Comments on: Faris: why I don’t want a Crikey blog http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/ now with extra source Sat, 11 Feb 2012 13:13:23 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Michael James http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6277 Michael James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6277 Discipline on a blog site is absolutely essential, at least if there is any intention by the blogsite owner to have it serve as a productive debating function. Proper site registration as suggested by others and every submission must be read prior to posting. This creates the problem of it being a labour-intensive chore for someone, and thus expensive. I presume this is the reason why the Fairfax site(s) are lamentably deficient and why the New York Times is one of the best (though both are going broke….). The NYT comments on OpEd pieces are often more useful than the original piece (see Kristof on American healthcare this week with 300 responses from around the world describing national healthcare systems and how they function--terrific). I do not know how they do it, especially with up to 900 comments and nary an abusive trolling bore. I am sure they must reject plenty—and of course, such action by itself will deter the trollers from revisiting (good!). Of course, since I am centre-left I would say that. On the other hand I do not particularly enjoy the (similarly centre-left) Washington Post blogs because they are clearly less disciplined and thus often tedious and unproductive to read. Some features that the NYT employ are very good: there is the “Editor’s Selection” and" Readers Recommends" (with total score displayed). George Melagonis at the Oz grappled with these issues and decided not to censure any submissions but to only post early the worthy ones –it is not clear to me if he has done this. I would suggest that a Editor's Selection, a Reader’s Selection, an “All except trash.” and a “Trash” (for the worst that people like me do not want to wade through). I am not the least interested in the junk sites like Andrew Bolt and his ilk; I have not visited his site for almost a year. The new Pure Poison seems to be going in the direction of Bolt and I have already lost interest. Discipline on a blog site is absolutely essential, at least if there is any intention by the blogsite owner to have it serve as a productive debating function. Proper site registration as suggested by others and every submission must be read prior to posting. This creates the problem of it being a labour-intensive chore for someone, and thus expensive. I presume this is the reason why the Fairfax site(s) are lamentably deficient and why the New York Times is one of the best (though both are going broke….). The NYT comments on OpEd pieces are often more useful than the original piece (see Kristof on American healthcare this week with 300 responses from around the world describing national healthcare systems and how they function — terrific). I do not know how they do it, especially with up to 900 comments and nary an abusive trolling bore. I am sure they must reject plenty—and of course, such action by itself will deter the trollers from revisiting (good!). Of course, since I am centre-left I would say that. On the other hand I do not particularly enjoy the (similarly centre-left) Washington Post blogs because they are clearly less disciplined and thus often tedious and unproductive to read. Some features that the NYT employ are very good: there is the “Editor’s Selection” and” Readers Recommends” (with total score displayed). George Melagonis at the Oz grappled with these issues and decided not to censure any submissions but to only post early the worthy ones –it is not clear to me if he has done this. I would suggest that a Editor’s Selection, a Reader’s Selection, an “All except trash.” and a “Trash” (for the worst that people like me do not want to wade through). I am not the least interested in the junk sites like Andrew Bolt and his ilk; I have not visited his site for almost a year. The new Pure Poison seems to be going in the direction of Bolt and I have already lost interest.

