The story: http://www.journaltimes.com/articles/2008/12/12/local_news/doc4942f60812532593818137.txt
The rules: http://www.journaltimes.com/about/rulesroad.php
I wonder what, if anything, will happen? I assume the hammer will come down, but will it stay down? What will the bloggers' reaction be? Stay tuned folks.
Bumped to top with updates; comments and new link added -- (kk)
Bumped again due to popularity, and the Journal Times story and comments on the LGBT Center. It will be interesting to see how they moderate this one. (Orbs)
Matt King's mission to fight hunger in Milwaukee
9 hours ago
Posts
51 comments:
"You will be banned if you:
"Call someone a name such as idiot, stupid, a dope, a moron, a racist. Do not call fellow bloggers and commenters names."
Crikey! But what if someone is a stupid idiot dope moron racist?
I think we should sign up using the names idiot, stupid, moron, etc. LOL
Would someone be banned for using our user name in a post?
Seriously, though.. things have gotten out of control. Way too many comment sections have turned into personal attacks towards others. Even when those called out are not even posting in the story.
Take a story, and within a few posts the calling out and slamming and arguing starts. Ridiculous.
If they really don't allow users to cut and paste entire articles, there will be some who have nothing to post!
DA, you are so right...lately it has been a war zone over there.
However, I do think the RJT has gone a little over-board on this...
Orbs, you call them MR. SID (Moron, Racist, Stupid Idiot, Dope!)...I'm sure they are all the same blogger...
Doesn't seem like much has changed there, it is still the same old $#!T... oops, that would get me banned, lol.
I still say banning and policing is a slippery slope. Remove something if it is truly over the top...offensive or libelous. We never objected to that. It was the "I don't like your comment" removal and subsequent ban that made the hair on our necks stand up.
All BOB did was fluff up the verbiage to his little ban policy a bit more. He must feel very "important." Can I call him *that* name?
I can't tell you how glad I am to not be blogging there. I'm also glad that our members police themselves and we don't really have to deal with this kind of gutter nonsense.
I come here for sanity, not for the peep show slime. Oh heck, a *little* slime between friends is ok... tee hee.
Why did they announce it on a Friday evening, going into the slowest part of the week? They should post it first thing Monday morning.
Now they've removed the comments from their story about comments. It's like they want the ratings of the Jerry Springer Show without the audience participation.
Logjam the Moronic Idiot here (and you all don't have to agree at one time),
Hey Orbs, do you think we might have an influx of posters here now or other "JTI" Jr. sites?
Ah, they have a blog entitled MyJT Bulletins where they've posted the rules and comments are allowed - for now.
Like I said, stay tuned. My biggest issue with them was the unevenness of their moderating. I never knew from day to day, or even hour to hour, what would or wouldn't happen to my comments and/or account. I remember comparing it to absurdist literature. No one can function when the rules constantly change and/or are applied arbitrarily.
Logjam, I don't think so because most of them don't know that we exist. Also, we're not quite as nasty here, so I don't know if they would want to contribute.
(added thought)
I like the "gutter nonsense" we have here; it's very refined and refreshing. But coming here for sanity? But I know what you're referring to KK.
The one thing I really appreciate about this group is, yes we have our differences and do express them, but we don't get evangelistic about them.
Wooohoooo, freedome of F&%K'en speech and piss speeled words.
Only on JTI.......
Whenever I drive past the Journal Times, I keep an eye peeled for this guy. If I ever see him, I'm going to punch him in the nose.
That is hilarious. I read the comments on that blog this morning around 7:30 am. There was really nothing there that was questionable, other than people discussing what will really be blocked and some comments in favor of them finally doing something..there was a lot of flaming going on there recently.
All were clueless or there was no mention about our little saga and our defection just 5 1/2 months ago. (seems longer, doesn't it?)
It was tough not to post something, mentioning this history, but I resisted.
Yep, orbs, this is my sanity. What does that say for me? Certainly irregular...
