I got blocked today by Crooked Timber, one of the leading Academic/PoliticalPoliSci blogs on the Internet. Yup, I got blocked by a bastion of "academic freedom," better known for compelling discussions about neo-liberalism, modern day Marxism, and the quality of book reviews in The Financial Times. It also seems to be the place for a select group of academicians to flame and bait their rivals.
My crime, as nearly as I can figure, is that I said something uncomplimentary about Aaron Swarz, "a good friend, as well as an active member of the Crooked Timber community." Oh, a "good friend" who has been charged by the US Attorney for breaking into an MIT wiring closet and making alterations to their network in order to hijack the bandwidth for a massive transfer of data, causing disruption of service to MIT and academics around the world.
So these guys are promoting an online petition (we all know how effective those are) to "Free Aaron," supposedly an embattled fighter for free(r) access to information, whilst I am shut down for calling him a criminal (ahem, alleged criminal).
Well, maybe not for calling him a criminal, per se...
My first comment went unmolested. I condemned Swarz for the criminal acts, and for the consequences suffered by third parties. My second comment was a response to another's comment, calling me out for a clearly marked bit of hyperbole (which I rejected for a more sanguine reaction). That comment was a pseudo defense of Swarz' alleged crimes by attacking the concept of JSTOR, the site he hacked into MIT's system to access, because they actually charge money to print and distribute the academic papers Swarz is supposed to have downloaded.
perfunctory background:
JSTOR is a collection of academic papers that can be accessed for free by students and academics at most universities around the world. It is one of the most valuable tools for anyone writing a paper, especially for theses. I took Swarz' hijacking of JSTOR's bandwidth and files personally, because I sent a LOT of time online accessing JSTOR to write my Masters thesis. If I lost my access for days at a time because some hacker got my school kicked off JSTOR I'd be tempted to cause bodily harm (the aforementioned more sanguine reaction).
http://en.wikipedia.org/...
To my amazement my comment was "crippled." All the vowels were removed(!). I checked the comments rules, and while there is nothing about coarse language, I thought maybe it had some automatic filter. Maybe it was because I used the crass term about Swarz "not giving one shit" about his fellow academics (original italics), and that his actions deprived his colleagues of valuable research, making him a selfish bastard. So I edited it, changing it to read "one whit," and reposted with the clever joke: "I've been disemvoweled!" Well, I though it clever. It posted just fine and I went back to watching the Murdoch family lie to Parliament. (Don't you wish you were me?)
A while later I checked back to see if there was any more give and take (I like a good argument; sue me). Instead I found my comment missing (is that an oxymoron?). So I retyped it, and resubmitted it. This time, it just didn't show up at all. Tried it again, still nothing. Reread the comment rules and found that the author has complete and total control over who can comment, what they can say, and can block anybody for any reason (there's that "academic freedom" we all admire). So I sent a comment, directly addressing the author, saying his defense of Swarz while simultaneously blocking my comments was hypocritical. No surprise, I haven't received any response. I recalled another recent comment where I used the vernaculr "bullshit" and that it posted unmolested. So I must surmise that my offense was calling this "good friend' of Crooked Timber a selfish bastard. More accurately, I called him a "selfish, self-aggrandizing bastard."
To compound matters, it now appears the author has also blocked me from commenting on the entire site. That's right, the defender of Aaron Swarz' freedom to hack into a university's computers, steal bandwidth, and cause harm to other peoples' research efforts, has blocked my comments for simply criticizing his "good friend."
Is it any wonder the neocons can get public sympathy by attacking "intellectual elites?" When (purportedly) leading academics can and will censor other people's opinions simply because they were mean to their friends or disagree with their personal politics, how can liberals expect to fight the specious memes? When there are supposedly small-L liberal minds who practice big-C censorship, every effort to open people's minds is cut off at the knees. Not change people's minds, but simply helping them accept other's opinions is damaged.
This isn't (just) about me venting because I'm pissed at a reactionary response to my criticism. It's about me getting my licks in, and about common sense, or the lack of it, from a site The Guardian listed as one of the 50 most important blogs, and from people the rest of us depend on for leadership in the free exchange of ideas - which the Crooked Timber author is trying to claim is something Swarz' alleged criminal acts contribute to.