State of the Discussion

The posts in play...

Fiction’s Ethos
()
+
Comment Deletion, Comment Policy, etc.
()
+
On What Doesn’t Really Matter
()
+
 

The comments...

DensityDuck
+ "Isn't it wonderful that all these kids are reading?" "Yeah, they're reading Harry Potter; it's like you just said it's so wonderful that they're all eating [. . .]
citizen

The exercise here is to push every parameter until everyone makes it out alive and unharmed. HO scale model trains kill very few people.

+ As far as I can remember, he was banned due to some ridiculously inflammatory comments about exterminating the Muslim brutes or something along those lines. [. . .]
+ David - a few things. Mark had already given Mike his "final" warning before I said anything to him at all. Ergo he was already gone [. . .]
BSK
+ I thought you meant here.  My apologies. I will say that I had a rather unceremonious start at PL.  I won't go into the reasons why, [. . .]
+ If you really want to get a rise out of me, call me a Paultard. No, you can hoist yourself by your own- Ah, fine. I [. . .]
BlaiseP
+ Anyone who writes well will develop a little cabal of enemies, the Confederacy of Dunces of which Swift spoke. The key is to make the right [. . .]
Kim
+ it was a login site. the name got banned. so new name. and a wink to those who knew me. as a policy, such things seemed [. . .]
Burt Likko
+ David seems pleasant enough. Whatever points David raises will stand, or not, on their own merits. For now, my opinion is that he's acted and [. . .]
BSK

Sounds like you weren't really "banned" then.  Maybe a 5 minute major for fighting.  But far from a game misconduct.

+ Hehe, neither. Just saying that a discussion about the problems we have with one another are more appropriately placed here than a thread about marginal [. . .]
+ The other, far more likely and reasonable, interpretation of "with the same voice he's using now" is of course "in the same tone as he's [. . .]
+ If a commenter is consistently going over the line or at least close to it even as he has other comments that are useful, [. . .]
+ Also, too: this bit, where he accuses Blaise of taqqiya rather than address his points. This is just the tip of the iceberg, looking at his [. . .]
+ As a longtime lurker, I believe that the fact that you have only banned four people is far more a consequence of your site’s [. . .]
+ David, with all due respect, I would submit that Erik and I have a right to try to assure certain minimal standards at this site. [. . .]
+ Well, then. Allow me to ask again: Would you like me to strike out my comment with a note of your choosing? I would be more [. . .]
David
+ To Mark, the phrase "...with the same voice he’s using now" certainly sounds to me as if Jaybird is insinuating that I and Mike are [. . .]

Which Chris (there are a few), and if it was me, now I really want to see it.

Patrick Cahalan
+ Are you soliciting opinions about the League in general, or just yourself? That Pat guy is a pedantic blowhard.  Did you read his early commentary?  He [. . .]
+ Would you like me to strike my comment out with a note saying "David asked that this comment be struck out according to his interpretation [. . .]

I assure you that Jaybird was making no such insinuation, veiled or otherwise.  He was in fact being quite sincere.

BSK
+ Agreed.  There was a lot of informal talk about what the policy was or wasn't.  It was helpful to clarify it for the masses.  While [. . .]
David
+ I believe that Will Truman's suggestion was best. Strike the content of the comment, and leave a note there as to why the content was [. . .]
BSK
+ Eh.  I'm my own man, responsible for my own actions, piling or otherwise.  I didn't need much, if any help, to get on Tom.  I [. . .]

I buy them by the bundle at Sam's Club.  I'll be happy to give you a few since you're guilty of following my lead.

Patrick Cahalan
+ If past experience is any guide, this conversation or another one like it will occur sometime in the next 18 months.  If we make it [. . .]
Kim
+ Some wisdom, to mike or whomever out there might read it. Because I've been there before. Been banned, came back with a new name. (Didn't change [. . .]
BlaiseP
+ John Fowles discusses the conversion of his novel The French Lieutenant's Woman to film in his book of essays Wormholes.  Fowles realized he was best [. . .]
+ I think that making this stuff public was of benefit to the non-front pagey commenters (and I say that as someone who doesn't really consider [. . .]
BSK

Jerk!

...shit...  How many mea culpas can one issue in a day?

+ David, If we are examining things dispassionately, may I ask you to comment on such statements as; "fascist pieces of shit like you," "fascist, motherless, subhuman [. . .]
Patrick Cahalan
+ To some extent, I'm sympathetic to this, but it depends on to how great of an extreme your expectation is. There are threads on the blog [. . .]
BSK
+ I think this is a fair response, but want to throw something else into the fire (though I don't know if this will make it [. . .]
+ I second this one. Tom is not a victim, no matter how often, and how well, he plays one. He gives as good as he [. . .]
J.L. Wall
+ I want to second what Tom said about e-mailing front-pagers en masse about this -- I, for one, had no idea what was going on [. . .]

In the morning, I shall be sober, but you sir, will still be wearing those sunglasses.

David
+ As a longtime lurker, I believe that the fact that you have only banned four people is far more a consequence of your site's very [. . .]
+ Kain suffers from Hyper-Yglesiasism. It's not a terminal disease, but it does mean that on the internet, there will always be a diverse group of [. . .]
Patrick Cahalan
+ I can't even remember what threads it was on; there was a period a few months ago where you and I went back-and-forth on like [. . .]
 
Please do be so kind as to share this post.
TwitterFacebookRedditEmailPrintFriendlyMore options