What happened here was that the JT pissed off the intelectuals with opinion and manners. Intelectual is not a bad word or a bad label. I'll end up sounding elitist for this, but I do NOT want the knuckle draggers to come here.
We can disagree using facts, not attacks. We can have varied political beliefs and not throw rocks. I don't want the unwashed, uncouth, low brow minions that the JT will most likely sluff off to be welcomed here. It has nothing to do with elitism.
While we don't have rules of speech here, I sure hope we have rules of etiquit and will somehow rise above the knuckle draggers that have made the JT so offensive when they come.
I'm all for new bloggers coming to our site. I've noticed a couple of very nice people who have been commenting lately using an anonymous login. Yea, welcome! The more the merrier! I hope *more* decent people find their way here. (anons, please take a name so we can get to know you!)
If we happen to get "undesirables..." those who choose only to spew hate without content, (happened in the past) in those extreme and blatant cases, we have the option to remove those comments.
We are not the representation of the city, we are not a journal nor business, we do not have the responsibility of free speech like they should.
This is a much calmer group and, just plainer a nicer gathering of folks here than on the RJT site. It is to the point that if you say something and they disagree, they rip your throat out. I would prefer the MR SIDs stay over there and not bother our nice little group here. We have a group of pretty intelligent folks here who know how to debate without acting superior or insulting to the others.
Plainer...what was I thinking...'plain nicer gathering....' Good grief, Beejay, get your act together before hitting the 'publish' key.
KK,I noticed that too. Not one mention of our saga 6 months ago. Where was BOB back then? I thought things were worse back then they are now.
Huck,I argee with you about the trolls. I don't want them here either. We dealt with them in the past. As long as we stick together,we'll be fine.
And for all the nice anons out there-please,take up a name and join us! We don't bite!
We're not a news site, so we're not as likely to generate the numbers or the friction that they are.
Beejay, isn't their blogging section calmer than the news section? That's the way it's been in the past.
Perhaps our branching off caused them to employ a hands-off policy towards the bloggers for awhile?
This is because of the suicide, and the predictable comments that happened afterword. Funny, no one ever suggested to anyone that was offended that they simply stop reading the posts. Oh well, I needed an excuse to stop posting there, now I have it.
I don't know much about the history of JT, or what has gone on in the forum discussions, but just reading the new rules posted I don't see anything all that surprising, shocking, or unusual. Since I have also been the administer of a busy community forum for a few years, I know how difficult it can be to keep any level of decorum, not to mention keeping us free from the possibility of being held liable for someone's slanderous or libelous use of our forums.....
Its taken a lot of fine tuning to get to where we are now, and I am sure many changes will take place again in the future. Its a neverending job of monitoring, observing, and moderating to ensure things are kept on an even keel.
Our rules aren't all that much different than the JT's. I'll tell you, its much more difficult than one would think to allow for "free speech" while also ensuring there is no use of what could be interpreted as hate speech, defamation, libel, slander, etc I tend to err on the side of caution, and John and I will probe very deep prior to making any decisions when it comes to questionable posts.
Bottom line, its not so cut and dry.
DK, no one here is advocating for hurtful, libelous, garbage posts. I've personally deleted trash posts here and would readily do it again. I guess you had to follow what took place 5 1/2 months ago to understand. The policy stated there now is not the issue.
What occurred was personal, it was not evenhanded. Long term blogger's posts and people were banned due to opinion differences, not due to any content misuse. Some were allowed leeway to say unbelievable things, while other innocent posts would disappear without cause. In my opinion, it was an ego, power thing. There was a silence and refusal to communicate with long term members. News and speech was being manipulated.
JAK, we have fun here. Lots of fun. Hope you're feeling a little irregular....
DK, yes, I'm sure it's much more difficult moderating comments on a news site. The Journal Times is the official newspaper of Racine. I wouldn't want the job.
