Comments policy revisited
Some time ago (August 2010) Rosie proposed the following:
Some of the commenters have complained that we do not adhere to our stated comments policy. The policy and the complaints can be read here.
I would suggest that we enlarge on this policy, and before laying down some ground rules, would ask the contributors here, both bloggers and commenters, to read this draft position paper and suggest some amendments and improvements.
The data is mostly drawn from this site, though I have been influenced by other tendencies I have observed in the blogosphere.
Broadly, I would keep to a liberal comments policy, but would note that there are objectionable commenters that have to be dealt with by deletion, editing, abuse or mockery.
Analysis
“Trolls” are a well-known type of commenter, and can be left out of this paper. But there are other kinds of objectionable commenters, who commit offences against the intellect, manners or morals. For methodological convenience, I shall divide them into the following categories:- “Cunts”, “Arses” and “Shits”.
Cunts (Intellect)
Cunts are so defined for their intellectual dishonesty. They argue in bad faith, ignore any counter arguments, pile up straw men by the barnload, make stuff up, put words in your mouth that you not only have not said but would never dream of saying, make wild accusations eg if you write about the same topic as another blog, you therefore agree with that blog in every comma, full stop and hyperlink, and if you don’t write on a particular topic that for them is big news, you are creating a deliberate diversion and your non-coverage is a sinister ploy . (For an example of this kind of Cuntishness see here from comment 10 on.) If you quote from writer X, you therefore agree with writer X’s every utterance. If you quote from a reputable source, they will google mine that source until they find something discreditable it published back in 1973. They fill the thread with irrelevant matter, hoping to use tanks of verbiage to crush what they failed to shoot down with counter argument. They adopt a patronising and/or jeering tone. They will never answer a direct question, either weaselling out of it or ignoring it or saying that the reason you asked this question was another diversion. They are Poundstretcher Alastair Campbells, intellectual loudmouths who are absolutely incapable of admitting that an opponent may have made a telling point, or has any motive other than the lowest form of partisanship.
The chief Cunt on this site (and many others) is johng.
Arses (Manners)
With Arses it’s not a question of their political opinions, which may be perfectly acceptable, but of manner of expression. Arses shout and swear and scream diatribes against all those who have annoyed them in some way, whether it’s the Pope, the Labour Party, the bloggers on this site and other sites, or fellow commenters, even inoffensive ones. They post pointless abuse, insults and violent fantasies in comment after comment so that reading through the thread is like picking your way between the pools of vomit along Lothian Road/Sauchiehall Street [insert your local street famed for drunken debauchery] on a Sunday morning. Arses are better people than Cunts or Shits (see below) but they are a nuisance and put off other commenters, just as any guy ranting impotent violent threats while holding a can of Carlsberg is probably a better person than George Galloway, but you would still rather not share space with him.
The chief Arse on this site (and many others) is Will.
Shits (Morals)
With Shits it’s morals rather than manners or standard of debate. In the society outside the blogosphere, Shits two-time their partners, betray their friends, play politics in their jobs instead of getting on with the work, neglect their children and aged parents and are rude to people who are forced by their position to be polite (waiters, airline stewardesses and the like). There’s only a limited capacity for Shittiness on blogs, which are built out of words rather than actions and it is primarily implemented by “outing” someone who wants to stay anonymous or writing comments in their name expressing racist, sexist or otherwise disgraceful views. Chasing commenters around blogs to shout abuse at them on different sites or insulting tentative or daffy but harmless commenters crosses over from Arsiness to Shittiness.
Our last Shit was a BNP creep called Curious Freedom, who “outed” another commenter, one Willywipples or some such stupid name. The most famous blog Shit is Orlando Figes who used sock-puppetry to savage his rivals’ history books and praise his own and then set lawyers on the rivals when they rumbled him. Threats of litigation, though they can certainly be defended in some cases, are usually a sign of Shittiness. Andy Newman has started to dabble his feet in this kind of turdery in the Galloway/Viva Palestina case and now is threatening more litigation against another blogger who “made clearly libellous and derogatory remarks of an explicit sexual nature about [Newman], and two respected academics and bloggers“, so though I wouldn’t call him a Cunt or an Arse as a rule, he’s in danger of turning into a Shit.
I would therefore suggest the following blogging policy:-
Cunts:- given that they reveal their own Cuntishness with every lousy argument and lie they produce and in that way damage their own cause and reputations they should be allowed to comment but should be taken to task and ridiculed and abused.
Arses:- should have their comments edited or deleted. The unarsey comments they make should be allowed to remain.
Shits:- should be banned immediately.
There are also reasonable folk, the ones who disagree with the blog post and other commenters but who do so honestly, make a case for their disagreement, and can write with wit, cleverness, information or common humanity. They should be welcomed and engaged with.
