RECENT COMMENTS
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Eric S. Huffstutler on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
Yvette Cannon on What is up with the Church Hill Post Office?
crd on Power Outage on the Hill
in response to a poisonous environment
08/13/2008 4:07 PM by John M
The level of discourse around here keeps getting worse despite repeated attempts to redirect. I am *this* close to changing things over so that you have to register to comment, though I would very much prefer not to. This would also mean potentially blocking certain people from using the site.
The basic problem is that a number of people here do not seem to know how to disagree with something without being mean or attacking the person with whom they disagree. I want that to change, because I do not like to have to read that negativity every day on my own site.
Take a moment before you comment and do what it takes to dial it back a notch.
Thank you.
Amen! I’ve been getting real tired of people taking a persons opinion too seriously and personally myself. There is a difference; argue intelligently!
I am an avid reader of this site and find it a great resource for the community, but have only responded one time in a year. I completely agree; in the past few months I have grown very weary of reading pointless responses that go completely off topic and are just plain mean. Kids; play nice with your neighbors!
I’m not sure that registering’s going to help much, other than making it easier to block comments by individuals. Most of the posters are using their “handle” consistently, whether it be a pseudonym or some variation of their actual name.
I’m just musing here, but I wonder what would happen if everyone had to post under their full names?
The anonymity of the internet makes for a lot of big talk that not everyone is willing to stand behind when it comes down to it. You gotta give points to folks like Laura and Eric — I may not always agree with what they say, but at least they own their words.
Amen! Amen! Amen!
I love a good discussion or debate but I agree the meanness and attacks have escalated. On many occasions I’ve had to take a breather before writing a response. If possible, it is best to ignore a poster insulting you and continue with a level headed debate or passionate position on an issue. I’ve seen more name calling on CHPN than I’ve seen in either of my children’s classrooms over an entire school year.
Thanks Anne and Ladonna for the shout out. I must confess that, on occasion, I use an anonymous name to talk about things.
The reason for this is that I find that many folks already place judgment on my comment because my name is on it. If I post under my alter name I don’t have anywhere near the negative reaction to my comments.
And, the interesting thing is, the folks that go after me as “Laura,” tend to agree with me under my fake name.
I guess my point is that, I too, appreciate folks that post by their real name, but understand that anonymity can also be a good way to communicate.
Besides, some folks have sensitive jobs, or other reasons for posting under an assumed name, but want to participate in a public dialog. More power to them. I don’t think anyone likes to be called names or treated badly by anyone, no matter what name you go by.
I really try to be respectful toward others using both names. At times, I have failed a that, and to those that I have offended, I am truly sorry.
Hey Anne Soffee:
I went to your website and love it. Love the Betty Page do too! Didn’t see a “contact” button on the site, so sorry for going off thread here.
Are you interested in getting involved with James River Writers. Great org and lots of wonderful folks to meet.
Contact Jim at jim@mysterydinner.com I know they would love to have you be involved.
I think some of the perceived “meanness” can stem from frequent readers’ becoming tired of seeing the same commentary from the same people over and over. I don’t need to see any more from Poster X about her genius son or Poster Y about his dislike of some of the architecture or Poster Z about how much he hates geese (if you’re getting bristly, you should probably reconsider how often you repeat yourself). I make a real effort to understand what people are saying, but not everyone has the time or the inclination. Some of the posters I’d put on the “Most-Disliked on CHPN” list have made some really good points that have been completely missed by the masses.
These are all people I don’t know except from right here on CHPN, and I don’t have the least bit of a problem with any of them personally – it just gets old hearing the same horns tooted constantly.
I do use my real first name and my real last initial, and that’s as accountable as I’m willing to be on a public website. John knows who I am, and that’s good enough for me.
I do have a problem with commenters blogging under a several or more names within a thread to make it look like a gang of folk are in agreement against one poor soul. That there is an unfair debate. I’ve just realized recently that three commenters who are always disagreeing with me on educational issues are probably one person.
I think it is best and honest to stick with one name, either real or anonymous, within a single community blog.
Laura, I have found some comments coming from you and your husband to be wildly entertaining, especially on parts of this thread http://chpn.net/news/2008/06/01/a-proposal-to-revisit-new-construction-in-oldhistoric-districts/ . I enjoy reading your stuff.
Hey Jennifer C,:
You’re a very frequent commenter on Hills & Heights and I believe, River District News.
