Friday, August 03, 2007

New Rules for Commenters - Whiners Need Not Apply

One line of rules at the top of my Haloscan comment page simply doesn't do any justice seeing how some commenters insist on throwing temper tantrums of sort, especially among some of the deaf people who think name calling or ad hominem attack has the equivalent of a great argument. How little do they know. I have now added several more rules, which can be seen below, in order to expand and further my clarification on the expectation from people who comment while on my blogsite. These are real simple rules that even a deaf caveman can understand. I am sure most people will agree with my new policy. If not, well, then they are a lot dumber than I thought. The "rules" link is seen at the top of my Haloscan comment page and the link is a recent addition placed approximately 2 weeks ago.

UPDATE: I am putting the rules here because people with cell phones may not be able to link to my .png image that describes my rules. The "rules" link in Haloscan will be linked to here from now on.


A very, very simple guide to posting comments on Kokonut Pundit

Kokonut Pundit welcomes all points of view but unlike some sites this blogsite does not permit people to greet those who disagree with by way of personal attacks, name-calling, or profanity. So, if you want to avoid having your comments edited or deleted, or getting yourself banned (either for a short time or longer, take your chance) then please follow these simple guidelines:

No profanity. There is no reason to resort to foul language, regardless of how badly your arguments have been shredded or that you are befuddled by your own stupidty you'd resort to profanity thinking it replaces well thought out arguments.

No personal attacks. If you want to call names, you know where you will be welcomed. But here, please conduct all discussions with at least a modicum of intelligence and respectability. Personal attacks on other posters will not be tolerated. This goes double for personal or ad hominem attacks on the people who post blogs on Kokonut Pundit.

No off-topic ramblings. If you think a comments thread is meant to be a free-for-all smorgasbord for anything that comes into your head, you are in the wrong place. Try to maintain at least a tenuous connection to the subject matter at hand.

No abuse. Post the same message over and over, especially in multiple off-topic threads, is not a good way to ingratiate yourself.

No spamming. No advertising and whatnot about product or services. Nobody like getting spames. If you do like spam then certainly there must be something wrong with you.

No juvenilia. In case you didn't understand the word "juvenilia" it means acting like a child. Kokonut Pundit had its fill of the occasional insipid insult phrases that pervade the cybersphere, and they will not be permitted here.

And most importantly of all, comments are to be made in English only. Anything other than English will means automatic deletion.

If you disagree with my policy then you are certainly a lot dumber than I thought. This is a place where all can present arguments, facts, ideas, and opinions about the subject matter at hand. This is so that we can learn about certain topics and other people's perspectives.

5 comments:

Mike said...

Copies of comments from my old Haloscan commenting put here due to Haloscan not becoming free anymore.


"Profanity" needs to be changed to "Dirty Words"

After all, you said "that even a deaf caveman can understand."
Wiggums | Homepage | 08.03.07 - 11:43 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now you did it. See what you made me do on my next blog?
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.03.07 - 12:39 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I like your rules but dosnt the line "If not, well, then they are a lot dumber than I thought." constitute a personal attack on people by calling them "dumb."???

If we must have rules then shouldnt even the blogger follow them?

hehehe
Lolypup | 08.03.07 - 4:46 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lolypup, who am I addressing personally? Nobody. Is it a particular person? No. A group? No.


And I still stand by what I said.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.03.07 - 5:31 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ouch! stern words indeed. I can only imagine what gets posted on your blog that we don't get to read. Oh wait, yes I can... they're all over at Draco Malfoy's place.
Curious Eyes | 08.04.07 - 10:57 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CE, LoL. And they call it infringing on their freedom of speech when their comments get removed knowing full well that sort of talk isn't permitted here. Bright people we have.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.04.07 - 11:39 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The only one I see whining is you, honey.
Yeah right. | 08.04.07 - 1:24 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Is that all you got to offer? Next time, come up with some good arguments and not ad hominem attack against commenters here. Can't hack it? Then don't even bother to trying in here.

Note the rules in the link at top of the Haloscan comment page.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.04.07 - 2:54 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike said...

What's so important to offer a whiner new material to bitch about?

I think you just shot yourself in the foot.
Yeah right. | 08.04.07 - 3:40 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Shot myself in the foot? Actually.....no.

Now, it is not a surprise that people think that doing ad hominem attacks is the equivalent of a brilliant argument. Not so in here.

Again, if you have nothing to offer and insist on subterfuge then you are not welcomed here. Otherwise, do your best at presenting something useful here. Last warning with your insistent on personal attacks that I've edited out.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.04.07 - 4:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Surprise, surprise. Whiners have control issues.

If you ran this country like you ran your blog, this would NOT be United States of America.

And, honey.. This is not a whine, this is a fact. Everyone knows this and you know it.

You've been told.
Yeah right. | 08.04.07 - 4:20 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you can't follow the rules here then you're not welcomed. Simple as that. Please go someplace else if you believe that personal attacks are heralded as a clever way of debating. People are interested in actual debates and arguments without getting personal and throw temper tantrums. Obviously YOU cannot handle that very idea of keeping it clean. It's all about keeping it clean here when addressing other commenters. And nothing to do with "freedom of speech" which you are seriously twisting things here.

Sorry.