]]> By: Stilgherrian http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6278 Stilgherrian Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6278 Ah, Faris QC, a blog without comments? The whole POINT of blogging is the extended conversation. The dialogue. The glorious and trashy rough-and-tumble conversation where you learn new things, get abused, refine your arguments, share knowledge, get slagged off, slag off your opponents in return -- and, yes, deal with that fact that people might say hurtful things that you don't like, or even find offensive.<br /><br />Diddums.<br /><br />Industrial-age media inserted a layer of mediation between you and your audience. It allowed you to comfortably make your pronouncements, wrapped in the "authority" of quaint old titles like "QC", no matter how off-beam they were. Only responses which were deemed worthy, non-defamatory and otherwise "nice" would be published. The media became a middle-class theme park, where everything was "respectable" and "proper".<br /> <br />Well, that's the past.<br /><br />The open world of blogs and their comments, and all the other new media, reveals the reality of human nature. Good heavens! Not everyone is polite! Not everyone thinks before they click on "submit". Some people are even... rude!<br /><br />Thank the Gods, now even the great unwashed can air their views. This is a Good Thing. Sure, it'll be tumultuous until we all work out the new social rules. But the end result will be a dialogue which reflects a wider range of viewpoints, not just the comfortable media elites.<br /><br />Bring it on!<br /><br />P.S. Analysis in terms of "left" and "right" is two centuries out of date. Time to update, methinks. Ah, Faris QC, a blog without comments? The whole POINT of blogging is the extended conversation. The dialogue. The glorious and trashy rough-and-tumble conversation where you learn new things, get abused, refine your arguments, share knowledge, get slagged off, slag off your opponents in return — and, yes, deal with that fact that people might say hurtful things that you don’t like, or even find offensive.

Diddums.

Industrial-age media inserted a layer of mediation between you and your audience. It allowed you to comfortably make your pronouncements, wrapped in the “authority” of quaint old titles like “QC”, no matter how off-beam they were. Only responses which were deemed worthy, non-defamatory and otherwise “nice” would be published. The media became a middle-class theme park, where everything was “respectable” and “proper”.

Well, that’s the past.

The open world of blogs and their comments, and all the other new media, reveals the reality of human nature. Good heavens! Not everyone is polite! Not everyone thinks before they click on “submit”. Some people are even… rude!

Thank the Gods, now even the great unwashed can air their views. This is a Good Thing. Sure, it’ll be tumultuous until we all work out the new social rules. But the end result will be a dialogue which reflects a wider range of viewpoints, not just the comfortable media elites.

Bring it on!

P.S. Analysis in terms of “left” and “right” is two centuries out of date. Time to update, methinks.

]]> By: will http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6279 will Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6279 maybe to many people with agendas, and not enough prepared to debate with an open mind? Open mind could be a oxymoron for many of the people leaving comments maybe to many people with agendas, and not enough prepared to debate with an open mind? Open mind could be a oxymoron for many of the people leaving comments

]]> By: Joel B1 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6280 Joel B1 Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6280 Crikey.<br /><br />You need to consider your blog or article comment design. Rather than linear, choose nested design. It makes comments more pertinent and will reduce spurious "off-beat" comments.<br /><br />More importantly, it will allow the development and resolution of sub-threads. This in turn will reduce "agro" in your commentators.<br /><br />Trust me, my wife's a Doctor. Crikey.

You need to consider your blog or article comment design. Rather than linear, choose nested design. It makes comments more pertinent and will reduce spurious “off-beat” comments.

More importantly, it will allow the development and resolution of sub-threads. This in turn will reduce “agro” in your commentators.

Trust me, my wife’s a Doctor.

]]> By: Edward James http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6281 Edward James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6281 I don’t know if I am left or right. I post comments here on Crikey.com in the main stream media and on Sydneyindymedia. It is invaluable to have instructive comment from a QC which helps to educate some of us. I have become accustomed to putting my name to things which I publish and sometimes even my phone number. Open free and public discourse is important in a democracy. We must of necessity discuss the efforts of our elected representatives and have you notices the more and deeper those public discussions get the more representative our government seems to be.. We must moderate ourselves somewhat if we are to keep those esentially open forums which are avilable on the WWW. I don’t know if I am left or right. I post comments here on Crikey.com in the main stream media and on Sydneyindymedia. It is invaluable to have instructive comment from a QC which helps to educate some of us. I have become accustomed to putting my name to things which I publish and sometimes even my phone number. Open free and public discourse is important in a democracy. We must of necessity discuss the efforts of our elected representatives and have you notices the more and deeper those public discussions get the more representative our government seems to be.. We must moderate ourselves somewhat if we are to keep those esentially open forums which are avilable on the WWW.