(NB: since 2010 some names -JohnG for instance – have largely disappeared from our radar while new ones have arrived. As for Will…he seems to have turned to Jelly. Readers’ suggestions for a consistent comments policy for this site are welcome).
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 17, 2012 at 8:45 am
Don’t have one. Comments ‘policies” are a sure sighn that yer blerggHH is shit. Just delete who the fuck you want or ban who the fuck you want. The end.
Innocent Abroad said,
April 17, 2012 at 10:09 am
For once I have some sympathy with the Jelly. A blog is the blogster’s: all the rest of us are your guests. You don’t have to give a reason to ask me to leave your home – except perhaps for your own self-respect – you just do it. The same with a blog.
Surely the principal difficulty with comments is that iti isn’t possible to know for sure who’s posting sober and who’s the worse for wear?
hotsocks said,
April 17, 2012 at 10:20 am
Most commentary is “comment in place of action” and serves to assist the dimwitted commenter to believe s/he is contributing in a worthwhile fashion to the debate on what it is, and what it should be, to be human. All very silly but par for blogland.
Modernityblog on the other hand is just a very boring cunt and that is unforgiveable. Ban him please, His repeated whining serves no purpose. We understood him the first time, no need to repeat ad nauseam. No platform for boring cunts.
Jimmy said,
April 17, 2012 at 12:58 pm
Using parts of the anatomy to describe people is custom and practice on the shop floor workplace and in the army. Some weak in the heid people will always be offended by mostly anything that is said. I agree with Jelly in part however I think there is some good stories in this blog. I was banned from SU some time ago. I did post some shit to them afterwards just to annoy them. If you are going to start banning people then become a Muslim or join the WRP.
Jim Denham said,
April 17, 2012 at 2:35 pm
John Gameboy no longer pollutes this site with his hysteria and lies, but he’s over at Socialist Unity making an utterly outrageous accusation that he really must be called out on:
“But what an odd bunch of bigots they are at Shiraz Socialist. But yes, the appalling way in which they argue that anti-racists should not be mobilising against racist murders of people wearing Hijab”
I’ve challenged Game to defend this lie and provide evidence, but no doubt the Stalinists at SU will block my reply.
s4r4hbrown said,
April 17, 2012 at 2:43 pm
I just thanked the c – the chaps – over on SU for letting feminists know how they should comport themselves. And you are quite right of course about what johng said about the hijab article, although I wasn’t completely keen on it myself, in all respects.
s4r4hbrown said,
April 17, 2012 at 2:43 pm
And I assume I’ll be blocked too of course.
sackcloth and ashes said,
April 17, 2012 at 3:05 pm
Being banned from National Socialist UnityMitford is a badge of honour which I gladly share with the two previous posters, and it’s not surprising that Johng has retreated there to smear other bloggers.
Jim, it’s your gaff and your rules. But if I were to offer a suggestion it would be that members of the Strasserite Wankers Party should be banned sine die, with the emphasis on ‘die’.
Jim Denham said,
April 17, 2012 at 5:11 pm
Nooman and his moronic Stalinist sock-puppets (including the egregious John Game and the antisemite John Wight) at “Socialist Unity” are presently trying to compare me persionally, this site and the AWL with…Breivik.
People like Nooman, Wight and Game are lying (well, in the case of Game, hysterical) scumbags who discredit the left.
sackcloth and ashes said,
April 17, 2012 at 6:38 pm
It’s a standard stunt with them, Jim. And given that National Socialist UnityMitford has John ‘CODOH’ Wight as one of its commenters it’s as sick and twisted as the site itself.
s4r4hbrown said,
April 17, 2012 at 6:22 pm
WRT comments 4 and 8 – Shiraz’s comments policy certainly seems pretty liberal …
SteveH said,
April 17, 2012 at 6:28 pm
Why do I not have my own category but your friend will does and someone called JohnG who doesn’t even comment does?
It is generally accepted that I am the village retard. I am more than ahppy with this label.
sackcloth and ashes said,
April 17, 2012 at 6:38 pm
If you want your own category, ‘winnet’ would suit.
Mick O said,
April 17, 2012 at 7:02 pm
I prefer a liberal policy. We can’t delete the cunts, aresholes and shits from everyday life and blogs should be no different. This is a public forum. You can’t rant from a soapbox at Speaker’s corner with a no hecklers policy. My view is that comments should only deleted in circumstances where they risk exposing you to legal action. It is up to us as readers to decide which comments are bullshit, offensive etc and to respond if appropriate. This is a tricky problem admittedly but if comments all echo similar viewpoints then you will be seen as preaching to the converted.
SteveH said,
April 17, 2012 at 7:08 pm
Slackcloth, just looked this word up and spat my cut of tea out, brilliant, I love it!