Ciao.


mcconnell | Homepage | 08.04.07 - 5:33 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, I have no issue with your establishing rules for your blog. You have the right, as a blogger, to expect and demand respectful dialogue. However:

1. Your putting your house rules in a PNG picture file renders them inaccessible to many using a text-based browser, including those of us who use Sidekicks to read your blog. That doesn't seem like the brightest thing ever.

Here's a friendly suggestion: write a new post on your blog, date it before the blog began, copy and paste the information so it is in text form and if you wish, add "Rules added on (date)" for accuracy. Update your links to your house rules. That way it's more accessible for everyone.

2. The section on off-topic ramblings could be sticky. Off-topic is so subjective. Of course, many times, it is very obvious when something is off-topic, but not always. There are times when a topic naturally leads to another. What you have written seems very absolute and does not allow for any gray areas. If you do intend on allowing for some flexibility, it might be good to note that beyond your ..."tenuous connection..." line. The key for any discussion, I think, is to be as fluid as possible.
hmm | 08.04.07 - 7:57 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike said...

Continuing on copying old comments from Haloscan to here:


(Continued)
3. Ad hominem attacks - of course, this should not be permitted. However, I have seen you declare something to be an ad hominem attack when it was not. For example, the recent fracas over at DeafDC.com where Peyote Pete and Deaf Pundit commented on your tendencies were not ad hominem attacks. Calling you, say, McMoron, would of course be an ad hominem attack and grounds for deletion. Please do note, however, that I am not actually calling you a name here. I'm just offering up an example. If you're offended, I apologize.

4. The line about if one disagrees with anything, you're dumber than I thought was incredibly condescending and offensive, in my opinion. Dissension/disagreement is a comment on one's intelligence? This came across as very condescending and suppressive to me. Plus, if dissension/disagreement isn't tolerated, why bother having a comment section? I know you will probably try to say this is not what you meant. If that's the case, I'm relieved. But that's the impression you are leaving me with as a result of that line.

I think most of your rules appear very reasonable and most reasonable people would not disagree with the majority of your rules. However, that line was completely unnecessary. Here's a gentle suggestion for a re-word: "If you disagree with my policies, please do not comment on this site."
hmm | 08.04.07 - 8:00 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Last part)5. The line in your entry:
hmm | 08.04.07 - 8:04 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(Trying again for the last part)
5. The line in your entry:
hmm | 08.04.07 - 8:07 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. The line in your entry -These are real simple rules that even a deaf caveman can understand
hmm | 08.04.07 - 8:08 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike said...

5. The line in your entry:
hmm continued | 08.04.07 - 8:09 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5. The line in your entry:
hmm continued | 08.04.07 - 8:32 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why can't I post? Just 2 short paragraphs.
hmm continued | 08.04.07 - 8:36 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

hmm: McConnell said, if you disagree with his policy (about posting comments to KP), you're dumber than he thought. It's OK to dissent and disagree. It's not OK to insult someone or call them names. Case in point: "yeah, right" above. I'm glad you got rid of that, McConnell. It's very boring to read.
Curious Eyes | 08.04.07 - 11:29 pm | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CE, but doesn't his saying "you must be dumber than I thought" constitute an insult simply because one disagrees?
hmm | 08.05.07 - 12:24 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Trying again
5. The line in your entry:
hmm | 08.05.07 - 12:26 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

As I explained it to Lolypup who asked that very same question. It's not about one who disagrees but rather the person would in fact agree ad hominem attacks should be allowed. Agrees that insults should be allowed. Agrees that spamming should be permitted. Profanities are a-OK. And so on. Essentially by disagreeing the person is not interested in good, clean public discourse and debate. And so what if anyone think that what I wrote (ie "insults") among my list of rules. If anybody actually felt insulted when I said "you're dumber than I thought" then certainly those people need to think why they felt insulted. Is it because they don't agree with having good, clean, intelligent discourses and debates here in Kokonut Pundit?

It's all about putting 2 and 2 together equals 4.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.05.07 - 8:58 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mike said...

Hmmm, also, thanks for bringing up the text based link problem. I'll correct that very quickly.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.05.07 - 9:01 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Hmmmm..." as for what you don't like (per the insults) then perhaps you didn't get the gist of what I said concerning the whole package. If people don't like my rules then certainly THEY are dumber than I thought because the whole point is to have good, clean discourses. No one wants to see insults thrown all over the place at other commenters, the blogger, guest blogger and so on at a personal level. Allowing for that sort of dissension will only produce more and more profanities, insults, ad hominem attacks and so on. It will simply disintegrate. It doesn't produce anything positive. My aim is to stop that and people need to learn to respond appropriately here. And, hey, this is my one time opportunity to express how I really feel about those people who disagree with my policy. Don't like? Well, what can i say? Though I do appreciate your inputs and suggestions.


mcconnell | Homepage | 08.05.07 - 9:25 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

CE, exactly.

Let's keep it clean is all I ask. And that is NOT an unreasonable request.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.05.07 - 9:29 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hmm...I have no idea why you're having problem posting. Just keep trying.
mcconnell | Homepage | 08.05.07 - 9:35 am | #

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thanks, McConnell, for making your rules more accessible for those of us with text-based browsers. We appreciate it!
hmm | 08.08.07 - 2:12 am | #