« When did the McCain campaign take over the Alaska governor's office? | Aunt Sam's Blog | STEVENS CAN STAY IN SENATE IF RE-ELECTED!?! »
COMMENT FOR TRUTHSEEKER - APOLOGY TO MS. JOANNE
First, I apologize to Ms. JoAnne for clicking on recommend for Truthseeker's pithy piece when intended to comment instead, but alas, there is no comment allowed.
Second, your post is petty, petulant and wrong. In reading Ms. JoAnne's reply to your cited link, it appears to me she is not referencing the post you indicated.
I will try to phrase this as factually and respectfully as possible: I have found Ms. JoAnne's postings and comments to be informational and on target. Even when we may agree to disagree I value her contributions to this site.
Your post regarding Ms. JoAnne, in my opinion, has no validity or value. Now, let's see your apology!
Advertisement
And shutting off comments was wimpy.
October 26, 2008 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree.
October 26, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
an act of abject cowardice
October 27, 2008 12:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Abject"? Hardly.
I'd say truthseeker successfully drives you all nuts.
And isn't that why we come to TPM, after all?
Because why would you even read truthseeker's posts unless you want to be driven nuts? I notice he has a loyal following: the same people comment on his every post.
Me? I read truthseeker to see what he has to say.
October 27, 2008 10:09 AM | Reply | Permalink
um, what RTBAG said. Co-sign.
Always an interesting experience when s/he and I agree. :)
October 27, 2008 1:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
And it's downright freaky that we have the same cat! ;-)
October 27, 2008 1:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
"Truthseeker" does not - and never has - take his adopted name seriously. He seeks only to annoy and disrupt. Now he hides behind disabling comments.
In other words, "Truthseeker" is a lying coward.
October 26, 2008 7:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sam, I missed the original truthseeker post...can you link it?
October 26, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/truthseeker77/2008/10/clueless-msjoanne-wants-my-ret.php
October 26, 2008 10:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for this blog! Because I too just accidentally did the same thing. I wanted to comment and accidentally clicked rec'd for that blog, when I was hoping to click to comment about how disturbed I was by the blog.
I was distressed that instead of making his or her comments in a thread, an entire blog had been devoted to that purpose. And then to set up the blog so that a person trying to make a comment accidentally clicks recommend is very annoying and uncivil - to say the least.
Seems to me we need to take this issue up with Cafe management and have this commenter reprimanded or banned. I find this behavior disruptive and anti-social.
October 26, 2008 11:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Enough with the banning! This is getting to be like the French Revolution!
October 27, 2008 12:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
October 27, 2008 10:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
Perhaps there should be a neon pink sign always lit at TPM pointing to the awating tumbrill with accompanying dress for that ride to Mme La Guillotine! ;)
October 27, 2008 1:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
For the record, I've sent a long comment to Al Shaw about this. Since it's like a bug in the system - in addition to the "bug" in the offensive blog itself.
(Such a shame when we have waste time fixing something like this, when the whole country is in crisis.)
Thank you again, Aunt Sam, for being a good citizen and putting up this blog.
October 27, 2008 12:30 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oy! Such morality!
"Bug," "offensive," "shame," "fixing," "crisis," "good citizen." Geez, get a life! This is a public forum.
October 27, 2008 10:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
And sometimes it's not unlike a public restroom.
In the end, the best you can do is make sure you don't walk out with toilet paper stuck to your foot.
October 27, 2008 1:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Count me in as hitting the goof button as well.
Too bad you can't renege a rec for (say) 5 minutes or so.
October 27, 2008 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
I would like to see if we can come up with a solution for these things. I understand that we don't have a way to contact each other so blogs get used to comment or sometimes I see people commenting about other issues with someone on one of their blogs.
I recently posted a 'vent' blog and asked that it not be rec'd which allowed people to comment and that it would not end up in recommended reader posts. I would prefer these personal blogs not end up in recommended reader posts because of the fact that they become very public and it like putting laundry out in public.
I know this person confused people by cancelling comments so that a few rec'd it because they were actually planning to comment. Now that some of us know that trick hopefully we won't be fooled again.