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 18, 2012 at 2:43 pm
christ. do you live in a biscuit tin? What a fuckking cunmt you are
Rosie said,
April 17, 2012 at 7:13 pm
I think it does boil down to what Jelly says at comment 1. People piss you off, immediately or eventually, so you delete/block them. I don’t think you need a stated comments policy any more than a pub manager needs a stated chucking out policy. Oi, you’re too pissed/too noisy/got a face I want to smack, so out.
SteveH said,
April 17, 2012 at 7:38 pm
“People piss you off, immediately or eventually”
To translate, let us ban people with whom we disagree.
blerergg ococmementrarayrer said,
April 17, 2012 at 9:31 pm
Tories and scabs should be banned – vermin like sackcloth and ashes in other words.
sackcloth and ashes said,
April 18, 2012 at 8:51 am
Fortunately, Will, it’s Jim’s blog and not yours. Otherwise Shiraz will go the same was as the Drink Soaked Trots (which used to be a good blog, before you went mental and fucked it up).
blerergg ococmementrarayrer said,
April 18, 2012 at 2:32 pm
Tory Cunt and Scab sackcloth and ashes speaks:
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 18, 2012 at 2:33 pm
Maybe the goon who uses the avatar ‘shitcloth and bashes’ could do with a bit of drink, it might improve his dialectics. But it is still hard to see how the cunt can get out of his nastiness and pettiness. Strangely enough, being a drunk was also levelled at Guy Debord, but then he replied that he had always been a drunk, and that from an early age. So it goes.
ban and delete shitcloth and sashes. he is a cunt nazi.
sackcloth and ashes said,
April 18, 2012 at 3:00 pm
On the Spesh already, Will?
Please don’t tell me you’re actually sober when you type your comments.
Rosie said,
April 17, 2012 at 9:41 pm
Johng after respectfully disagreeing with the Save Gadaffi! Save Assad! line taken over at Socialist Unity, is now sucking up to them after the Galloway win, since Respect has become a bandwagon the Swuppies might just be able to jump back on to. He is gone into his false-horror and outrage mode.
@ SteveH – you translate everything into your own idiolect, which bears no relation to what anything actually means.
Pinkie said,
April 17, 2012 at 9:55 pm
Yep, that should do it. A revised comments policy is just what is needed to improve this site.
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 19, 2012 at 12:18 pm
deleetiNg you in real life would improve the stock of humanity tenfold. tosseeR
Jim Denham said,
April 17, 2012 at 11:06 pm
SteveH: “To translate, let us ban people with whom we disagree.”. You mean like Socialist Unity, who feel free to compare me personally, and the AWL as an organisation, and this blog, with Breivik…then blocks replies from me and others?
And you have the effrontery to whinge about occasionaly being banned from here?
Chris said,
April 18, 2012 at 11:20 am
Hilarious. I am always amazed by how funny lefties can be, given that I spent a few yrs in the Socialist Party (dour and dire).
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 18, 2012 at 2:48 pm
ps. it would be a better laff here if me and bLerggHh CoNnh nTaytror were allowed comments through mOdErATIoN and deletion shit and that. the rest of you are well boring arseholes. honerable exception Faster Pussy KaT. and that.
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 18, 2012 at 2:48 pm
can we hev another post abowt cyclophobia?
Jimmy said,
April 19, 2012 at 12:07 am
Jelly. That U Tube link looks like a young version of Chancellor Lawson maybe even Edwina after a Major swallow.
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 19, 2012 at 12:13 pm
Steeve haiTch’s fave fillum directoR
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2012/apr/19/mel-gibson-rant-joe-eszterhas
in his woown werDS
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 19, 2012 at 12:24 pm
mOrrissey with dog
Roger said,
April 23, 2012 at 3:07 pm
Surely it should be dicks, pussies and arseholes:
http://technorati.com/videos/youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3D32iCWzpDpKs
Having done it for a while moderating comments is a waste of time for a relatively low traffic blog (and a monumental waste of time for a high traffic one).
WordPress etc should allow readers to block automatically comments from the cunts and shits by user name
(I almost always enjoy Will’s channelling of the great R Lee Ermey as a Red Army drill instructor even if he thinks I am also a boring arsehole – so arses are OK).
But no doubt there are good capitalist reasons for not doing so – every troll being a revenue generator.
modernity's ghost said,
April 27, 2012 at 6:34 pm
Fascinating post.
Sadly, it gives the impression that socialists are sem-iliterate, often drunk, cannot articulate a case without swearing and favour the lowest common denominator.
If that’s not the impression you wish to give, then possibly you might want to consider writing a mature post looking at the issues.
There is plenty of material in this particular area as it is a well discussed area of blogging, it might be productive if Shiraz admins examined those debates and left off the juvenile swearing.
Monsuer Jelly est Formidable said,
April 28, 2012 at 1:23 am
sacre bleu. wot a weirdo.
Faster Pussycat Miaow! Miaow! Miaow! said,
April 28, 2012 at 8:46 am
socialists are sem-iliterate
Brap! Brap! Brap! Brap!