Go Back   Bloggingheads Community > Diavlog comments
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Notices

Diavlog comments Post comments about particular diavlogs here.
(Users cannot create new threads.)

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old 10-17-2008, 12:49 AM
Bob M Bob M is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 23
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

I don't disagree with Bob's point that here
http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/152...7:54&out=09:29
that gratuitously offending somebody is not a good way to persuade him or her. But I guess it depends on whom you are trying to persuade. It is not my own style to be derisive or mocking, but it seems to me that sexism IS worthy of derision and mockery.

Perhaps making fun of a religion's sexism is not a good way of convincing the strongest adherents of that religion not to be sexist, but it might be a good way to prevent the religion from picking up new adherents. Isn't that Bob's point about why Mickey should not be friends with Ann Coulter?

What's the rule of thumb here, Bob?

I guess you probably agree with The Specials that "if you have a racist friend, now is the time, now is the time, for your friendship to end." But if you have a friend - like the Baptist minister - whose prejudices are malevolent in effect but not in intent, then you should nicely and politely express your disagreement??

It seems to me that maybe we need both the nice, sincere disagreement AND the smart ass remarks.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 10-17-2008, 03:32 AM
Jyminee Jyminee is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 105
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Bob's Sarah Palin moment.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 10-17-2008, 07:08 AM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bob M View Post
It is not my own style to be derisive or mocking, but it seems to me that sexism IS worthy of derision and mockery.

What's the rule of thumb here, Bob?


It seems to me that maybe we need both the nice, sincere disagreement AND the smart ass remarks.
Let free speech reign. Including Bob's coaxing... after all, he is a moral animal.
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 10-17-2008, 08:28 AM
Baltimoron Baltimoron is offline
Deactivated User
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Busan, South Korea (ROK)
Posts: 1,690
Send a message via Skype™ to Baltimoron
Lightbulb Comments Policy

For an ad hoc reaction to Kaus' opposition to highlighting comments in his diavlogs, Wright's monovlog (please make the coinages stop!) is acceptable, but not as a feature. It cuts against the grain of the "diavlog" notion for one 'head to address the ether.

Actually, I agree with another commenter, that the purpose of highlighting comments is to bridge commenters and 'heads. However, and excluding spammers, I think comments are mostly precious for self-important reasons, not as much for any contribution to any diavlog. A few 'heads mention comments, but it seems only the negative ones, and I can't recall any information or argument highlighted prominently. A few 'heads engage the Boards, but again for mostly negative effect.

I would make another case for announcing diavlog schedules and allowing commenters to post questions for certain diavlogs a/o 'heads beforehand, like many fansites do. This would have been particularly entertaining on the Hitchens-Alterman diavlog. That way 'heads can frontload content with commenters' viewpoints in mind. Of course, Kaus et al can ignore the questions, but I think the confluence of concerns will improve diavlogs and bridge the gap far more efficiently than talking into the ether.

On the other hand, since commenters have no objective means by which to evaluate 'heads, and no way to influence pairings and new talent, why allow so much influence now. The Boards are a cyncial sop at best, but some commenters make a virtue out of a tired tradition.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 10-17-2008, 04:20 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lyle View Post
Obama's relationship with Ayers is exaggerated?
That's what I wrote, and then I wrote why I wrote that:
Quote:
Originally Posted by handle View Post
Maybe it's just me, but I take my "paling around" seriously, and would not define my interactions with colleges as such.
I don't see any evidence they were "pals" but I feel for you guys as this is starting to look like your only hope, and it appears to be working against you, even if the imagination can be stretched to buy it exactly the way you are selling it.

Good luck!
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 10-17-2008, 04:29 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Back in a few days!

Had the brilliant idea to check his blog today:
Bjkeefe
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 10-17-2008, 11:21 PM
allbetsareoff allbetsareoff is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 32
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Comments monovlog: good
Comments monvlog when exhausted: not good

Why append comments on comments to any particular diavlog? Treat them as a print publication would letters to the editor, with responses (video or written) from the diavlogger in question, if that's feasible.

Also, widescreen Bob gives us a nice view of your classy, commodious and constructively cluttered working environment. I'm a little concerned about spine damage to the books leaning on the top shelf. And what, exactly, is the light in the distance illuminating? (If that's not prying...)
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 10-18-2008, 11:52 AM
Namazu Namazu is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 185
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Talk about high-touch customer service! Harvard Business Review will have to do a case study. But why not take things one step further: fill up the tank and drive around the country on weekends delivering your feedback in person. See you at the Karma Cafe in Philly!
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 10-18-2008, 12:26 PM
JIM3CH JIM3CH is offline
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 157
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

I canít get the mono-vlog to play. Was it good?