I don’t comment on those sites much because I don’t live in those areas. But, is it possible that people are tired of your comments on those sites, like you are of some of us on chpn.net?
Just saying that some folks really dig these dialogs and others don’t. No one is forcing anybody to read what we have to say, including you.
uh oh.
Um. Laura, obviously you’re taking what I said personally, but it wasn’t meant that way. I think the juxtaposition of your post to mine was coincidental. Geez.
Hey Gray:
I hear what you’re saying about using two different identities within the same thread. I really try not to do that, and most of time, I don’t.
Glad you think Jim and I are entertaining, rather than obnoxious, which is what I am being right now with waaaay too many comments on this thread!
I enjoy your comments too.
Laura, my “same commentary/same poster” issue has more to do with people who add a hundred words of self-congratulatory commentary to every single post about every single topic than it does with people who actually stick to the topic at hand. I’d rather not have to wade through people repeating themselves if I can avoid it.
Hi hear you Jennifer. And how about those Olympics? Great stuff!
I am tired of hearing people getting bashed for posting anonymously. Everytime a discussion gets heated I hear that same argument. There are many reasons why people might not feel it is appropriate to use their name.
Some of us have jobs in media outlets or work for the city or law firms. Voicing our opinions on issues could be a conflict of interest.
Others might just feel their safety could be threatened, whether it be trying to avoid an abusive ex-husband or just not wanting to give out info to a potential web-surfing psychopath.
That said, anonymous posters shouldn’t be making accusations or taking personal swipes at people. Anonymity in a public forum can turn people into real assholes.
I wish more people would follow my criteria for a comment:
1) It must be related to the discussion at hand.
2) It must actually contribute in some way.
3) It must not repeat what has already been said.
… or if it is just funnny.
I also like to keep in mind “Graham’s Hierarchy of Disagreement” (google it): Attack a person’s argument, but not the person.
It’s gotten to the point where I will stop reading most threads after about 20 posts because it has usually degraded into name calling by then.
Great point about hiding behind cyberspace to say stuff that you wouldn’t say in person. And while it is nice for the mod to know who is who, it is also appropriate for the person who is being addressed to know who is addressing them.
Allow the person to consider the source, eh? Maybe they would be glad to not see eye to eye with you, if they knew you – take your dissention as a compliment, even. The greatest shame is to be worshipped by fools. So, another good rule, maybe? “Would I say this in person or am I being a coward?”
Life is interpreted through your filter, and that is pretty much the only thing that you will ever have control over. I’m so glad that my filter on life is not crusted over and dripping with cynicism. Makes people so old and ugly.
Other’s barely-controlled rage is a good reminder, though. So albeit poisonous for sure, if there is a bright side, it’s that – a good example of how to strive not to be.
J’s guidelines are good. Perhaps they can be permanently posted as a constant reminder to us all.
i think that j’s guidelines are great, however, there will always be the fine line of what is considered funny. i sincerely hope that people do not stop posting funny things because that would just make me really really sad.
I too agree with j’s comments. I read this blog often because of all of the information that is on it – much more than in other local news outlets – but the name-calling and nastiness does detract from the subject so I tend not to continue to read and probably miss some good input.
Ooooh, I smell a cat fight!!! I think Laura and Jennifer should settle their differences mano et mano. How about a Church Hill Death Match down at the Dog Park???
or gato et gato as the case may be!!!
re post #15 “…words of self-congratulatory commentary….”
Jennifer, you’ve got to step over that poster like you would a puddle and if a little splashes into your sandal, be sure to shake it out before it reaches between your toes.
Displaced,
Jennifer wasn’t speaking of Laura and it looks like the two of them worked it out.
If you guys are talking about me with the self-congratulatory remark, and I think you might be because of other circumstances and comments, I’m honestly humbled.
Speaking in the first person, from my own experience, is the voice I was taught to use in order to take responsibility for my viewpoints. And backing up viewpoints with personal experience is what gives them depth. I always appreciate reading about not just how a person feels or thinks, but why – how they got there.
I apologize about coming off this way. I guess I kind of write how I talk, and sometimes it’s pretty stream of conscious. And maybe that can go overboard.
I’ll keep an eye on it. Thank you.
I often refrain from commenting because I am afraid of being attacked. I think the discussion would become far more diverse if some of the more prolific commenters would be a bit more tolerant of a dissenting point of view.
I think people do occasionally get ugly on here, but that’s the exception, not the rule. There have been negative reactions to things I’ve said, and guess what, it didn’t bother me a bit. I’m not that fragile :-p I mean really, how seriously can you take it..?
