April 15, 2007 7:28 AM
The Washington Post's comment policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
I must say I feel vindicated as the Post's policy has been my humble comment policy all along. I'm not sure why some people in the blogosphere think it's unethical for bloggers to exercise discretion in the comments they print, as though commenters have a "right" to be printed wherever they want - kind of like gay groups who think they have a right to intrude on the academic life at private colleges (and the media who sympathize with them).
This blog is like my living room. In our family we have lots of lively discussions and debate, but if a stranger came in and started hollering at us, I can't say he'd be welcome.
I also cannot for the life of me understand people who troll blogs just to argue with those they don't agree with. It seems to be mostly a leftist phenomenon: maybe they have more free time on their hands. The irony is that they are the true proselytizers in our culture - pushing their politics with the sanctimony and self-righteousness of the religious types they hate.
From time to time some leftist blogger lets loose on something I've written and I get a stream of visits from people who don't have the slightest idea what's going on here who want to leave their two cents about why people who believe in modesty for women are nuts, whether hiphop music is free speech, and how homosexuality is blessed by God.
Most people on the left seem unable to write a dignified response to something they disagree with. Among comments I drop are any with ad hominem attacks:
American Heritage New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy, Third Edition : ad hominem [(ad hom-uh-nem, ad hom-uh-nuhm)] A Latin expression meaning “to the man.” An ad hominem argument is one that relies on personal attacks rather than reason or substance.
Why would you expect someone who's obviously done her homework but has a different opinion to listen to yours if you're calling her names or telling her she's obtuse?
Anyway, here are the latest stats for MommyLife:
Average daily visits: 2867
My posts: 1716
Your comments: 6634
Actually, only a teensy number of comments are deleted - maybe one or two percent. But now you bloggers who've been somehow feeling you MUST print everything to be fair might want to reconsider. It's your blog, after all.
Posted in Blogging | Permalink
Comments
I agree as usual.
BTW, I added you to my list of "thinking" bloggers. (You probably were already nominated several times over.)
Posted by: Carol | April 15, 2007 10:00 AM
I think it is great that you delete those comments out. I do not care to read comments that are rude to say it nicely(sometimes they are just mean and nasty). Even if you disagree with someone you do not have to attack them to try to prove your point of view to be the right one. I see some horrible things on some of the blogs I read and they are never really arguing thier point just being hurtful to others with a differing point of view. That is actually one of the reasons I love to read yours. I like reading what is in line with my views. If people do not agree with your way of thinking they do not have to read your blog.
Posted by: momoffour | April 15, 2007 10:25 AM
I suppose you've seen the buzz about the Blogger's Code of Conduct being discussed lately? IMO this is your site and you are responsible for what is said here. You not only have the right to monitor the comments, but the duty.
Did you see about the guy who is suing MySpace for infringing his free speech by deleting his profile?
Posted by: Michelle | April 15, 2007 12:59 PM
"The irony is that they ar the true proselytizers in our culture..." Yes!
Just this morning, our Pastor was pointing out the highly specific and highly significant word choices Matthew frequently made in his writing. The examples were rich. Among them was one particular verb that is used only very selectively means to tell or proclaim. Where did he use it?
1.) When the women at the empty tomb were told to, "Go and tell," about the risen Jesus.
2.) When the mercenary soldiers were given a large sum of money by the chief priests to go and tell the story that while they were sleeping, the disciples had taken Jesus' body (How they knew this if they were sleeping when it happened, I guess, is irrelevant when one is in a hurry to set up a counterfeit gospel to preach!)
It's not only Christians who preach! It is only Christians who are expected to be silent because they are "religious," and "forcing their views" upon others. EVERYONE worships something, everyone places something as ultimate, and everyone is "religious." The world in general preaches long and loud and more zealously than the vasy majority of Christians. But with hate behind it, not love.
Posted by: Marian | April 15, 2007 2:30 PM
"The irony is that they ar the true proselytizers in our culture..." Yes!
Just this morning, our Pastor was pointing out the highly specific and highly significant word choices Matthew frequently made in his writing. The examples were rich. Among them was one particular verb that is used only very selectively and means to tell or proclaim. Where did he use it?
1.) When the women at the empty tomb were told to, "Go and tell," about the risen Jesus.
2.) When the mercenary soldiers were given a large sum of money by the chief priests to go and tell the story that while they were sleeping, the disciples had taken Jesus' body (How they knew this if they were sleeping when it happened, I guess, is irrelevant when one is in a hurry to set up a counterfeit gospel to preach!)
It's not only Christians who preach! It is only Christians who are expected to be silent because they are "religious," and "forcing their views" upon others. EVERYONE worships something, everyone places something in the position of Ultimacy, and everyone is "religious." The world in general preaches long and loud and more zealously than the vast majority of Christians-- but with hate behind it, not love.
Posted by: Marian | April 15, 2007 2:32 PM
Great point (as usual!), Barbara. Thanks for the reminders.
If you're interested, one of my favorite articles on this topic of "what do we owe people with whom we disagree" is available on the Peacemaker Ministries website: Roger Nicole's, "Polemic Theology."
Hope you and yours enjoy a wonderful Sabbath!
Thanks again for your ministry,
Tara B.
Posted by: Tara Barthel | April 15, 2007 2:43 PM
Hi, Barbara! I have selected you as a Thinking Blogger because your blog makes me think. :-) I know you are probably too busy to tag five more people, though in actuality I only came up with four, I thought I'd let you know. More info can be found here:
http://www.thethinkingblog.com/2007/02/thinking-blogger-awards_11.html
Have a great day!
Drewe Llyn
Posted by: Drewe Llyn Jeffcoat | April 15, 2007 5:47 PM
I like people who take a stand. There are too many generic people. That's why I like you Barbara. I've found it impossible to trust people who are so generic that you can't be sure what they will do or say when presented with a new situation. When people are open enough to take a stand and let me see who they are and what they are - I am free to trust them. Thank you for being you!
Posted by: Debbie | April 15, 2007 6:56 PM
