It's not fair to tie the Nobel Peace prize to an accomplishment. Remember when Al Gore won? It was for raising awareness of global warming. I feel that it was well deserved, but he didn't actually accomplish anything (yet). The President of the United States actually said out loud, in front of people, that the United States is not at war with Islam. That is something in itself, a foundation to peace that no other U.S. President has offered. His open hand and willingness to listen to other world leaders has set tone of cooperation and trust that our 'enemies' can hold on to and offers the hope of peace. If raising awareness about global warming deserves a Peace Prize, the U.S. President saying "You are not our enemy" certainly does. In my humble opinion.
Hi folks, just popping in to say 'hi'.
Hi.
I just noticed that I've made 144 comments on Making Light, 140 in 2007 and 4 in 2008. How very sad. At least now I have 1 in 2009.
I've missed you guys...
"Everything I own and love is on the island; I'm going down with the ship"
The idea of starting over, trying to build a new life in a new place, can be absolutely terrifying. She didn't say that she would beat the storm but that she would rather die than give up everything that she knows.
In the big picture, that attitude doesn't make sense, but in the moment of fear...well, making sense isn't always a priority.
As for me, I fear the unknown much more than death. Yet I will attempt to brave the unknown rather than embrace death.
Scraps @ 48
I was referring to his current, sober views on the subject, not his
drunken ramblings of more than 30 years ago. I've met many other
British folk that are much more level headed and clear when expressing
their hatred of 'foreigners'. It takes a long time for cultural values
to change, no matter how loud the cries for change are. Cultural values
have a strong influence on personal values and can manifest themselves
in some interesting and dreadful ways.
Call me naive, or at least desparate to hold my heroes blameless,
but my understanding of Clapton's view in this matter isn't about white
supremacy or not wanting blacks around. From what I've read, he has a
problem with the UK encouraging people to immigrate from Africa and
then exploiting them for cheap labor.
“My feeling about this has not changed really. We have always been
up to some funny business in this country, inviting people in as cheap
labour and then putting them in ghettos.â€
The irony of the above quote is that putting black people in ghettos
was exactly what Powell wanted, or at least he wanted to keep blacks
out of white neighborhoods. I believe that Clapton is woefully
misinformed about Powell's views. It's unlikely that Clapton is the
most informed person around, given his lifestyle.
Now, it would seem to me, given the company that Clapton keeps and
the music that he loves, that he is not (intentionally) racist.
Racism, sexism, ageism...there are a lot of negative views and
prejudices that sit below the surface of many otherwise nice and caring
people. I know for myself, that my family upbringing and culture has
programmed some crappy ideas and prejudices about certain groups of
people. I have to consciously and deliberately choose not to think that
way (change my mind). Over time, this is slowly working, I am changing.
However, if I were the type to go around getting drunk or high or
otherwise losing control, it's not hard for me to imagine saying
horrible things about people that are different than me. I try not to
think or act that way, but I am aware of what's going on inside me and
what I am capable of.
All of that to say that I give Clapton a little grace. I know he's
not necessarily the greatest human being on earth, he did sleep with
his best friend's wife after all, but I am not ready to label him a
creep or a bad guy.
Taziastan @ 5
"Living God" is a phrase from the Bible. It's found in both the Old Testament and the New Testament. Yahweh is called living God as opposed to the popular pagan practice of praying to images or idols.
Unfortunately for Huckabee, it's impossible to meet God's standard. The whole point of the Incarnation and Crucifixtion of Christ was to provide a way to bridge the gap between God and man.
I'm not sure what Huckabee intends to change, but he appears to have missed the most of what the Old Testament was about, which is, external 'religion' or state religion Does. Not. Work.
In the OT, you find a government, a nation (Israel), founded from the beginning on the Word of God spoken to Moses and continually spoken to the people through the prophets. And what is the common theme throughout the narrative? The people and even the kings turning away from God and embracing sin. The New Testament is about internal change, a decision to turn to God. This cannot be legislated. If the Ten Commandments didn't work for Israel, they won't work for the United States.
