Free Speech or Rude Comments?
May 14, 2006It seems that last week Peoria Pundit had an incident which brought about the dreaded deleting of a post. It then led to the banning of a certain bloggist and the removal of his link. Since we still live in a free and open society, one which allows the exchange of ideas and comments, can have its good points and bad. Bill Dennis of Peoria Pundit is well within his rights to decide what is allowed or disallowed on his own blog, and I respect the right that Bill has exercised. I too have had to censure and remove some postings from a person that feels lewd and rude language is the way to present a point, well really not a point, it seemed rather to engage in childish insults.
The post in question seems to have started harmless in its nature over at the Peoria Pundit, but soon disintegrated into sharp exchanges between a few of the regular posters. While it wasn't a Red vs Blue state exchange, it did involve those that think on opposite sides of the street. While I didn't see the post in question that drove Bill's ire into play, and created the possible question of libel, I do know it was the typical exchange of why one won't allow comments and others do allow comments and the suggestion of our banned blogger being a small child (which the comments themselves smell of immature actions). Since the non-comment allowing blogger is also within his right to not take comments publicly, he is also within his right to post on others blogs that do allow comments. To say since he doesn't allow commenting means he shouldn't comment on their sites, is a pretty weak argument. If we live with that ideology, then I guess unless you run a blog, you shouldn't post a comment on another's blog.
Since I do feel Bill can ban, delete or unlink from anyone he wishes, even if it was for the fact that he doesn't like their screen name, I do feel that the matter that created this incident should have been more evenly handled. All parties that decided to exchange barbs, continue the exchanges should have received the same penalty that our banned blogger received. I also hope that Bill will reconsider the ban, and let the blogger return. I rather enjoy his comments as well as the "typical liberal" posters. Diversity is what makes the whole blogging world so fun, interesting and irritating all at the same time.
Cruise Control
No Agenda, Just A Thought…
Deleting the commlents was one thing. De-lnking is petty and junvenile – especially for the “Dean of Peoria Bloggers” Let’s all rememeber that next time he rants about censorship at some college paper, eh? Oh, I can’t have what you said on my blog but hey, I’ll de-link you as well?? Hell, no. I don’t want people to read what you write, even if we agree 90% of the time. LAME.
Oh, how this is growing.
Here is the thing – unless I’m mistaken, with the exception of one area blogger, all of these bloggers have their comments enabled. Certiainly, if someone chooses not to, then that is within their rights to do so. But what irks me is that since I’ve been following these local bloggers and have even started one myself, there is one blogger that constantly goes around throwing out insulting and smart ass comments. Have I thrown some back? Absolutely. Probably ones that I should not have.
How I look at it is if someone wants to offer comments of a critical nature with sincerity and frankness, then that is wonderful, but when a poster continually resorts to calling people “moonbat”, “fag” or whatever, on other blogs while not allowing comments on their own blog, then that person should be taken to task.
As for calling the use of child like analogies (taking one’s ball home when mad) “immature actions”, my reply is, if the shoe fits, wear it. What else can it be called when a local blogger continually uses other blogs to hurl insults but doesn’t even lack the backbone to enable their own comments?
This is the last public comment I am going to make on this.
Vonster wasn’t panned because he insulted anyone. He was banned because he LIBELED someone. If what he called this person was said about me on someone’s blog, I would sue.
This isn’t the first time this has been a problem with Vonster. So I banned him.
I’ve decided to link to his site again. If he tries ONE MORE TIME to make a comment anonymously under someone else’s email address, I’ll delink him again.
I agree Bill, if someone has directly made a claim against another person, something like a thief, rapist, pedophile or gay, those are some pretty harsh comments. I see comments like this on many blogs, the ones attacking Rush, Bush and some other conservative types all the time and wonder how this is allowed. For some reason, people get pretty tough/mean sitting behind the safety of their keyboards. It’s the same old story, and it seems the Internet has created a whole new class of bullies and threat artists. I have been attacked a few times, and while aggravating as it is, I have done my best not to move to the next level of calling someone a derogatory name, though some have decided to get close with tossing out the bigot label, racist rant etc., this was why I wondered just how close to the line do we allow? Jerk, ignorant and the lower slams I guess are safe, though we know laying just below the surface, those posters are really no better then the ones that sling the more libel comments.
Maybe everyone has learned a small lesson from the events that have happened this week and will think just a little more before they hit that submit button, though I am sure there are some that have done their sanity check and will still post the rude and uncalled for tort.
Asking a question is not making an accusation.
Try to grasp that Bill.
And good luck with that lawsuit if it ever comes up. Let me know if you can get any lawyer to take the case. Check back on Falwell v Hustler. No lawyer would take your case on contingency, you don’t have the money to pay and even if you did you’d likely decide not to invest in such a Quixotic venture.
Neither do I think Scotty would waste his time or money chasing something so dumb, especially against a 3rd party like yourself. Sure, if I was serious or it was an ongoing thing but…
Now, I’m sorry I offended your delicate sensibilities, Bill, but your indignation over this is a little over the top.
