To Participate on Thurstonblog

email yyyyyyyyyy58@gmail.com, provide profile information and we'll email your electronic membership


Friday, October 5, 2007

The comedy of moderation

It's no secret that I was "banned" from using The Olympian's comment threads for using the word "ass" in reference to a reader that had been purposefully agitating an argument with me for weeks. Recently, due to a computer glitch, the block was lifted from my computer and I honestly posted with my name and used my email address. Hours later, blocked again.

Aaron Mason and the other moderators at The Olympian are making sure that no one as crass as I use the word "ass" or, as in the case of my alterego "Emma" (not really, but it is sure fun to poke at the rightees), no one is gonna make a "yo momma" joke in reference to another reader.

So...the fun begins.

If you look at the Letters to the Editor comments for Thursday, October 4th, you'll find an afternoon post by "Olsen" that just says something about "great comments - for more reference" and then has a link to "secretpenis". "Olsen" also posted a homepage link, as many do. Both links take you to a picture of a fully erect penis - my guess is a home photo, if you check the background. That's right folks, a picture of a fully erect penis in the archives of your family newspaper!

Now, lets examine this. No, not the penis, the moderation of the comments.

How did the moderators miss a posted link to "secretpenis"? Probably a little too busy worrying about the politics and fray between readers on the comments section is my guess. There is an old saying about paying too much attention to nickels and losing dollars. This is a perfect example.

I've commented before, here and in Olyblog, about the ridiculous attitude portrayed by the moderator(s) at The Olympian. Editing (like removing links to penis pictures) is one thing but getting into spitting matches with readers is just plain dumb. It serves no purpose. If someone violates the rules (ambiguous at best, mind you), just delete them and move along. If they continue to violate the rules, continue to delete. It's called editing. Don't get into the fray by making bold posts about "banned" or whatever other descriptive term. It's senseless and does nothing more than elevate the fuel for fires on both sides of the political argument. One side defends the banned poster, the other side takes joy in quieting the opposition. Who becomes the fool in the center? You guessed it - The Olympian.

There is a local blogger - Andy, a rather conservative chap - that will not allow opposition posts on his blog. Whereas I don't understand Andy wanting to talk at people, rather than with people, I guess I have more respect for his position than for someone that does such a crappy job of enforcement of rules that they composed.

Let the people speak, I say.

1 comment:

Rummy said...

Gee, do you think anyone would be banned for life if they called that guy a dick?

As for Andy (I'm not familiar with him or his site) I can agree with you; especially since (I'm assuming) his blog isn't advertised as being a place where you're welcome to share your views.

My blog is "all about me", I've left the few critical comments up out of principle, but if I ever wanted to I could delete them at will, not allow anonymous replies, or turn off comments altogether.

Either option is better than inviting the community in, then creating perpetually morphing rules that aren't ever consistently enforced.