Besides, dissent is good.
Exactly my point – let’s keep up the dissent but lay off the attacks.
shannon, i didn’t think they were talking about you. your comments are well-reasoned. there are a few on here who say extremely haughty things and then expect the rest of us to bless them because of it. they bring themselves up in conversation for no apparent reason. twenty bucks one will post in response to this and do exactly that…
btw, i think that we should remain able to post anonmously on this blog for all the reasons listed above. (and personally, i’m happier NOT knowing who most of the people that post are.)
Thanks elephaba. I’m having kind of a rough day, and that really made me feel nice.
I appreciate it.
Maybe all of us posters could make an effort to police ourselves. If someone’s comment becomes personal or aggressive, we could gently reminder that person about j’s rules.
if this blog and the web in general want to be accorded the same respect as traditional media outlets they must strive to apply freedom of speech in its purest sense. that means freedom to say anything you want in whatever fashion you choose . if you dont like how i say something …..disagree gently,sarcastically, funnily, or with disdain. say it in whatever patois or dialect you use the important thing is to say it like you mean it. the internet is the first time in history that the common man can find and disseminate knowledge and truth at a pace that outstrips authority’s ablity to supress it. all that said if you dont feel like posting under your real name dont. i post under my real name for a reason people may or may not believe. i like to find out stuff. so if you have an issue with how i might be “mean” avert your eyes. the internet can be a savage garden but only in a look ma nobody really got hurt way. its only words and words can never hurtyou. particularly when uttered by somebody without the nerve to take credit for an insult or attack using a pseudonym. buddycorbett
Folks have the complete freedom to start their own site if they are compelled to be overly quarrelsome or caustic in their desire to “disseminate knowledge and truth”. If they are going to participate in this site, there are going to be some boundaries.
by the way you are gonna block people from accessing your website if you dont like their “tone”. how enlightened of you. how “stickin it the man”. keerist man you started a media otlet for the community but you wanna control access to it by the lameass critria set out in an earlier post. hyocrisy is alive and well. block me. block you. buddycorbett
j:
You mention in your rules “3) It must not repeat what has already been said.”
Sometimes, in debate, if the topic gets off track, the way to bring it back in line is to repeat one’s main points of the argument.
I find repetition, to a certain degree, useful, when these threads get really, really long and hard to follow. You know, the whole “repetition helps with retention” thing.
Is there another context you’re referring to regarding repetition?
Buddy, I have read many posts of yours and have never quite understood why you feel the need to be so hateful to other posters on here (let alone the moderator). This is a site that John started and, as such, he has COMPLETE discretion on how it should be used. I, personally, think it wise of him to call for civilized conversation and debate. To resort to name calling and hateful verbiage does no one any good… Additionally, take a good look around the site Buddy. If John’s intension were to “block people from accessing this website if he doesn’t like their ‘tone’â€, there would only be a couple of posters, if any, able to post here. I think John’s point would be we’re all neighbors…just act like that and not like a jack ass. Buddy, that was not a personal attack on you for being a jack ass, I think many posted have seemed that way on this site a some point or another…
John,
I have an awesome idea! Start a thread about mean and inappropriate comments and have everyone argue in that post. I can’t believe how empty all of the other threads have become now that people have a proper place to get out their frustrations. Bravo.
I don’t want to block anyone from the site. Nor do I want to be responsible for a community that at, at times, becomes so negative and caustic.
I have asked folks to “take a moment before you comment and do what it takes to dial it back a notch.” Is that asking too much of you?
John M — you will not please everyone all the time. Do what you think necessary for this site to be something you are proud of. As for those who are unhappy with whatever new direction you seek, as you point out, they are free to start their own site.
One suggestion which I think has been done before is to just close the thread when it gets too out of hand. That would be unfortunate for those who still have approrpiate input to share but would not give those who can’t play nicely in the sandbox further chances to attack. Just a thought.
You know, saying “this isn’t a personal attack” along with making a personal attack is kind of like saying, “I’m not racist, but…”
I agree there should be some parameters of being civil in posts. How to do that is of course tricky, as different people read words with different tones of voice (it’s especially hard to hear how your own words may “sound” different to someone else), some may find a word insulting that others accept as a legitimate term.
Anyway, kudos to John M both for starting and maintaining this site but also to trying to keep a democratic and civil tone!!!