]]> By: John James http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6282 John James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6282 I recall that exchange to which Joel B1 refers. I think Bernard thought that the Young Liberals had co-ordinated an "attack". I agree with Peter about trying to have a better balance in terms of contributors.<br />But I really love that bit about "religious vilification.... is a criminal offence"<br />You mean all that sh*t I've been taking because I'm Catholic is ILLEGAL? Oh, wow! Off with their heads! Venise Alstergren, you can run but you cant hide. I recall that exchange to which Joel B1 refers. I think Bernard thought that the Young Liberals had co-ordinated an “attack”. I agree with Peter about trying to have a better balance in terms of contributors.
But I really love that bit about “religious vilification…. is a criminal offence”
You mean all that sh*t I’ve been taking because I’m Catholic is ILLEGAL? Oh, wow! Off with their heads! Venise Alstergren, you can run but you cant hide.

]]> By: Nadia David http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6283 Nadia David Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6283 While I hate the idea of Crikey readers even REQUIRING censorship, I completely see why Peter doesn't want a bar of it. I like the idea of everyone having to sign their comment with their full name and the email address the subscription goes to. I do it anyway, because that way I literally censor myself. If I don't want my name attached to what I write, I know I've gone too far.<br /><br />Perhaps us Lefties are just a bit too defensive? Perhaps we imagine attacks where there's just opinion and debate? Perhaps we just need to read what we write with a more objective eye before we click 'send'. While I hate the idea of Crikey readers even REQUIRING censorship, I completely see why Peter doesn’t want a bar of it. I like the idea of everyone having to sign their comment with their full name and the email address the subscription goes to. I do it anyway, because that way I literally censor myself. If I don’t want my name attached to what I write, I know I’ve gone too far.

Perhaps us Lefties are just a bit too defensive? Perhaps we imagine attacks where there’s just opinion and debate? Perhaps we just need to read what we write with a more objective eye before we click ‘send’.

]]> By: Michael James http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6284 Michael James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6284 An addendum to my earlier comment. Joel-B1 is not a really awful example but his style is exactly what I am not interested in reading—or wading through to find informative comments. His suggestions about nested comments is terrible because it encourages inter-blogger sniping of the worst kind. Almost all the ones like that I have seen, appear to rapidly degenerate into extraordinarily tedious name calling abuse. I suspect most of those bloggers are under 15 year old males (which of course can mean 30-something males these days!). No serious news site should contemplate such a free-for-all. There are countless such sites out there for those so inclined to waste their time on anonymous name-calling and leave the rest of us alone. One can also note that Joel-B1 is one of only three (maybe 4) of the 15 submissions who chooses to remain anonymous and is the least interesting and most impolite submission (oops, but there you go, he has me doing it too). For the record, to my knowledge the three James’ here are unrelated. An addendum to my earlier comment. Joel-B1 is not a really awful example but his style is exactly what I am not interested in reading—or wading through to find informative comments. His suggestions about nested comments is terrible because it encourages inter-blogger sniping of the worst kind. Almost all the ones like that I have seen, appear to rapidly degenerate into extraordinarily tedious name calling abuse. I suspect most of those bloggers are under 15 year old males (which of course can mean 30-something males these days!). No serious news site should contemplate such a free-for-all. There are countless such sites out there for those so inclined to waste their time on anonymous name-calling and leave the rest of us alone. One can also note that Joel-B1 is one of only three (maybe 4) of the 15 submissions who chooses to remain anonymous and is the least interesting and most impolite submission (oops, but there you go, he has me doing it too). For the record, to my knowledge the three James’ here are unrelated.

]]> By: mike smith http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6285 mike smith Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6285 Or, you could do what SlashDot does, if you don't post a comment from an account you're posted as "Anonymous Coward" - with a provision to be able to suppress all such from display. (its more complicated, but the /. moderation system works reasonably well) Or, you could do what SlashDot does, if you don’t post a comment from an account you’re posted as “Anonymous Coward” - with a provision to be able to suppress all such from display. (its more complicated, but the /. moderation system works reasonably well)

]]> By: Nadia David http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6286 Nadia David Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6286 Is rudeness, "getting slagged off" and other derogatory crapola really a "Good Thing"? Hardly. If you can't debate someone's ideas without calling them something nasty you need to have a good hard look at your debating style. Better yet, get one.<br /><br />And left v right is SO much quicker than post-modern reductionist w*nker v establishment-loving myopic prig. Is rudeness, “getting slagged off” and other derogatory crapola really a “Good Thing”? Hardly. If you can’t debate someone’s ideas without calling them something nasty you need to have a good hard look at your debating style. Better yet, get one.