Let me state for the record that reading the comments is the only reason that I really like to come to BHtv. I view the actual bloggingheads as being nothing more then rather talented and entertaining facilitators of the more elevated discourse that follows them afterwards in the forum. Thatís why I am so devastated and disappointed at Mickey Kausís blatantly admitted disdain for commenters. Thatís why, despite his participation in the creation of bloggingheads, and despite the fact that he actually does sometimes have an idea, Iím not going to listen to any of his contributions again. And with regard to his arcane labyrinthine tortuous quagmire of a blog on SlateÖ, Iím not going to read it anymore. So there.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 10-18-2008, 12:50 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Yeah, I agree that I'd be willing to pay for watching BhTV, but there's a couple ways of going about this.

For one thing, you might want to make the diavlogs for-pay and the comments free. Then, people can read the comments and see whether, based on the comments, they want to watch the diavlog. Any comment that "gives away too much" is one that you can hide into a premium comment section, or just delete altogether for giving away too much.

Alternatively, you can charge for both. But certainly don't charge just for the right to comment and not for the diavlogs. Bad idea. Reading the comments and participating in them can be fun, but that privilege itself is not worth $10 a month. Maybe $5 a month. Maybe. But I doubt even that. I read the comments because I've been here a while and I know the personalities. But I doubt, if I had just stumbled onto this site, that I'd want to pay to read them.

However, I would definitely pay to be a commenter if that gave me a chance to diavlog with someone else. And I think not showing the face is a good and a bad idea. It's good, because for conservative professors like me, I don't want to lose my anonymity until I get tenure. It's bad, because there's a level of hostility that can arise when people are masked. It makes them feel as though they can get away with anything. That could lead to some painful diavlogs.

Also, some people here fancy themselves smart, but just aren't, really. I mean, they're just above callers to a conservative talk show. I'm not going to name names. (However, I will say that bjkeefe is NOT one of them.) Point is, if you let one of these dummies diavlog, you'd just have to delete it. Otherwise, it would be horrible, because when they diavlogged with an actually informed guest they'd either go berserk or have nothing to say.

My recs in a nutshell:

(1) Have people pay to watch diavlogs.
(2) Make comments free, and allow people to see comments for free to create interest in the diavlog
(3) Allow some lucky person to have the opportunity to diavlog, but be prepared for some real stinkers. Maybe even make this opportunity a for-pay opportunity (though the people who pay for this, make a diavlog, and have it deleted, will be PISSED.)
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 10-18-2008, 12:56 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

I also don't see them as pals. I see Ayers as a person's ring Obama had to kiss.

I never thought that by "terrorists" Palin meant Al Qaeda types. If you listen to right-wing talk radio and watch Fox News on a regular basis (which I do, though I admit my listening has fallen off a bit laterly), NO ONE takes Palin to have meant Al Qaeda types. Not even the callers.

There's nothing wrong with bringing this up. If it's something Obama had to do to succeed in Chicago, too bad. That's life. Obama would certainly do the same to McCain if he needed to.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-18-2008, 01:22 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
I also don't see them as pals. I see Ayers as a person's ring Obama had to kiss.

I never thought that by "terrorists" Palin meant Al Qaeda types. If you listen to right-wing talk radio and watch Fox News on a regular basis (which I do, though I admit my listening has fallen off a bit laterly), NO ONE takes Palin to have meant Al Qaeda types. Not even the callers.

There's nothing wrong with bringing this up. If it's something Obama had to do to succeed in Chicago, too bad. That's life. Obama would certainly do the same to McCain if he needed to.
I think maybe he was kissing Annenbergs ring, but, like you, I speculate.
I'm looking at the Ayers attack as so counter productive to the GOP cause, that I now encourage the attention that has been wasted on it, while Mccain nose dives in the polls. Keep up the good work!
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-18-2008, 01:37 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: 6 reasons why Bob's Commenting on Comments is a good idea

Kudos to you for knowing Sinn und Bedeutung!
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-18-2008, 01:38 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Heh. Hey, conservative though I am, I want McCain to lose too. I prefer Obama to him. I just don't want a 60-seat Dem majority in the Senate.
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-18-2008, 01:39 PM
TwinSwords TwinSwords is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Heartland Conservative
Posts: 4,933
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Quote:
Originally Posted by JIM3CH View Post
I canít get the mono-vlog to play. Was it good?
Sorry to hear that. You could try to download one of the alternative formats:

Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-18-2008, 01:42 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
I also don't see them as pals. I see Ayers as a person's ring Obama had to kiss.

I never thought that by "terrorists" Palin meant Al Qaeda types. If you listen to right-wing talk radio and watch Fox News on a regular basis (which I do, though I admit my listening has fallen off a bit laterly), NO ONE takes Palin to have meant Al Qaeda types. Not even the callers.

There's nothing wrong with bringing this up. If it's something Obama had to do to succeed in Chicago, too bad. That's life. Obama would certainly do the same to McCain if he needed to.
This sort of misses the point. The people you're referring to (listeners to AM talk, etc...) don't need to be persuaded - they already have an opinion that's just generally confirmed by the "pals around" meme. It's people who are more casually connected to politics, who will hear the message, but who are far less likely to have a lot context for it, these are the folks at whom the message is directed.

That said,
Quote:
I see Ayers as a person's ring Obama had to kiss.
is dead on, I think. But implying it's fair to say so, and to let the implications take care of themselves - no.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-18-2008, 01:56 PM
handle handle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,986
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
Heh. Hey, conservative though I am, I want McCain to lose too. I prefer Obama to him. I just don't want a 60-seat Dem majority in the Senate.
Interesting.. like some of my leanings, you sound like a true conservative. There is part of me that wants Mccain to win, not because I see him as conservative, but because the next Pres. will inherit the whirlwind, and get blamed by those conservative in name only for disasters already in motion.
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-18-2008, 04:09 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by AemJeff View Post
This sort of misses the point. The people you're referring to (listeners to AM talk, etc...) don't need to be persuaded - they already have an opinion that's just generally confirmed by the "pals around" meme. It's people who are more casually connected to politics, who will hear the message, but who are far less likely to have a lot context for it, these are the folks at whom the message is directed.
That's a good point, but do you have any evidence at all that people have taken her to be talking this way?
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10-18-2008, 04:10 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: 6 reasons why Bob's Commenting on Comments is a good idea

Well, I'm a philosophy professor. I do my part to the 100 students I teach per semester. Alas, I don't think I'm doing my part well enough, as about 30 of them still think philosophy is both stupid and obvious.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-18-2008, 04:11 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Holy crap, you're good at computers.
Reply With Quote
  #61  
Old 10-18-2008, 04:26 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
That's a good point, but do you have any evidence at all that people have taken her to be talking this way?
Evidence of how the message is being interpreted? Nope - but my argument was about the nature and the intent of the message. And let's be honest - I'm making an inferential case about that. But, I'm not wracked by doubt regarding the accuracy of my assumptions.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #62  
Old 10-18-2008, 07:52 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Well, I think it's certainly possible that that's how the message is being interpreted, but given that the Limbaugh/Hannity/Levin, etc. set is interpreting it (as being about Ayers) and given this video that's going around, where the very angry McCain supporters take it to be about Ayers as well, I'd be pretty doubtful, if I were you, that the McCain/Palin campaign wanted it to be understood in the way you think they did. I suppose, though, you could say that that's what they wanted but they just didn't succeed.
Reply With Quote
  #63  
Old 10-18-2008, 08:24 PM
AemJeff AemJeff is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 7,750
Default Re: Mickey's Right to Defend Palin's Comments

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
Well, I think it's certainly possible that that's how the message is being interpreted, but given that the Limbaugh/Hannity/Levin, etc. set is interpreting it (as being about Ayers) and given this video that's going around, where the very angry McCain supporters take it to be about Ayers as well, I'd be pretty doubtful, if I were you, that the McCain/Palin campaign wanted it to be understood in the way you think they did. I suppose, though, you could say that that's what they wanted but they just didn't succeed.
If you're designing campaign tactics, you don't need to try to convince the people who are already on board. You need your message, minimally, to not alienate them, and you'd like to energize them - but in order to win you also have to persuade people who haven't been persuaded, yet. So the best sort of message is a dog whistle that tells your supporters what they want to hear, and delivers an argument for your case to undecideds.

I think that's a pretty credible model for what the McCain campaign is trying to do at the moment. And, at the moment, the polls seem not to indicate that they're being particularly successful at the second task - at being persuasive.
__________________
-A. E. M. Jeff (Eponym)
Magnets - We know how they work!
Reply With Quote
  #64  
Old 10-18-2008, 11:18 PM
EchoesOhio EchoesOhio is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

I'm very late with a comment here but want to add that it would have been much better without the constant apologies. Please, Bob, just think of us all as Mickey - which should put a quick end to that nonsense.

I rarely leave comments but it is nice to see a relationship between the head honcho and his somewhat anonymous co-horts, including the Baker's Dozen. It gives the site a personal touch that is lacking elsewhere. So my vote is for continuation of the monovlog, with some minor adjustments.

I was going to make a 'play with your moose' joke here, but I'm afeared it will get me sent to the dark place. It's your site, Bob. Bury what you like. But the example you gave is a poor one: we can't offend the holy ones; angering them only makes them meaner(?) Protecting people who call themselves religious from opposing viewpoints may seem like the godly thing to do, but it's really nothing more than censorship. It makes one side innocent and the other less so and it degrades free speech for the sake of an undefined morality. Personally, I'd rather see you stick to the 'I'd like to make some money and save Bloggingheads' rationale.
Reply With Quote
  #65  
Old 10-19-2008, 05:25 AM
Wonderment Wonderment is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 5,694
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

Quote:
So, again, the issue isn't whether religion and religious belief can be criticized or not, but what kind of criticism is appropriate. And the issue isn't about free speech, but rather about morally (un)acceptable behavior toward other human beings.
That may be an issue ultimately, but Bob's example was still a weak one.

Keep in mind that the original Brcruds post referenced by Bob was "Jesus Christ! Women aren't allowed to be pastors? What kind of knuckle-dragging shit is this?"

Bob only objected to the interjection (blasphemy?), "Jesus Christ."

To Bob's ears that may sound like an "f*** you," but (as is often the case in free speech issues) that characterization is debatable.

The way I read it was, "Wow. Women should have equal rights in our religious institutions. Such equality should have been achieved long ago."

The use of "Jesus Christ" seemed appropriate to me as a reminder to the Christian leader to get real.

You could make a case that the intent was to insult the pastor. Or not.

One of the many reasons why censorship is so dangerous is that the censor can get a writer's intentions wrong. Another is that the censor may throw out the baby (the idea) with the bath water (the allegedly offensive language). A third is that one act of censorship can lead you down a very slippery slope. A fourth comes up when no rules apply and everything is left to the arbitrary (and biased) judgment of the censor. Bob runs up against all these problems with this little two-line post. Which illustrates why it's very tricky to mess with free speech.

NOTE: I'm using the word "censor" just to discuss the issue. Bob didn't really censor anyone. The post wasn't deleted, and even if it were, Bob is free to set whatever rules he wants for the site.
__________________
Seek Peace and Pursue it
בקש שלום ורדפהו
Busca la paz y sŪguela
--Psalm 34:15
Reply With Quote
  #66  
Old 10-19-2008, 02:54 PM
EchoesOhio EchoesOhio is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 11
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

One could argue that the comment in question was 'a minimal level of human decency'. The commenter did not attack any individual person, but rather a set of beliefs that set women apart, unjustly, in the opinion of the writer. A valid concern. Though Bob may have a problem with the phrasing, few here, I suspect, have a problem with the point being made.

Still, this is Bob's house. Bob's rules, and I respect them. Censorship is a very personal thing. And if he has a problem with blasphemy then, goddammit, we should refrain from cursing in his house. (Will a small g get me past the censors?) :-)
Reply With Quote
  #67  
Old 10-19-2008, 04:00 PM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Mickey's Playing Dumb on "Palling Around with Terrrorists"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastwest View Post
Half-hour into this now:

I used to feel some degree of sympathy for Mickey's views.

Totally lost it with Mickey's "terrorist" accusations on this one. Mickey's being disengenuous and won't admit it. If I never see him on BHTV again, that's too soon.

Paradoxical: I used to think Bob was deficient in "intestinal fortitude." Nice to see him try to pin Mickey's ears back regarding the obvious "dog-whistle" message of the McCain campaigns Ayers attacks.

Bob himself doesn't whistle very well, though. (This in reference to the few bars we got from him as they dealt with technical glitch.)

EW
I'd appreciate an explanation of why this comment was pulled off the DV-related comment stream (almost immediately, btw) and buried.

Thank you.
EW
Reply With Quote
  #68  
Old 10-19-2008, 08:05 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: Mickey's Playing Dumb on "Palling Around with Terrrorists"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eastwest View Post
I'd appreciate an explanation of why this comment was pulled off the DV-related comment stream (almost immediately, btw) and buried.

Thank you.
EW
To my eyes, there is no obvious rationale for the burying. Maybe a concession to the hurt feelings of the thin skinned Mickey? I hope you get a reply in the public forum. If my memory serves, I recall your comment being on the stream quite near the top. Even if the reason is unrelated to Mickey, it does beg the question. Weird.
Reply With Quote
  #69  
Old 10-19-2008, 10:06 PM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Mickey's Playing Dumb on "Palling Around with Terrrorists"

I doubt Mickey is thin-skinned. If he were, he probably wouldn't have linked to this take-down of him.
Reply With Quote
  #70  
Old 10-19-2008, 10:28 PM
graz graz is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,162
Default Re: Mickey's Playing Dumb on "Palling Around with Terrrorists"

I take every gratuitous shot that I can level at Mickey. I wish I were a better person, or he deserved better. Short of that, I'll continue to insist that he has a face made for radio, with an inexplicable cult like following.
Reply With Quote
  #71  
Old 10-20-2008, 12:26 AM
robarin robarin is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 18
Default Re: Bob's comments monovlog

I am somebody! Even if Bob did mangle my handle
The vowels o, a & i are pronounced like those in Spanish. Approximate pronunciation is "ro'-ba-reen"; it's a Japanese nickname, though I'm not Japanese.

I just wanted to say that I had in fact come around to the view that "pals around with terrorists" is pretty incendiary, especially in the context of a "war on terror". That said, I'm not sure how much this line of attack would hamper Obama's ability to govern; does anyone expect the Right to continue such attacks once Obama is in office? Or is the thinking that Obama will start out with a weaker mandate (based on polling, I suppose) because a certain segment of the populace will still harbor suspicions concerning Obama's loyalty to his country?

But these questions are perhaps best pondered in a different comment thread.

I would be highly disappointed if BHTV disappeared. "Highly disappointed" does not even begin to describe the bummitude I would feel. I?m not a habitual commenter, but I am a regular visitor to the site and know of nothing else like it. If it came down to it, I would pay for access.
________
GANG BANG JAPANESE
________
Homemade Marijuana Vaporizer

Last edited by robarin; 09-02-2011 at 10:14 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #72  
Old 10-20-2008, 01:36 AM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Mickey's Playing Dumb on "Palling Around with Terrrorists"

Quote:
Originally Posted by graz View Post
I take every gratuitous shot that I can level at Mickey. I wish I were a better person, or he deserved better. Short of that, I'll continue to insist that he has a face made for radio, with an inexplicable cult like following.
I somehow, on first discovering bhtv, resisted that temptation, inexplicably defending Mickey repeatedly against what did seem like a lot of gratuitous abuse, whilst feeling no compunction about ribbing BW over weakened critical faculties toward his junket benefactors, the Saudi's, poking fun at EP's determinist tendencies and exclusivity pretensions (I gather EP is a favorite BW hobby-horse), and generally refusing to play PC to mooshy-mindedness.

(Maybe BW "Wrighteous indignation" explains it.) Anyway, this looked to me like heavy-handed censorship. It appeared to me that Mickey had crossed the line from his usual bad-attitude curmudgeonly snarls into being fine with intellectual dishonesty just for the sake of being Santa-Ana-mode contrarian. Guess I've gotten a little sick of self-declared pundits saying "whatever" just to score a point in debate.

EW
Reply With Quote
  #73  
Old 10-20-2008, 02:57 AM
Bobby G Bobby G is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 728
Default Re: Mickey's Playing Dumb on "Palling Around with Terrrorists"

I'll ask you guys the same question that Wonderment answered earlier: what is so loathesome about Mickey that you place him in the same company with LGF, Powerline, etc.?
Reply With Quote
  #74  
Old 10-20-2008, 03:15 AM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Mickey's Playing Dumb on "Palling Around with Terrrorists"

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobby G View Post
I'll ask you guys the same question that Wonderment answered earlier: what is so loathesome about Mickey that you place him in the same company with LGF, Powerline, etc.?
Clarification: I don't think of Mickey as "loathesome" at all, just increasingly disingenuous and hence not worth my time. He's good for the occasional "love child" accusation and such, but otherwise is, intellectually and politically, not the least bit fresh. In short, IMHO, he's a bit of a yawn. When he took a vacation for a couple months, I came to value his absence.