Keep in mind that this is not a verbal debate. It is written at the top of the page what each thread is about. And this format lets people jump around. Bringing the topic back on track is not really necessary.
I agree that sometimes rephrasing, clarifying or summing up an argument can be helpful, but trying to get in the last word is fairly pointless when threads could stay open forever and anyone can comment.
I’m not someone who feels I have to
share my opinion on every topic. Arguments aren’t won by voting for one side or another, they are won through consensus — both sides coming to an agreement. People should keep that goal in mind, rather than antagonizing each other. And some arguments can never be won.
Now I guess everyone I felt when I was called and was told that the article about me in the Voice was on this website for all to talk about me. When some wrote it was racial. When I went to the link this was discuss before and saw that someone had taken a picture of my house on May 9. I have not read all of everything that was posted on this site. Only what was about me. I was curious about this one. I don’t like this website. You are all up in people business. A lot you don’t know wthwt you are taking about. I don’t have time for this. I spend my spare time looking for grants, to help people in my comminty. You can put what ever you what you want on this website , regardless who it hurts, ut people can’t say what they want.
There are some really good things posted here, sometimes, and this blog is a great way to stay plugged in. It’s the bickering and beating other people over the head with the same rhetoric that wears on me. It’s sometimes hard to watch and not get hooked in.
Probably a good time for me to do a computer-only-as-absolutely-necessary vacation. We do have a beautiful river here in town. And it’s been great gardening weather, too.
You are right, John. Thank you for having a strong moral center about the need for greater civility and the courage to take such an important stand.
all the above not withstanding i have enoyed participating in this forum. it is unfortunate that selective censorship is being practised under the guise of promoting civility. you cant act like you are promoting discussion if you only publish comments that dont offend you personally. in a free and open discussion you dont get to pick and choosewhat you publish. otherwise you are just another in a long line of tyrants trying to control what your neighbors think. cmon john stand up and do the right thing.buddycorbett. all done now and i hope somebody gets to see my poisonoos correspondence and judge for themselves because here lately i aint gettin love from the murdenator
j:
You said, “Keep in mind this is not a verbal debate.” Are you referring to this thread in particular or the site in general?
This site is a mixed bag of all kinds of communication: debate, consensus, opinions, rebellion, contrition, apologies, appreciation, news gathering, etc.
I’m not sure that folks really care about winning or losing arguments. I think the interaction is what drives this forum, and the “sharing” for better or worse.
I respect you opinion, but it is just that, an opinion that you are sharing with the rest of us.
That is, unless “j” is an alter ego for john_m, in which case, you call out the rules.
And, since we’re talking rules You have repeated your “rules” more than once on this site. Isn’t that in violation of your rule #3: “It must not repeat what has already been said.” ?
The “free marketplace of ideas” is truly an ideal of what makes this America a great place.
I have learned on this site to say I am sorry when I have overstepped and I thank those who have helped me see it.
I have also learned that everyone doesn’t have to agree with me. It bothers me when people just make up sh** and try to pass it off as fact.
I also must add that I appreciate John invoking “Godwin’s Rule” on the “Talking with Don Coleman” thread.
But, Shannon was the first to invoke Fascists and ReachemTeachem’s response was funny (!) and factual (***** 5 stars).
Re: post 51 —
I really was not going to respond to this, but I thought about it and I think I’d like to clarify.
Regarding the concept at hand – definitions of regimes – I stand by the simple interpretation stated. Lots of trees have already been killed with folks talking about the idea, and I admit to pulling it out for effect. I suppose I am not unique in that, since there is an internet law designed for the occasion – one which I was not aware of, but that makes sense. I’m dropping it there.
However, the reference was brought on by watching another member of this community be deliberately misinterpreted, and cry Uncle a full three times to no avail. Maybe I could have just stayed out of it, but as a PTA member myself, and an avid believer in the organization, it was difficult to have the fellowship as a whole represented in that fashion.
Perhaps, when speaking to effectiveness of argument, it might have been worked better to have simply thrown out this gentle reminder: attraction, rather than promotion. Works great.
Hmmm …. Dropping it is great, Shannon. But, a simple apology right about now would be nice.
GetRealRichmond:
What I was dropping was the whole “definition of a certain regime†thought.
I stand by the concept that “honesty” is subjective based on perception, and useless if there is not any respect for individual differences in values and experience involved. Why should a person care about someone else’s truth if they feel discounted? I fail to see how that is pop psychology. I think it’s plain old sensitivity and good neighborliness.
