is people are passionate about their ideas, and ready to actively engage in dialog.  While some lines were crossed (e.g., Chuckleberry calling Wilf "a fool") for the most part there were rich ideas exchanged in the comments that strengthened the value of the post.

  2. William F. Owen Says:

    I had pretty much withdrawn from the "net," as I saw it as pointless discussing operational matters with folks who were basically World of Warcraft players – thus not part of the professional debate. I responded to posts here out of respect to Mark. Passionate or not, I am not open to being insulted by anonymous posters who lack the knowledge and ability to argue their case.

  3. Chuckleberry Says:

    As a member of the armed forces, I am part of the professional debate.  I felt compelled to call you a fool due to the empty criticism you’ve repeatedly employed over the years.  This is a great example: http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/5540.html (I especially like FM’s comment at the very bottom).  You also failed to address any of my questions in the last comment thread.   

    "I am not open to being insulted by anonymous posters who lack the knowledge and ability to argue their case."  What a cop out. 

    That said, I do apologize for insulting you personally.  That was certainly out of line, considering your service over the years. 

  4. Chuckleberry Says:

    Its obvious that Owen and I will not be agreeing anytime soon, so its pointless to continue arguing.  If you want to respond to the post immediately prior to this one, please feel free to do so, obviously.  However, in regards to COIN, we should move to email if you want to discuss it further. 

    Again, my apologies for the personal attack.

  5. Lexington Green Says:

    Civility is a force multiplier.  It is counterintuitive, but its true.

Switch to our mobile site