And left v right is SO much quicker than post-modern reductionist w*nker v establishment-loving myopic prig.

]]> By: Edward James http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6287 Edward James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6287 I don’t know if I am left or right. I post comments here on Crikey.com in the main stream media and on Sydneyindymedia. It is invaluable to have instructive comment from a QC which helps to educate some of us. I have become accustomed to putting my name to things which I publish and sometimes even my phone number. Open free and public discourse is important in a democracy. We must of necessity discuss the efforts of our elected representatives and have you noticed the more and deeper those public discussions get the more representative our government seems to be.. We must moderate ourselves somewhat if we are to keep those esentially open forums which are avilable on the WWW. I don’t know if I am left or right. I post comments here on Crikey.com in the main stream media and on Sydneyindymedia. It is invaluable to have instructive comment from a QC which helps to educate some of us. I have become accustomed to putting my name to things which I publish and sometimes even my phone number. Open free and public discourse is important in a democracy. We must of necessity discuss the efforts of our elected representatives and have you noticed the more and deeper those public discussions get the more representative our government seems to be.. We must moderate ourselves somewhat if we are to keep those esentially open forums which are avilable on the WWW.

]]> By: Patrick http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6288 Patrick Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6288 "Perhaps us Lefties are just a bit too defensive"<br /><br />Yes but Precious Pete is from the right. In fact it's usually the rightwingers who pile on the bile then complain about "bad manners", isn't that right Piers? Sorry is "Precious Pete" too insulting, should I include the QC part? “Perhaps us Lefties are just a bit too defensive”

Yes but Precious Pete is from the right. In fact it’s usually the rightwingers who pile on the bile then complain about “bad manners”, isn’t that right Piers? Sorry is “Precious Pete” too insulting, should I include the QC part?

]]> By: steve martin http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6289 steve martin Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6289 I must say that I seldom agree with Peter Faris, but he does have a point. I don't know about the legal grounds, after all he is the QC, but some comments are over the top ad hominem, attacks without regard to the validity of the argument are beyond the pale.<br />For example the remarks recently on a piece quoted from Miranda Devine.in SMH- stupid cow etc without regard to her argument. And of course the attacks on Faris that he talks about.<br />The trouble with censorship is as he points out - where do you stop? On balance let the status quo prevail. I must say that I seldom agree with Peter Faris, but he does have a point. I don’t know about the legal grounds, after all he is the QC, but some comments are over the top ad hominem, attacks without regard to the validity of the argument are beyond the pale.
For example the remarks recently on a piece quoted from Miranda Devine.in SMH- stupid cow etc without regard to her argument. And of course the attacks on Faris that he talks about.
The trouble with censorship is as he points out - where do you stop? On balance let the status quo prevail.

]]> By: Graham Ring http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6290 Graham Ring Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6290 I'm with Faris QC on this one.<br /><br />It's not clear to me how democracy is advanced by giving people the opportunity to unleash virulent personal attacks and then 'sign' off with a cheesy alias.<br /><br />Never mind 'moderators'. Why not get one of those allegedly outmoded 'editor' types to read the stuff that comes in and run the ones that are lucid, relevant and actually contribute something to the debate? <br /><br />Graham Ring<br />Darwin<br /><br /> I’m with Faris QC on this one.

It’s not clear to me how democracy is advanced by giving people the opportunity to unleash virulent personal attacks and then ‘sign’ off with a cheesy alias.

Never mind ‘moderators’. Why not get one of those allegedly outmoded ‘editor’ types to read the stuff that comes in and run the ones that are lucid, relevant and actually contribute something to the debate?