The idea here is that each person moderates their own blogs. Seems to have worked so far, but, again, it's comparing apples to oranges.
I was thinking, too, that maybe the Journal Times is bracing for the Adrial White retrial. That is bound to generate a lot of heat.
The JT seems perfectly capable of allowing comments when it benefits them and disallowing when the wind shifts. I don't see it as being so difficult for them. On cases where there is a victim... don't allow posts. Just state the news and leave it at that. No one needs to put in their opinion on that. Don't then play the whole banning game. The occasional troll should be dealt with. Period. The trouble is they are greedy. They *do* want the Jerry Springer-ism to bring in advertising hits without the guilt and responsibility. Who are they trying to fool?
It seems to be somewhat calmer, but sometimes they even get out of hand. Some of those folks are just Mr. Sid. Doesn't matter if they are commenting on a news item (and the suicide of that young boy was awful...) or something that someone doesn't agree with, someone will go way off with remarks that are totally uncalled for. I like our friendly group here. It is nice not to feel that if someone disagrees with you, they are going to beat you to pieces.
Personally, I stay out of the racial, political stuff....sort of the same rules that I apply that if I am in a bar, ie, no religion, racism or politics!
I have said it before...you could have an obituary for an 89 year old grandmother who died peacefully in her sleep and spent all day baking cookies for church bake sales and you would still have some idiot who would blast her for something at the JT site!
I have only had to delete one comment here on my blogs...it was only two words long at the second one was "you" (I will let you figure out the first word!)
One of the things that strikes me is how quickly everyone has come to believe they have the right to instantly comment on any story. 10 years ago, the only "comments" were letters to the editor which the newspaper totally controlled. Letters to the editor required you to sign your name. People could find you if they wanted to and I can tell you that there are nutballs out there who would...I have had vandalism to my house, hate mail, answering machine messages, and even threats left on the windshield of my car at work after being published at times (and you know papers generally don't allow viscious, swear laden attacks in their letter sections...just stating unpopular opinions is enough to get death threats).
Even more amazing is that some people believe their comments are that vital to having a constructive dialogue on issues, but that's a whole different topic!
Internet = anarchy. Kill the Internet!
A blogger on the Journal Time's site has posted a blog entitled Dear Mr. Bernard O'Brien, JT Online Editor::, essentially an online letter to Brendan, I believe, not Bernard, O'Brien.
GinaB, the blogger, states, "Mr. O'Brien, what exactly about my post violated the rules? Your previous post to the aforementioned blogger was not a sufficient answer. I need a more clear and direct answer. After all, if you don't tell us what rule we've broken, then how can we avoid breaking it in the future? At this point, it seems like comments and even entire blogs are being deleted, shut down, or not permitted at all simply because people disagree with or have criticized the 'clarification' of the Terms of Service."
Sound familiar? Oh, the memories come tumbling back . . .
I broke my code of silence.... Bless me irregular father, for I have sinnned. I was able to leave an anonymous comment on GinaB's blog! What' up with that? Since when can you comment anonymously there? And, the million dollar question, how long will it stay published before BOB hits "delete"? :D
Nice comment KK (or should I say "Anon"), it should bring us more business, hopefully, the good kind!
KK,(damn those old biscuts) your sin has been forgiven......
Now about the others on the list here....
Purge II: Bernard's Revenge
Released direct to video.
Don't think I'll rent the sequel. The plot line of the first flick left me queasy and led to some irregularity.
What a mess over there, way to go Huck!! Your comment will probably be gone by morning but you know which place has more fun :)
So much for this nonsense. This exchange (Credit to the RJT website, all rights reserved) took place among 3 dopes leaving comments on the 12/15 Police report:
My Opinion
Handgun stolen from apartmentCheck one of her thug boyfriends, I am sure he has the gun!
Opinionated Lady
Excuse me, My opinion, but my 94 year old grandmother happens to live in the 5000 block of Byrd Avenue. Please direct your stereotyped comments somewhere else. Thank you.