Here’s a Scotty quote from his blog: “you (meaning me) think any publication to the left of The Third Reich Daily is part of the liberal media…).
Third Reich Daily, huh?
Scotty is so innocent, right Bill?
Vonster, those are the slings I am speaking of. Though he doesn’t actually come out and say you are a Nazi. I am not sure with the autonomy that comes with blogs, if you can actually sue for libel as a poster. I know in the past Apple and others have sued for release of trade secrets. Haven’t really read of a case involving a poster sued for libel or slander via a web posting. Since I am anonymous, not sure I could sue say the gay comments made from my favorite poster, I mean really he is slamming the screen name of Cruise and not ##########. So unless he used my real name, and I would imagine it would have to carry a more personal attack on me.
To be honest, the “typical liberal” attacks are rather interesting. I think it shows the anger and lack of argument to the issues at hand.
I don’t want this to reduce itself to name calling though, I would rather see a real discussion of what would be libel, how it’s defined as it pertains to blogs, as we see an awful lot of such postings.
Vonster,
As usual you only cut and paste the parts you like while refusing to acknowledge the content or meaning of the larger picture of what others put forth.
My comment about the Third Reich was based on how no matter what content is found in a media publication article, conservatives typically tend to scream “liberal media” when the article is of a contrary opinion. For example, Rolling Stone magazine recently had an excellant article on a wounded soldier that was free of a political angle and discussed much of the increase in medical technology because of the Iraq War, but as soon is the title “Rolling Stone” is mentioned, those on the right would automatically wince “liberal media” before even reading the article.
And in the case you cited I was discussing an article from Texas Monthly – a magazine not known for its “liberalism”.
I have used a vaguely parallel metaphor in the past but mine only suggests that people like you think that anyone “to the right of Ted Kennedy is a fascist”
On the other hand, your metaphor is meant to imply that I’m a G*damnned NAZI. Admit it or STFU and go away. I’m tired of your lies.
Vonster,
If I wanted to call you a “Nazi” I would, so don’t try to tell me what my intent was. My intent is clearly stated above.
People like you simply portray anything other than FoxNews, The National Review or The Weekly Standard as the “liberal media” regardless of the content of the media.
Don’t try to tell you what you intended? You sure like to tell ME what I think…“you (meaning me) think any publication to the left of The Third Reich Daily is part of the liberal media…).
Third Reich, Scotty. Tell me again how you didn’t mean to infer that I’m a Nazi??
sigh……this is all silly.
I think what Vonster is trying to say, I could be wrong, is a double standard. I think we have a much larger issue, our borders, the price of gas, and the sad speech we got to hear tonight. The fact that we all seem to get called names, left, right, middle roaders is going to always continue…
Does this remind anyone else of a flame war on a BBS circa 1994? Makes me want to bust out my 2400 baud external modem and ASCII skills (or lack therof).
It doesn’t matter if Bill is right or wrong. It’s his blog to do with as he pleases.
More like SlashDot…
And I have the right to take him to task if I think he’s wrong.
BTW, Cruise: Do you have a small vaguely square pic or graphic I can us for a link button to you?
Send to vonstercomments@aol.com
Thanks
Hey, jsut because someone is asking a question about something it doesn’t mean that they are accusing you of something, adn if you feel that they are, then you have got a guilty concience.. Hold your head still for a minute, and think about that, really think about waht I said..
HEY, GOOD LUCK WITH GETTING THE LAWSUIT FILED, LIKE IT IS EVER GUNNA HAPPEN. Look back in history, there is a case like yours. There was not a lawyer that would take your case on contingency. I really dont feel that you don’t have the money to pay for this kind of thing and even if you did have the money for it, well you wouldn’t wast it on this type of thing.
Neither do I think Scotty would waste his time or money chasing something so dumb, especially against a 3rd party like yourself. Sure, if I was serious or it was an ongoing thing but…
Sorry if I offended you in any way, but for real, you are going beyond reson.. So come to think of it, I take my apoligee back…..
Bush and the Republicans were not protecting us on 9-11, and we aren’t a lot safer now. We may be more afraid due to george bush, but are we safer? Being fearful does not necessarily make one safer. Fear can cause people to hide and cower. What do you think? How does that work in a democracy again? How does being more threatening make us more likeable?Isn’t the country with
the most weapons the biggest threat to the rest of the world? When one country is the biggest threat to the rest of the world, isn’t that likely to be the most hated country?
If ever there was ever a time in our nation’s history that called for a change, this is it!
The more people that the government puts in jails, the safer we are told to think we are. The real terrorists are wherever they are, but they aren’t living in a country with bars on the windows. We are.
lone star ford houston tx
I wonder how much money Jordan has made from his shoe line? Probably in the billions!
mm.. nice post man.
i am gonna show this to my friend, dude
Hi!,
mobile home insurance az 1998 winter olympic games location ashley furnitures arizona paypal premier master card rx-5200 vintage panasonic boombox ebay
Hi! I was surfing and found your blog post… nice! I love your blog.
Cheers! Sandra. R.