Admin: Blog comments

Dear readers,

In the past couple of weeks this blog has gotten many comments using foul and racist language. Usually I tend to leave such comments, as they reflect on the writer more than anybody else, however the amount of such recent comments made me rethink that position.

Until further notice all comments will be moderated. Any comment using foul and/or racist language as well as comments in languages other than English or using poor English will be deleted.

I am interested in how you, my readers, see this problem and what other solutions do you see besides outright censorship.

Thanks,
Esther

15 comments:

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Esther said...

Hi anonymous #1 - I think there's a limit when you call to indiscriminately kill people and when you incite hatred against innocents.

That's regarding racism, antisemitism, anti-immigration-ism and other such 'isms'. Regarding foul language, I don't see any good reason to use it. It's degrading to the writer, to the blog and to me.

Hi anonymous #2 - when people talk about killing other people, they do not mean any harm?

I don't understand what you mean when you say things have changed or that there are new considerations for free speech. If somebody would write me an email saying he's going to kill me would that be ok? how about kill all Jews? kill all blacks? kill all Muslims? kill all immigrants? Anything goes, no matter what?

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Esther said...

If people write comments without using foul language and without racism, then there's no problem.

Anonymous said...

if you censor then you become like the "enemy".

lilybird said...

what is racism ?

I believe the concept of racism is racist in itself because it is used to discriminate white well off people.

I don't support calls to kill. Demanding that we let the third world figure it out for themselves all the way is as far as I'd go.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Big Shaker said...

There's nothing wrong with censoring foul language. That does not make you "the enemy," as one commenter said. It simply requires people to use civil language. There's nothing wrong with censoring racist comments, either. I don't understand the comments of some who don't believe racism exists or don't seem to know what it is; in any case, it's perfectly within your rights to prevent your blog from becoming a forum for anyone to spew hatred. Also, there are those who will point to racist comments in your blog and say that they are representative of all the commenters or the blogger, so racist comments should be rejected.

Dag said...

I've had to moderate comments once in a while. people get tired of losing their rants to the aether and stop coming eventually.

Regarding free speech, it's a different thing from not allowing one to come and be obnoxious to the point of being genuinely offensive. If one can make a point civilly, then it's made; but when the same point is made by being obnoxious, it's not free speech anymore, it's just obnoxious.

Here in Vancouver Canada we are eagerly awaiting the trial of mark Steyn on charges of "hate speech" at the local court house, hosted by a clique of leftist social activists who work as thought police as government bureaucrats. People are rightly terrified. Steyn is facing them come Monday. If he were foul-mouthed fool ranting he wouldn't get much sympathy from any of us, and he might well be banned. That he's clever and funny and informed does wonders for case like his. Taste and freedom? Not the same thing.

Of racism, who actually reads De Gobineau? Who knows of Margaret Meade's campaign to create cultural relativism in the face of a lapsed social darwinism? People write and often shriek about racism without having a clue about the nature of the pseudo-science it was one hundred years ago and less. And to find out? Look in your library for De Gobineau. I can't find his work there. Why not? Because he's a "racist." So how do we know?

Censorship is stupid. But good manners are telling.

lilybird said...

@BigShaker
I basically agree with you and others defending the necessity of civilised conversation.

However, I do not agree with the term racism. Hence the question 'What is racism?'. When people talk about racism, they initially talked about an attitude that discriminates people as a whole based on biological attributes,e.g. skincolor or gender. During the 2nd half of the last century, the term became broader. It did not only cover biological attributes, but also adherence to a culture/religion. No problem so far. But in recent times, when public discourse became more and more ideological, the multiculturalists began to use this traditionally negatively connoted term as a weapon to silence voices that do not agree with their ideology. This has made it almost impossible in certain areas to freely discuss certain topics.

thomas said...

"Any comment ... using poor English will be deleted."
- Hmm. I really wish somebody would do that to the rest of the web. Good luck on making it stick here.