16 April, 2006

Mike Kopp, Just Turn Your Bleeding Comments OFF, If THAT'S How You're Gonna Be

So I read Kopp's impassioned defence of his actions and rolled my eyes at the whole waving-little-Muslim-girl who motivated him to action. (As someone said about something else earlier in the week, that's not much different than having your neighbor's dog tell you to shoot people. )

I commented on his blog where I said something along the lines of "you sound ridiculous, and you've abused a stereotype to inflame opinion, just as Hobbs tried to do", but with a lot more words.

Other people commented as well.

As of right now, all the comments that disagreed with Kopp are deleted. 11 out of 16.

I wrote earlier about what blogs are. I still don't have any kind of firm answer, but I definitely think that if a blog has comments, the only reason a comment should be deleted is because it is either foul or an off topic attack. None of the deleted commets at Kopp's were either.

Listen. If you want comments, you take all the germaine comments. (Like the one a few posts down on here where someone said something that made sense to them and may make sense to you but still leaves me feeling as though they missed a sentence or two.)

If you don't want comments, there is an option for turning off the comments on a post. People do it all the time.

So, Mike, man of the people, either turn 'em off or leave 'em up. As it stands right now, you look like the KGB. "Good news only!!!"

17 Comments:

At 7:59 PM, April 16, 2006, Blogger commentergirl said...

Sadly, Bryson for Governor is also censoring comments. But rather than delete them, they just never approve them for publication if they are critical of Mr. Hobbs.

 
At 8:14 PM, April 16, 2006, Blogger Kat Coble said...

I can kind of understand that. I'm not just saying this because I'm a wingnut who thinks Hobbs can do no wrong. (I'm a wingnut, but I think Hobbs does do wrong...)

Comment mediation is the dorky way to make it look like you have lots of friends and no enemies. Comment mediation is like sending flowers to yourself to impress the girls in the office. But at least comment mediation says at the outset "we will choose if what you say is worthy."

It's stupid, but it's an option. It lets the reader know up front that they may not make the cut.

Frankly, every time B4B accepts one of my comments I feel a little happy inside. Like I'm good enough to live in posterity.

 
At 8:21 PM, April 16, 2006, Blogger HJ said...

Kat, the one difference is that at the B4G website, there is not a single post addressing the Hobbs situation. Any comments regarding it are off topic.

HJ

 
At 8:34 PM, April 16, 2006, Blogger commentergirl said...

Is this post not about "the Hobbs situation"? I would say that it is.

 
At 8:38 PM, April 16, 2006, Blogger commentergirl said...

By the way, I pulled an excerpt from the post written by Bill Hobbs and replied specifically to that bit of text. My comment was in no way off topic.

HJ, did you read the comment(s) that I made that was held and not published?

 
At 10:13 PM, April 16, 2006, Blogger Kat Coble said...

Commentgirl,

It appears that Bill didn't approve the comment because it contained profanity. He's addressed it in that post.

By the way, I apologise for saying that comment moderation is "stupid". What I meant to say was that I think it can (and often does) send the wrong message and defeats the purpose of comment sections.

"Stupid" was clumsy shorthand. Sorry about that.

 
At 7:24 AM, April 17, 2006, Blogger Bill Hobbs said...

commentergirl's comment was deleted because it used profanity. period

 
At 8:22 AM, April 17, 2006, Blogger Michael said...

I agree with you on the commenting thing. If you don't want people to disagree, then you turn them off.

The only comments I delete are spam or those that are just truly ugly or vindictive. If you don't agree with me, that is cool. It's a big world and we can all disagree.

Can't we?

 
At 10:44 AM, April 17, 2006, Blogger S-townMike said...

Lemme get this straight (without taking sides for or against Kopp): you make of habit of lecturing others (namely, me) when you assume that they are telling people what to do with their own property, but you feel perfectly fine telling Kopp what to do with his own blog and its comments? Are you only a libertarian when it is convenient to be one?

 
At 10:51 AM, April 17, 2006, Blogger Kat Coble said...

but you feel perfectly fine telling Kopp what to do with his own blog and its comments?

Well, obviously Mike (the other one) doesn't have to do what I say. But as a libertarian (which I am), I was quite peeved to see that someone had what appeared to be open comments but weren't.

Clearly this post title was hyperbolic. Relax. Oh, wait. It's not "libertarian" for me to tell you to relax. Let me rephrase that in a more Libertarain way:

If you should choose to relax, then feel free to do so.

Oh, and btw, I never advocated, even jokingly, causing damage to Kopp's property.

 
At 12:49 PM, April 17, 2006, Blogger S-townMike said...

I was quite peeved to see that someone had what appeared to be open comments but weren't

Actually, I interpreted your peevishness as having more to do with whose comments were deleted, not that they were deleted.

I no more advocated damaging property than you do covering it with a hood (which may just be sacrilege--hence, damaging to the privately-owned hood--from certain religious perspectives). The satellite dish--oh, property most sacred, more holy than life itself--remains in tact, and will remain in tact. Remember: self-control of selfish desires is a still a good thing, even when not the most excellent thing. I would lapse toward sin if I in fact wished to see something happen and saw the damage through to its end; or worse, confused damage as excellent in and of itself.

 
At 1:03 PM, April 17, 2006, Blogger Kat Coble said...

Actually, I interpreted your peevishness as having more to do with whose comments were deleted, not that they were deleted.

Misimplication on my part or misinferrence on your part. Sorry. I only had one comment (now two) deleted. Hobbs had about 3, Sharon Cobb had 1 and several people I have never heard of each had one.

I don't even mind all that much if someone decides they hate me and don't want my comments on their blog. I think it's a bit silly, but I can understand it. What got me about Kopp's Selective Deletion policy was that he deleted those who were in some way critical of his story.

 
At 2:23 PM, April 17, 2006, Blogger Gunner said...

I think the problem is that some bloggers talk about freedom of speech, but are very fast to delete them when they disagree. Oddly enough I say he has the right to delete all he wishes as it is his blog.

I simply have no plans on sending a spiral comment his way as he is in the middle of a hissy fit and needs a time out.

 
At 6:25 PM, April 17, 2006, Blogger Kat Coble said...

Oddly enough I say he has the right to delete all he wishes as it is his blog.


Gunner, I agree. He most certainly does have the right. I'd never question that.

Just as I don't question my right to moan about it when he sanitizes the responses.

 
At 7:10 PM, April 17, 2006, Blogger Rain said...

I like dissenting views on my blog and enjoy hearing what others think about the topics. A blog that works best, for me, is one that has others adding to it or disagreeing, not just saying-- attaboy.

That said, i do delete comments from mine-- the ad ones. I consider them to be an irritation and I tried word verifcation as you have, but it left my best friend unable to comment as her computer would close them down before she could get the letters. So the solution for me was to just delete the spam.

 
At 8:21 AM, April 18, 2006, Blogger Don said...

"What got me about Kopp's Selective Deletion policy was that he deleted those who were in some way critical of his story."

Ah, but how do you KNOW that, Kat?!!! Perhaps Mr. TPP was deleting positive comments, eh? ;)

It's a perfectly reasonable inference I'll readily agree. And an absolutely wonderful example of how not to run a blog. So much so that it ought to be anonymized and used as a case study in PR classes....

 
At 9:34 AM, April 18, 2006, Blogger Kat Coble said...

Ah, but how do you KNOW that, Kat?!!! Perhaps Mr. TPP was deleting positive comments, eh? ;)


I had read them all before they were deleted. They were up most of Sunday afternoon.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home