So yeah, I believe all this God stuff, it's what my life is about. Would I want to live in a society/culture that reflects (my understanding of) God's character, his 'standards'? Sure enough. Do I think that changing the law, reducing our freedom to choose, in an attempt to force conformity to some preferred behavior will accomplish that? By no means. If man is not free to reject God, he is not free to choose God, and this thing that folks, like Mike Huckabee and myself, call Salvation and Abundant Life would not be available to anyone.
Abortion.
I talked about that topic a few months ago, and I'm still exhausted. But yes, Fred Thompson is being endorsed by the National Right to Life Committee, and The Catholic Voting guide is out and Cardinal O'Malley is urging Democrats to support anti-abortion candidates.
Oy vey.
If you like the Chris Walken Cowbell/Blue Oyster Cult sketch, you should see the census sketch with Walken and Tim Meadows. I laughed so hard the first time I saw it, I couldn't breathe!
*know* instead of *no* in that last sentence.
Shazbot!
Charlie @ 851,
Nope.
You have no understanding about how things work here at Making Light, the Internet, or the real world.
Conversations on ML tend to have a life of their own, apart from the Original Topic. Yet, it serves to highlight the point of Patrick's article. It's not about Censorship, as you claim. It's about the Blogger's Right to determine what is appropriate for their site. IMO, this includes the comments as well as the articles.
Look, you can't level a personal attack against a person's character, call it criticism, and then cry Censorship when they refuse to repeat your comment to every person the know or meet. Well, you can, but you shouldn't. It's an entirely different animal than dissent, disagreement, or criticism. The shades of meaning of each is too much to discuss in a comment, but I hope that get my point. It's one thing to challenge an idea or an opinion, it's quite another to attack the personal integrity of the blogger.
The Internet is a fantastic medium for the free exchange of thoughts and ideas. But not every idea needs to, or should be, expressed in every venue. You have no right to expect someone else to tolerate your ideas at a place that is intended to express their ideas. The fact that many bloggers do tolerate stuff that they don't agree with should not be taken for granted. It is not, and should not be, a requirement.
It's not censorship if I refuse to post your comment on my site. It's censorship if I seek to prevent you from posting your thoughts anywhere, especially if I have the power to do so.
More to the point, in the real world, most people don't care about your opinion unless you're famous or important, or you are a personal friend. Try grabbing a stranger off the street and forcing them to listen to your rant. Picture street evangelists or political activists standing on the soap box and screaming through a mega-phone at you on your front lawn. Or for the calm, reasonable criticism crowd, imagine Rudy Giuliani or Hillary Clinton supporters coming to your house at all hours and forcing you to listen to their pitches. That's the model you are proposing. Having to be approved by some panel and be required to tolerate whatever garbage or useless comments from whoever so chooses to post holds absolutely no appeal for me. Such a model would be a much more serious threat to free speech than comment moderation. Trust me, a bureaucracy is much greater tyrant than any individual. I work for the government, I know what I'm talking about.
To piggie-back what James said, bloggers surrendering their blogs to the visitors would in no way further the cause of free speech. It would just make every blog suck. Without moderation, the comments section would just be a bunch of jerks shouting over and at each other.
Go ahead and start your organization, or I'm sure if you look hard enough you can find a blog network that meets your requirements. Join it. Let me know how that works out for you.
Of course, I no it's best not to engage a Troll, but I have to admit, I'm having fun! :)
Serge,
It is not fair of you to use your super-human chess master brain to anticipate and respond to posts that haven't even happened yet, i.e. Emma @ 893. Please, leave some mystery for the rest of us.
Also, there is that whole time-space continuium thing to consider...
Abi and Serge,
I loved Nurse Chapel's driking song. Hilarious!
I have confirmed that Yaego and Tamara R are indeed real people, which is good. I don't like that the accused sockpuppets are all gathered in the comments section of Yeago's site, but maybe they feel that they will be heard there, which is also good. TheCynic is a dick, which is not news.
However, I did notice some 'red flag' behavior. So as a word to the wise, I offer some pointers:
Don't start a post with "this will probably get deleted" or "I hope I don't anger you" or anything like that. Self-fulfilling prophecy, as it were.
If the Moderator is identifying folks as Trolls or Sockpuppets, do not repeat their arguments or use the same kinds of phrases. You will be linked to the puppeteer, especially a nasty one like TheCynic, who using IP masking techniques and multiple identities (he admits as much). The only way folks have to ID these guys is the words they use and the way they use them.