SOB
Does your grandmother have any thug boyfriends? :-)
It is a darn good thing they spelled out their policy. The obvious advertisement was still up for floral arrangements last I looked. Business as usual. Selective censorship.
"You will be banned if you:
"Have a dispute with a business. If you have a consumer complaint or dispute with a business, this is not the place for it. Contact the business directly with your consumer concerns."
Yet the blog posted last night that complains about Wal-Mart's servicing of a vehicle remains online today. Then again, it was posted by "JTBloggerHero," so I guess that's OK. The double standard continues - one set of rules for the bloggers that the Journal Times likes, a different set for those it dislikes.
Horsedroppings!
Hey, maybe this is some sort of sinister plot to get us to read the Journal Times blogs again. They're probably implanting subliminal messages in them that will make readers buy the newspaper and their advertisers' products. Oh, those sly devils!
Okay kids I have a question.
I understand “bad mouthing a business”.
Here’s my question: “If you had a bad experience with a business and you post what happened, WITHOUT bad mouth them, just stating how terrible/poor their service was and how you got ripped off, is this considered bad mouthing”?
If you look at TMJ-4 they hammer restaurants with information from the city health inspectors. In the same turn, they will complement a business with a good record.
Another is Myfoxmilwaukee and they will list names of people and businesses where citizens have been ripped off.
What is JT afraid of...why not “weed” out the inferior businesses in Racine. If we want to have a good “clean” city lets post situations so more people can beware of poor business practices and better protect themselves.
Not delete/band them (blogs) and sweep them under the rug.
New from webhead, the JT is now allowing advertisers to post blogs if they pay for it! Now not only do you have to weed through the staff blogs, you get targeted for ads too. Seems they found a way to have their cake and get paid for it too.... hmmmm...
Click your heels and say, there's no place like home, there's no place like our irregular home...
One thing I don't get is that you could be banned if post a comment that is in poor taste. What do they mean by poor taste? I mean everybodys's got different opinions on taste. Too weird of a rule.
Personally, I find green olives disgusting! And the taste? Very poor! Please don't blog about them. ;>
Right on KK. That's why I hate olive loaf. O.M. ruins perfectly good bologna by putting those damn thing in it.
Sorry for the smart a@@ olive remark above. Seriously, I read the story of the LGBT earlier. It was placed prominently on the top of their home page.
My immediate reaction was that it was just another of their famous sensationalism stories, designed to rile people up and "get the juices flowing = advertising hits" Yes, sadly, we are so one dimensional, it is news... but is it the top news? As for comments, what exactly do they expect? I think any sane person who has witnessed the recent comments knows what to expect.
So, after so many "$$$" hits is it then moderated and closed for comment?
I think they close it for comment as soon as someone calls someone else a moron.
I may be in danger of being banned...I called the guy who killed Adam Walsh a 'creep.' Oh dear...but it was on a blog started by Winger...oh dear, what will I do...what was I thinking...
I was gonna comment on the Journal Times site. I had to try three different "OrbsCorbs" accounts before I could find one that wasn't banned. Lol. I changed my mind.
Allowing paid advertising blogs? I guess when the stock of your parent company is around a half a buck, creative marketing takes over. What gets me are people that do the cut and paste thing or rehashing what they saw on another site. I mean isn't blogging supposed to be original thought, rather than barfing back what someone else already published?
Orbs, if your "moron" suspicion is correct, I think we could have a little fun with the blogs over there......
Logjam, you are thinking of a little fun to be had are you?
Yea. Now I know why my old man kept telling me "you little shit" when I was a kid.
Yeah, me too. That's why I never had kids. All I needed was a junior version of my wise ass following me around.
I don't think the Journal Times is bringing the hammer down too harshly this time, but I don't know how many, if any, they've banned. They've learned a little.
I can think of a couple that should be banned. *rolls eyes*
Post a Comment