Graham Ring
Darwin

]]> By: Richard McGuire http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6291 Richard McGuire Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6291 It was Deng Xiao-Ping who said something along the lines of... "if you open the window to let in the breeze, you also let in the flies"...I remember the days before blogging, before the internet....Getting a letter published in a major daily newspaper was quite an achievement...As a result letters were generally of a fairly high standard...Part of the reason I am sure is that the letter writer had to, unless they had good reason not to, identify themselves.... Identifying oneself does lead to some moderation and perhaps even a bit of quality control ....While it is no guarantee against an homien, racist or just boring irrelevant comments, it is preferable to vetting or censorship. It was Deng Xiao-Ping who said something along the lines of… “if you open the window to let in the breeze, you also let in the flies”…I remember the days before blogging, before the internet….Getting a letter published in a major daily newspaper was quite an achievement…As a result letters were generally of a fairly high standard…Part of the reason I am sure is that the letter writer had to, unless they had good reason not to, identify themselves…. Identifying oneself does lead to some moderation and perhaps even a bit of quality control ….While it is no guarantee against an homien, racist or just boring irrelevant comments, it is preferable to vetting or censorship.

]]> By: Kevin Charles Herbert http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6292 Kevin Charles Herbert Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6292 <br />Peter Faris's credibility has been compromised by his racist views as expressed in his recent comments on Crikey re the Gaza Strip & Palestinians in general.<br /><br />Another Zionist fascist along in the mould of Mark Liebler et al.<br /><br />Although, it must be said that the offending Faris piece only added to increasing support by Crikey readers for Hamas, Fatah & Palestinians in general. Faris is much like that bigoted fool Alan Dershowitz.<br /><br /><br /> Peter Faris’s credibility has been compromised by his racist views as expressed in his recent comments on Crikey re the Gaza Strip & Palestinians in general.

Another Zionist fascist along in the mould of Mark Liebler et al.

Although, it must be said that the offending Faris piece only added to increasing support by Crikey readers for Hamas, Fatah & Palestinians in general. Faris is much like that bigoted fool Alan Dershowitz.

]]> By: Joel B1 http://www.crikey.com.au/2009/03/03/faris-why-i-dont-want-a-crikey-blog/#comment-6293 Joel B1 Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-6293 I've posted a few comments in both the articles and blogs. It hasn't been fun.<br /><br />A call for moderation is a wise one. Although it is too easy to p*ss-off moderators and then have no comments published for a month or so. (Try suggesting to ABC-online that the "journalists" could be replaced with a machine that simply puts up press releases on a web page...)<br /><br />One of the first things I said on Crikey was:<br />"Gosh, let me prepare to vote for these neo-labofacists. (a word that describes the likes of Rudd and Gillard who couldn't be bothered to vote for the $42 Billion package)"<br /><br />The next comment was B Keane:<br />"Between Joel's misogynist name-calling and the trolls we appear to have reached a new low"<br /><br />Subsequently, I was called "liver-diseased spewer of bile" (that's from memory). I mainly lurk now and it's unlikely I'll be taking out a $140 subscription.<br /><br />I can get abused for free on ABC-online. I’ve posted a few comments in both the articles and blogs. It hasn’t been fun.

A call for moderation is a wise one. Although it is too easy to p*ss-off moderators and then have no comments published for a month or so. (Try suggesting to ABC-online that the “journalists” could be replaced with a machine that simply puts up press releases on a web page…)

One of the first things I said on Crikey was:
“Gosh, let me prepare to vote for these neo-labofacists. (a word that describes the likes of Rudd and Gillard who couldn’t be bothered to vote for the $42 Billion package)”

The next comment was B Keane:
“Between Joel’s misogynist name-calling and the trolls we appear to have reached a new low”

Subsequently, I was called “liver-diseased spewer of bile” (that’s from memory). I mainly lurk now and it’s unlikely I’ll be taking out a $140 subscription.

I can get abused for free on ABC-online.

]]>