Comment 59974

By bob lee (anonymous)
Posted February 18, 2011 at 14:06:21

I made some criticism of one aspect of your site. I made that criticism in a civil manner, with an argument and evidence to back it up. There was an opportunity to discuss 'what is censorship', ie whether making comments disappear for anonymous users is or is not, and a chance to discuss what are appropriate limits on speech, even to the nature of a private website purporting to be an open, public community.

I think this is a pretty serious issue. I think the environment you create through your site design influences how and what you talk about. I don't think you have it figured out yet, and I don't think your reasoning for this functionality stands up to how it works. I think I bring a different perspective on this issue, as an anonymous, occasional reader, rather than a regular.

The response from people here ranged from personal attack ('whining' and 'BS') to citing Zipf's theorum without an explanation, to a complete failure to acknowledge there could be a problem in what I think would objectively be viewed as a pretty controversial practice. And now to an exhortation, which presumably includes my and Jeff Reid's comments, that we are incapable of rational argument, and people should ignore us.

It's a neat argument, since it can be levied with impunity. Trolls are caught by the downvoting system, the only people who would dispute the system must be trolls. I hope it leaves a bad taste in some of your mouths.

Reply | Permalink | Context

Comment Score: -1 (5 votes)
You must be logged in to vote on this comment.

Recent Articles

Article Archives

Site Tools

Feeds