If we can just generally refrain from rec'ing blogs that are other than complimentary or sincerely require the entire groups focus, it would allow that the persons involved can express without getting the entire group involved.
Getting into personal issues like this has been coming up lately in the community. I don't think banning is necessary unless someone is really being abusive. Then again, publicly shaming someone is a kind of abuse. An appropriate comment to someone posting a blog like this might be 'In attempting to publicly shame someone, you are being abusive'.
October 27, 2008 12:33 AM | Reply | Permalink
You can't regulate attitudes via laws. You can't regulate posters with threat of public floggings.
Humans are social animals. If the community ostracizes a poster that is pretty effective. In fact, those who do the ostracizing will be represented in exact proportion to the community that thinks someone should be ostracized. It works the same way in the real world. Act obnoxious enough and soon your friends won't be inviting you to the good parties.
Having back channel communications is valuable -- many blocks have a "private communication" function for just such a purpose.
October 27, 2008 12:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
In my view, as I told Al, they either need to fix it so people can't disable comments (and consider that a bug) or set up some rules users need to follow.
Suppose someone could disable a stop light - for themselves. And that was causing accidents. Well, believe me citizens would be up in arms and insist stoplights work and citizens not go through them (or pay the consequences),
All societies need laws. This is a prime example of why. Some people may think there should be no social consequences for anti-social behavior. But when that happens, you get people like GWB running a country and not obeying laws. It all comes down to what a civil society needs in order for civil order - and civil rights - to prevail. Whether it's writ large or small, it amounts to the same thing.
There was someone months ago, maybe in the Spring, who had figured out how to place comments on EC threads or The Muck, to which others could not comment. As I recall, they eventually banned that user. Different blogs handle it differently. Some "preview" all comments. That's not the system here. But if you abuse the system here, they will eventually ban you. Some people may like anarchy. But I don't.
October 27, 2008 1:02 AM | Reply | Permalink
With all due respect, TheraP, I think drawing a line from a guy who disables comments on a blog (which, for all we know wasn't for the insidious scheme of generating recs -- that's just an assumption, how was he to know the layout would end up the way it did?) to having a GWB in the White House is really stretching things. Your statement reminds me of this scene from Animal House.
I'm quite surprised when progressives -- who occasionally talk about how the GOP reminds them of fascism -- want TPM to be ruled like a police state!
October 27, 2008 2:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
I have addressed this here.
October 27, 2008 9:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
It would help if it was clearer that comments had been disabled.
October 27, 2008 1:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
And it would help if we could "un-recommend."
Why should it be possible to put up a blog and disable comments? Just asking....
October 27, 2008 1:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
I normally wouldn't weigh in on stuff like this, but apparently now banning is serious business at TPM. Some folks really need to take a break. For sure nobody else should be banned! That's crazy.
This is a political blog; if someone's opinion bugs you don't read their posts. Kicking people off the site who offend you is bullshit. For example, Billy Glad contributed far more to the discussion than many of those who "play nice in the sandbox" ever did - stacked together. Politics gets heated and personal from time to time especially at the end of such a long campaign. Folks need to lighten up.
If we need to take anything up with management it's that the new site kind of sucks - for all sorts of reasons (the ability to disable comments being one) - and is almost as buggy as the old system.
That said, blaming another poster because you didn't look at a link before clicking is insane. Does anyone honestly think it was some c-o-n-spiracy to get extra recommends? It is indeed silly season.
And if it isn't clear - I'm responding to many of the comments not the original post. Although, I'd personally recommend just letting petty crap die with the individuals who have the original conflict(since I'm puttin in my 2 cents anyhow).
October 27, 2008 4:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
And I'd just like to add ... well, nothing. You've summed it up perfectly.
October 27, 2008 1:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Socrates drank hemlock rather than face banishment. Maybe TPM can implement a suicide option.
October 27, 2008 8:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I love the non-apology apology : ) Still, you should post an apology at Apology Center and let the Internet community decide.
Apology Center
April 14, 2009 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink