We Don't Have This Problem
When we first started thinking about Ricochet, we faced a real problem. On the one hand, what we really wanted was a conversation -- and, ideally, lots of them -- between and among contributors and members. On the other hand, the comments sections on most sites -- blogs, news sites, you name it -- often devolve into swampy, nasty madness.
In the Daily Beast, Ben Smith talks about what's happening in the comments section of his Politico blog:
“My blog was at first given over to Obama-backers attacking me… as a racist and a Clinton tool,” Smith says. “Then to Clinton die-hards, attacking me and others as Obama minions; then mostly back to the Obama supporters attacking me as a neocon. And now that the energy is on the right, to conservatives attacking me as a pawn of the White House.”
Smith has been called a “weasel,” a “flaming liberal,” a “Journolister,” a “liberal hack,” an “establishment politico” who will be eaten by Sarah Palin for lunch, a “first grader,” “a basketball player with no jump shot,” a “piece of snot,” a “3 year old transexual, wanker,” and a “commie.”
He may, of course, be all of those things. I'm certainly at least three of those things myself. But it reinforces what we're trying to do here on Ricochet. People with some skin in the game, who are all following a fairly strict "dress code" for language, really do end up having some excellent, edifying, and often hilarious conversations. If only we could have cocktails.
- Comment (57)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
May '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
All those in favor of the Rob Long Bottle of the Month Club please raise your hands...
Aug '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
I am always up for a nice scotch with friends.
May '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
Hey, I'm having a cocktail, so I see this working out just fine.
I do find myself which three of those you happen to be, though. I mean, if I ever do need to resort to name calling, I would like to be accurate.
May '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
Wait... Do you guys use this site sober?
Jul '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
There's a dress code?
Um, are Snuggli's permitted?
Aug '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
politico mostly sounds like many of the leftblogs, but with a NYT state of mind or is it just me ? therefore less gros than kos matters more than media matters and not ever bearding for cal pols don't stop whining about tomorrow !
May '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
No jump shot? That's just spewing hatred, is what that is. The transexual wanker commenter appeared to be attempting to build dialog, but no jump shot? That calls for a permanent ban.
I hesitate to assert that Rob has no jump shot, David, for that very reason.
PS Rob, the comment volume appears to be picking up substantially of late (I'm sure you got numbers to track that). Good to see the Ricomentum..
Edited on Sep 13, 2010 at 4:47pmMay '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
The teensy monthly fee to comment here is the thing. (I have yet to see an all-caps rant.)
May '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
I mean, except myself and Pat Sajak, there's very little riff-raff at Ricochet.
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
My reputation is spreading.
Jul '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
Kennedy Smith:
PS Rob, the comment volume appears to be picking up substantially of late (I'm sure you got numbers to track that). Good to see the Ricomentum.. · Sep 13 at 4:44pm
Edited on Sep 13 at 04:47 pm
That's rank manipulation.
Whenever comment volume drops, they have Claire do one of her signature "There Really Are Moderate Muslims - Really." posts.
And we all spring to our keyboards, tying ourselves in knots trying to find yet another polite way to respond, "Um, Claire, are there, like, fairies, too?"
Edited on Sep 13, 2010 at 5:01pmJul '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
So are bedbugs, Pat...
Jun '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
Rob: And here I was just about to call you out as "A FILTHY LEFT COAST RINO WEASEL, A PLANT FROM THE COMMIE-PINKO HOLLYWOOD SOVIET!!!!"
Actually, I thoroughly enjoy Ricochet because we can post thoughts without fear of being called a scum-sucking pig. I think that's why Peter, with his unflapping politeness, is so valuable. Whenever I get a bit heated up, I just think to myself, "What would Peter think?" Then I immediately temper my rhetoric.
Edited on Sep 13, 2010 at 5:07pmAug '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
Kennedy Smith:
The transexual wanker commenter appeared to be attempting to build dialog...
Ah, but so tragically misguided.
According to the latest sociology research, three years of age is too young to have developed your sexual identity, so “3 year old transsexual" is just not the kind of phrase that builds meaningful dialog.
So sad when attempts at dialog turn out to be sociological non-starters.
Aug '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
tabula rasa: "Whenever I get a bit heated up, I just think to myself, "What would Peter think?" Then I immediately temper my rhetoric." · Sep 13 at 5:05pm
Edited on Sep 13 at 05:07 pm
I have never been so civil as when I started wearing my WWPT bracelet.
May '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
Well, just looking at the profile pictures of this thread, I see a red bow tie, sepia, Skywalker goggles, a man in black, and what's either a very large hat or a portable bathtub. Clearly, the standard is anything that might strike fear into the hearts of progressives or unwashed dogs.
Sep '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
I dismiss most online comments sections as "rude, crude and lewd." Not to mention stupid, ignorant and often lunatic. So I deeply appreciate the fact that Ricochet is attempting to maintain an elevated level of discourse, and avoid mindless name-calling.
The problem is this: We can discuss abstract politics & philosophy all day and, in the end, everything comes down to personalities. Because rotten human beings do rotten things. Rotten politicians pass rotten legislation. And I do not believe in "good intentions." People do bad things for two reasons: out of stupidity or malice. Too often, our politicians are both stupid & malicious. And it should be okay to say so, in very colorful terms. For example, I see no reason why I should shy away from pointing out that Kathleen Sebelius's recent exercise in anti-business thuggery exposes her as arguably the most odious human being in the Obama administration. After all, we are talking about a woman who accepted big donations from "Tiller the Baby Killer." The content of a person's character is very relevant.
Edited on Sep 13, 2010 at 5:36pmRe: We Don't Have This Problem
We don't have the problem of crude, low, insulting, foul-mouthed comments because Robinson said if I kept it up he was going to kill my dog.
Jul '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
The key to civility here is the ability to use italics - the emphatic choice of the effete.
In the absence of the the italics utility, one must resort to bolding or capitalization, at which point comments begin to look like ransom notes and the center cannot hold.
Besides, italics are fun. One can imagine oneself to be William F Buckley, who used italics like a finely-honed stiletto. Whenever WFB employed italics, a liberal staggered, bleeding, from the field.
Sep '10
Re: We Don't Have This Problem
Kenneth: The key to civility here is the ability to use italics - the emphatic choice of the effete.
In the absence of the the italics utility, one must resort to bolding or capitalization, at which point comments begin to look like ransom notes and the center cannot hold.
Besides, italics are fun. One can imagine oneself to be William F Buckley, who used italics like a finely-honed stiletto. Whenever WFB employed italics, a liberal staggered, bleeding, from the field. · Sep 13 at 5:30pm
Hey, I love using italics. And I am damn good at it.