Home › Blogs › The Editors's blog ›

A Note on Comment Policy

Submitted by The Editors on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 15:54
in

For a variety of reasons, we have been very hands-off when it comes to the comment section at The Next Right. We do not wish to turn this blog into a comfortable echo chamber. However, it is one thing to operate a big tent and tolerate dissent, but it is quite another thing to allow some behavior to poison the environment for others.

We've heard from a lot of people that the comment section at The Next Right just doesn't have a good signal/noise ratio. There is just too much trolling, thread hijacking, and behavior that simply does not create a productive interesting conversation. We don't object to disagreement - from the left or right - but we want The Next Right to be a more valuable, enjoyable experience for our thoughtful commenters and for the people who would participate if the signal/noise ratio was higher. And, frankly, for us, too.

So, here's the deal: We are not making formal rules. We simply expect commenters to be reasonable, generally substantive part of a functional community. If we believe commenters are detracting from the community, we will block them from commenting. We will not do this lightly, over policy disagreement, or on the basis of political orientation.

Our goal is not to purge dissent.   We do not seek to create a "safe haven" from people who disagree with us.  Indeed, part of the purpose of The Next Right is to confront some of these conflicts.  Our goal is simply to improve the value of that conversation.

4.6
Your rating: None Average: 4.6 (5 votes)

Comments

I would agree with this

Submitted by Bilbay on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 16:31.

I would agree with this policy if it is implemented with restraint.  I don't agree with the politics of this site but when I come here I come to listen to ideas.  I can get snark and mockery at any number of places. 

keeping it civil

Submitted by NYCweboy on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 18:55.

Comment moderation is hard... I appreciate you trying to do the right thing, and allow dissent... but not madness...

I've always liked the way Lucianne described the expectation on her site "this is a salon...not a saloon."

Suggestions for fellow commenters

Submitted by Bryan Pick on Fri, 05/08/2009 - 20:02.

I used to debate at a place with very diverse political views.  When it was consistently moderated based on a few simple rules, it worked very well and the signal:noise ratio was very high.  The basic rules were:

  • No mockery
  • No personal attacks
  • No speculation on motives

... against anyone else at the forum.  Very easy to remember.

Even if they aren't formal rules here, they're good to keep in mind.  If anyone starts doing those things, don't follow them down the hole.  Call them out on it and refuse to answer in kind.

I find that another way to keep things from getting out of hand is to give your opponent the chance to faithfully represent your views.  If they can't or won't do that, there's no point in continuing the conversation.  Save yourself the time and frustration of dealing with someone who isn't going to meet your arguments head-on, and you won't be tempted to get uncivil.

The Editors also mentioned generic trolling and thread hijacking.  Again, best to just identify the behavior, call it out and refuse to engage.

But that's just my advice.  Take it or leave it.

Some of us are used to it / some are not

Submitted by 4speed on Sat, 05/09/2009 - 12:01.

Attacks upon Commentors, for you saying or you "quoting" the Truth.....

If you want to Anger a Conservative, tell him a Lie, if you want to Anger a Liberal, tell them the Truth.

Definition of a Racist.........A Conservative that Wins an Argument against a Liberal.

 

Would that these sayings were not so easily accepted as Factual.  

I myself have exchanged Truths / Facts with Liberals on my private E-Mail and they end up ignoring the issues, going off the Deep end with 4 letter words and accusations of Racist are thrown around. 

I wouldn't want this forum to provide for equivalent diatribes of hate, but sometimes that is all you get, along with accusations that have no factual reference.

You can try, we will see.

 Sort of funny, as an

Submitted by In between on Sat, 05/09/2009 - 12:30.

 Sort of funny, as an independent, Republicans can come across in ignoring the issues. And hate? Try reading through Walter Todd Huston's comments. And also Sean Hannity. Funny listening to Sean Hannity, whenever he talks of Obama, we can put the word Bush and you have the same thing or even worse. These last 8 years have been a real eye opener. 

Sort of funny, how the Moby

Submitted by Nine-of-Diamonds on Sun, 05/10/2009 - 19:58.

Sort of funny, how the Moby infestations continue half a year after the election.

My Worry/Concern...

Submitted by Darvin Dowdy on Thu, 05/14/2009 - 23:33.

...is that many Movement Conservatives have wandered off course and taken the Movement along with it.  And those that are steering the movement become militant when criticized or when it is pointed out that they and their ilk are, indeed, partially responsible for the Movements downward trend.  When good constructive criticism comes their way [that they can’t deal with] then they tend to use the "rules" to eliminate those being critical.  The well meaning set of "rules" degenerates into a weapon.

Sadly this is what has happened w/Erick Erickson and Moe Lane over at Redstate, in my view.  Its ok for them to go off on someone like this:   ( LINK )  But when you write opinions that they strongly disagree with, well they lie in wait for you (especially Moe) and when you slip up just a tiny bit, well you're booted from the site.  I proudly admit I've been booted.  These folks have allowed themselves to descend into pettiness and have resorted to bullying tactics, in my opinion. Its really sad.  So, what am I saying?  No rules? No.  Gentlemen/Ladies of the NextRight I exhort you; don’t allow the "rules" to become "weapons" against those you disagree with.  Of course there are going to be mild personal attacks. Certainly there will be mocking.  And yes there will be some speculation of motives.  Totally justified in many cases.  This is to be expected in lively debate.  But no out right lies and no bad language.   I tried to post on a site last week and I was blocked because one of my hyperlinks had a bad word tucked in it somewhere. The word was a "B" word describing a child w/out a father.  I was pleased that it caught the gaffe and quickly changed the link to another.  The sight was Townhall and I recommend this software or whatever they have.  My 2 cents. Darvin Dowdy  

 

foul language

Submitted by chemjeff on Thu, 05/14/2009 - 23:49.

I totally agree with the anti-foul-language bit.  If you can't make your point without resorting to four-letter expletives, it isn't worth making.  (Rising Tide aka Maleficent, are you reading this?)