Recently, I received a deluge of posts and comments complaining about why I allow certain comments.
First, I must maintain impartiality.
Second, you don't have to like or believe what you read.
Third, save yourself typing because any questioning of what I allow/disallow will be ignored.
8 comments:
I generally agree with your points, but I have to say #3 just shouts out that you do not care what your readers think. If you aren't doing this for them, why are you doing it? Just asking.
I read many derogatory comments about me from people upset because their comments were deleted. Or people berating me for allowing comments they find "offensive".
If I acted with them in a caring fashion, this blog will lose its purpose. Upset readers shouldn't dump their brain. They must think and format their thoughts!
Comments and concerns within the LLNL gates are governed by trepidation. That's a given. Scooby's blog offers an outlet for some of these comments and concerns. Whether or not LLNS management appreciates it or not is another topic, but they are likely a portion of continued blog criticisms, with the hope the blog will dissolve.
There has been talk of "selective censorship" by some posters for years. If Scooby was not being accused, I was.
Those accusations were and are a big steaming load of bull cookies. Scooby has run this blog with a strong emphasis on being impartial, even to the point of allowing some comments that bother some or most people. The rules for rejection are simple and transparent to visitors here - "Stay on topic. No profanity, threatening language, pornography. NO NAME CALLING. No political debate."
Sometimes a post gets jammed in the review queue. It does not mean the Scooby was being high and mighty, just hasn't been seen by Scooby and approved. These things happen, no malice whatsoever.
Trolls will make up all kinds of ill begotten rumors as "pay back" for not being allowed to create mischief here. Just ignore them, Scooby is a good man who does try his best to be a fair, even-handed moderator.
Thanks Gregg! You know first hand about moderating!
"Moderating" literally means eliminating extreme views. It doesn't mean eliminating disputatious views, or contentious views, or argumentative views. Such views can always be presented "moderately," which should mean they are allowed, unless you have your own definition of "moderate" (as an adjective and a verb).
Since you have an idea on how to moderate a blog, why don't you volunteer as a co-moderator to help me?
I believe that commentator's 1/24/2022 6:18 PM argument is based off the root word "moderate" vs. "moderator".
Here is what Wikipedia has on the subject Discussion Moderator.
More specifically Internet Forum Moderator.
The second article covers all the issues that have been raised here - hidden cabals that a moderator serves, abusing powers for some personal agenda, yadda yadda. It's old-hat that gets brought up on everything from the old USENET News to Reddit, usually by people who don't get their way or those whose mindset leans toward conspiracy theories.
To squelch any further rumors I can certify that Agent S, err I mean Scooby is not a member of the Men in Black. Proof is available here.
Now go buy your kids some ice cream, let them stay up. And Scooby is not a MIB agent.
Post a Comment