Skip to main content

View Diary: What the f--- is KOS Afraid of??? (187 comments)

Comment Preferences

    •  Content of diary ridiculed. (25+ / 0-)

      Also in accordance w/ site policy.

      "Then a man dripping with Vitalis said I looked like Joe Namath." - Vic Chesnutt

      by turnover on Thu May 21, 2009 at 07:01:05 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Hunter: no reply to this comment is expected, but (6+ / 0-)

      I hope that before long you will come out with an official and measured statement of policy about publishing material from banned diarists.  By "measured," I mean one that does not denigrate people on either side of the issue.  In this post I repeat and expand on some comments I have already directed to MB.

      FWIW, I believe that your legitimate interest here -- if we think of this site as an example of how we would like progressive Internet communities (I still use that word) to operate and reject the notion some people offer above that because Markos owns the site we should all be hunky-dory with arbitrariness and error -- seems to be to make sure that the banning process is not going to be circumvented through the use of proxies and cutouts.  I don't dispute that; nor, I think, would most others.

      In general, this should suggest not porting over (at least extensive) material from banned users.  Two exceptions suggested themselves yesterday: (1) when someone believes that they are being maligned here without the ability to speak back; (2) when someone has been banned and wants a chance to say goodbye.  (In this case, we had one of the strongest examples of #2: longtime user, strongly supported, and argubly -- if it's even arguable -- banned because the site owner seemed to misread his post, offering a non-rabble-rousing goodbye.)

      My argument for exceptions to what certainly may fairly become a rule against posting whole diaries for banned users -- though that leaves a lot of questions about whether one may post a "fair use sized" paragraph of their grievances, etc. -- are essentially on the basis of simple humanity.

      If MSOC -- who admittedly loses some rights to considerate treatment because she evidently has continued violating sockpuppet rules -- feels aggrieved here, and if some user feels the desire to post it here so she can in some way address the community, then I don't think that the user ban is violated to any great degree.  The site can handle it.  If it becomes a problem, people can be so informed and/or warned; diaries can be deleted.  But the cruelty of being able to talk smack about someone without their right to try to set the record straight in the forum in which the supposed abuse occurs is mitigated.

      In Toke's case, especially given the unlikelihood that his essay could have led to a flood of (banworthy) CT diaries absent a change in policy, denying anyone the right to publish a valedictory address from him is needlessly cruel.  I don't care how many Savanarolas it makes happy.  He was a part of our lives here and (even if one believes he had to be banned) forcing everyone here to treat him as a non-person, without the ability to say goodbye by proxy is simply cruel and ill-befitting a liberal-minded institution.  If he were a clear troll, if it were a clear-cut case, maybe it would be different.  But it wasn't.

      If you do write a policy, I hope that it will be along the lines of "Don't circumvent the banned-user guidelines by allowing people to participate here as if they were users, although this is not intended as a complete ban on conveying or quoting their thoughts when the situation is appropriate.  We trust people to use their good judgment."  Under such a rule, I don't think either of the two users should have received warnings (and I don't know that both did) and we can avoid some ugliness.  Personally, I think that the orgies of ridicule here detract from the value and stature of the site, but perhaps I'm just an old softie.

      I fought with Toke here a lot over the years.  But I have never wanted to see him suffer what has traditionally been a juicy extra insult that rules have imposed on those who challenged them: denying him a decent burial.  That's what this felt like.

      To the extent that you've read through all of this, thanks for your time and attention.  Respectfully submitted for your consideration, SD.

      They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify invasion of Iraq.

      by Seneca Doane on Thu May 21, 2009 at 07:28:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site