And finally, if you're linking into a forum or blog from another site, check out the site a bit before you start posting. Check out the hosts and read some of the other threads. Get a feel for the community, if one exists, before jumping in and, potentially, starting trouble for yourself. And, for God's sake, don't say, "I was linked to this site from X", especially if you are going to post a criticism. You might as well say, "Hi, I'm a Troll. Please flame me."
All that to say, if you don't want to labeled a Troll, don't do trollish things. If you don't want to be labeled a Sockpuppet, don't do the things that a banned/deleted/disemvowelled person did.
So there, more cosmic wisdom from your friendly neighborhood CosmicDog.
I have to say, I really appreciated the e-mails I received from Tamara R. She really does seem to be a thoughtful person.
Bruce @ 560
LO-frick'n-L!
Terry @ 558
He sent an e-mail to me, too. At least he wasn't rude, and I was rude to him on his own site.
I have to admit, he/they are doing a fair job of keeping me off balance.
I even sent e-mail to Tamara to find out if she is actually the one posting lately. The tone and the way her arguments are constructed here, at BB, and at Yeago's are very different from her posts on her LJ or MySpace pages. Maybe I just have a problem with a 28 year old nurse claiming to be an "old timey gnu-hippy". I have my own prejudices to get past.
"Fix it or Fork it" indeed.
Tamara,
I know that you think that picking on spelling is petty, but you need to realize that you are dealing with an Editor. In particular, a well-known and respected Editor. Spelling, grammar, logic...this is their world. If you had done the same amount of research on TNH as you expected her to do of you, you would have seen this. I misspelled Nielsen earlier in the thread and was called on it almost immediately. My response, and what I feel is the most appropriate response, was 'oops', not 'you better have something better than that if you want to go against me'. See the difference.
Now it's time for us, at least for me, to unclench. This discussion is bothering me more than usual. At least it's inspired me to start writing in my own blog again. Apparently, I still have some thoughts and ideas in this pretty little head of mine that want to come out. Who knew?
Tamara and others...
This is getting tedious. What do you hope to accomplish by coming here and bitching about being banned or disemvowelled on BoingBoing? If TNH is the ogre you think she is, how exactly are you helping your situation by complaining about her on her own website? I don't know why you were banned and I don't care.
Fucking. Get. Over. It. Already.
I see you have a LiveJournal account, why don't you talk about it there? You can post whatever you want there, with no fear of the evil Teresa or any other of the monstrous BB'ers trying to block or censor you.
I still your think that you are a sock-puppet whose hijacked a real person's online identity for your own twisted ends. I've bookmarked your LJ page, if an entry about this shows up there, I'll be suprised. I still won't feel sorry for you being banned from BB, since you clearly have your own forum for communicating your ideas. Use it.
never-scottbot-whatever: You are obviously mentally ill. Please seek help before one of your delusions causes you to hurt yourself or others. I thought you were leaving this thread anyway. Who asked you to come back?
TruthFriction,
Start your own blog. Write clever interesting things and build a following, and you will then be able to communicate with as many people as you would on BoingBoing. Quit crying about being banned and quit trying to get around it. It may be unfair, though I highly doubt it, Teresa's powers of observation are not to be underestimated.
Moreover, this is really not the right place to make your appeal. If Teresa will not respond favorably to an e-mail from you, why on earth would she respond to an off topic post on her personal blog?
If you are trying to build support for your case over here at ML, then you are really barking up the wrong tree. We guests at Making Light may disagree over a great many topics, however we all respect Teresa (and Patrick, Jim, and Avram), otherwise we wouldn't hang out here.
So, I tell you what. Start a blog. Post the address here or go to my blog and leave a comment with the address, and I will come over and read it and engage in discussions with you.
Other than that, you need to knock it off. Seriously. I've seen you on BB, and you really need to stop.
| Year | Number of comments posted |
|---|---|
| 2009 | 3 |
| 2008 | 4 |
| 2007 | 140 |
Total: 147 comments. View all these comments on a single page.
The most recent 20 comments posted to Making Light by CosmicDog:
Show all comments by CosmicDog.