I still do not believe that style of persuasion to be one that gets anything done, and that if it gets the listener to submit, the submission will probably be just so that they will be left alone –an end justifies the means kind of thing…
I also still believe that it shows poorly on the organization involved for a person to be attempting to gather troops with this method, especially in its name. And this is an organization that I care about and would like to be reflected in a good light.
The only thing I can conceive is that I hurt feelings, and if that happened I can assure that this was not the intent. Can’t speak for anyone else, but I wonder if the person whose words were being twisted might have had their feelings a bit hurt, though, too. Seems like a topic that we all have some emotional investment in.
At the end of the day, there were no names called or personal attacks. I spoke about a philosophy, as well as a style of argument that was hard for me to watch, and that I don’t have an appreciation for. And I did it directly without walking on eggshells. I have already admitted that it could have been done less forcefully – but I think that can be applied across the board here.
Frankly, I’d rather not hijack this thread anymore by doing exactly what it is asking people not to do – bicker. I’m sure that nobody wants to hear anymore; really I don’t want to hear anymore either.
But if there is more that you would like from me, send me an email. I’m more than happy to listen with an open mind.
Thanks.
Shannon,
I refuse to argue tonight. No one ever “intends” to be in an automobile accident, but when they happen people (usually) say they’re sorry.
All I am suggesting here is that sometimes you seem more invested in arguing with Gray, than you seem in arguing about the topic at hand.
Bickering about PTA seems to be an excuse for an argument — as opposed to a discussion about how we can make our schools and PTAs more effective.
I happen to think Gray has a lot to offer and I appreciate her passion about improving our schools. I honestly don’t really understand why you needed to resort to invoking fascists in an effort to discount what she was trying to say. While not directly calling her a facist, you certainly implied that was how you viewed her commentary. Implied insults hurt as much as direct insults.
That said, I apologize if my remark about ReachemTeachem’s comment hurt your feelings. I still think Reachem’s remark was funny, but I am sorry if I said so in a manner that was insensitive.
I think the bigger thing that John Murden is asking of us is not so much for us “not to bicker,” but for us to find a way to have discussions and disagreements that are respectful of one another as human beings.
I really appeciate the tone of what GRR has posted. Imagine what could happen if we all tried to find ways to have our differences but to be able to create something positive from those differences that could make a substantive improvement in our community?
That is well put.
John:
On some sites you can “+” or “-“comments. With enough “-” feedback the comment basically get’s deleted.
I assume that you know the IP of all the comments. How tough is it to lock one name to an IP?
Over time, IP addresses shift. An IP from AOL can change during a browsing session. It is easy enough to set that that certain people’s comments have to be approved every time.
i have mixed feelings on this entire argument. however, i do feel that it is 100% within john’s rights to do whatever he wants. That being said, here’s my two cents.
there is a strong part of me that just really doesn’t care about how out of line people’s posts get because i feel that if they cannot respond without using harsh words, then that really says something about the legitimacy of their response. i understand that people can be really offended, but i also feel that that is part of the risk you take whenever you voice your opinion in a public arena. the GREAT thing about posting your thoughts here instead of screaming them aloud at the Hill IS the anonymity. if someone says something mean to you here, you don’t have to worry about getting upset in front of people, or not voicing your response well. you can sit there as long as you want until you collect your thoughts and then fire away! one of the major problems though is that some people simply cannot handle being disagreed with. some people get upset and then there are those lovely people who think everyone who doesn’t agree with them clearly doesn’t have the intellectual capacity to understand their argument. this, unfortunately, is something we really can’t change because its just a part of how people are.
possibly my favorite thing about CHPN is that it gives the normally quiet citizens the PERFECT venue to stand up for their beliefs against the people who are less quiet about their thoughts. use an alter-ego name and let your thoughts be heard! i implore you!
that being said, i don’t think it would be a bad idea to prohibit 1)curse words and 2)hateful words. if you can’t form your opinion without using them, then you need to rethink your post. (and i have the worst mouth ever, so i know that this can be challenging.) i know that it would be extremely difficult for you monitor every single post on here john, so is there a way to have a ‘report this post’ option? (which i also feel would be appropriate whenever people start to pick on others for things like writing skills, spelling, or their names-seriously we are all adults here.) that might help keep some of the big blue meanies at bay.
anyway. thats what elphaba’s thinking.
i wonder if this will be argued about for another 3 years.