In all fairness, though, there's lots of others around here like that: Ann Althouse, Eli Lake, Conn from "This Week in Blog," etc., all folks you don't even need to click on to know what they're going to say this week. Just replaying the same old tape...

EW
Reply With Quote
  #75  
Old 10-20-2008, 04:44 AM
Eastwest Eastwest is offline
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 592
Default Re: Ads on BhTV

Quote:
Originally Posted by mvantony View Post
Why aren't there a lot more of them? There were the recent Princeton U.P. ads and a few others before that, plus there are a couple of Google ads on the Forum page. But that's it.
....
I'd much rather see lots of ads than pay for BhTV....

So where are the ads?
Agreed. BHTV's a fine site, but no way I'd pay for it, period.

EW
Reply With Quote
  #76  
Old 10-21-2008, 04:57 PM
bjkeefe bjkeefe is offline
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Not Real America, according to St. Saģah
Posts: 21,798
Default Re: Horrible

Quote:
Originally Posted by kidneystones View Post
Try recruiting non-partisan moderators if you want stimulating debate instead of an echo chamber. Your own venal cracks at McCain might make you feel good, but they aren't generating a nickel.
It's hard to believe that you haven't yet figured this out, kidneystones, but for the record, here it is.

The moderators on this site (TwinSwords, AemJeff, and me) were given that privilege for one and only one reason: to delete spam comments. This is something I had been asking the BH.tv people to enable for some time. I felt that as some of us commenters spend more time on the site in the wee hours, when the regular BH.tv staff are away from their machines, we would be able to help delete spam as it appeared, around the clock. It is my belief, from experience with my own blog and on other forums, that the faster spam gets deleted (and the associated accounts blocked), the less desirable a target the site becomes for further spam attacks.

When the spam trickle changed to a flood a few weeks ago, it was decided by the BH.tv people to give this limited moderator concept a shot.

I have never, nor will I ever, delete a non-spam comment. Were I to find a non-spam comment unacceptable for reasons of content, I would use the same approach that any user would -- reporting it to the site admins and asking to have it removed by them.

I am certain Twin and Jeff feel the exact same way. Each of us voluntarily* made a pledge to observe this limited scope of actions, in writing, right after we were assigned moderator status, just to be absolutely sure we were all on the same page.

So, to repeat, the moderators on this forum do not serve any editorial role whatsoever. We are the equivalent of janitors in a newsroom -- we're not cleaning up the copy, we're just clearing away the trash.

==========
* Just to be clear, we were not asked to make any sort of pledge by BH.tv. IIRC, Twin started it of his own accord and Jeff and I chimed in.

==========
[Added] Another thing I should add, more for the benefit of newer readers: Twin, Jeff, and I do not represent BH.tv in any way.

Thus, all opinions expressed under my username, obnoxious and otherwise, are entirely my own. I do not speak on behalf of BH.tv except as a(n occasionally cranky) fan.
__________________
Brendan

Last edited by bjkeefe; 10-23-2008 at 09:25 AM.. Reason: footnote | footnote 2
Reply With Quote
  #77  
Old 10-21-2008, 05:36 PM
uncle ebeneezer uncle ebeneezer is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,332
Default Re: Horrible

Actually, there was a secret meeting in Berkeley with Bob and the gang of 12. (Brendan forgot his computer, which explains his comment-hiatus.) Bob lamented that the site was becoming overly conservative in nature. So after some drum-circle chanting, hackey-sack and a round of triple latte's for all, Wonderment came up with the ingenious "Operation Spam" to slowly censor all the right-leaning commentors. But the conspiracy isn't just against precious comments. Ever notice how many of the "technical glitches" in the diavlogs happen to occur just when a Jonah Goldberg or David Frum are making a particularly strong point in defense of Conservatism?? Coincidence. Perhaps. Or maybe it's just the beginning step in the mass extermination of conservative comments. Never again.

BTW- welcome back BJK.
Reply With Quote
  #78  
Old 10-21-2008, 05:40 PM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Horrible

Uncle,

I have been informed that the status of your membership is being reviewed.

O . G12
Reply With Quote
  #79  
Old 10-21-2008, 06:09 PM
uncle ebeneezer uncle ebeneezer is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,332
Default Re: Horrible

I'm just trying to throw him off the scent of our REAL plan.
Reply With Quote
  #80  
Old 10-21-2008, 06:17 PM
Ocean Ocean is offline
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: US Northeast
Posts: 6,784
Default Re: Horrible

Pssst... the review could be for a promotion...
Reply With Quote
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.