Dave Lindorff: The decline of public discourse

[marmar]

The decline of public discourse
Tue, 03/25/2008 - 14:59 — dlindorff


I suppose it's a sign that this site has made a mark that it has attracted its share of right-wing nutjobs and hackers.

The two guys who spent their lonely nights writing screeds and rants managed mostly to embarrass themselves with their poor grammar and their even poorer grasp of facts and reality, but they also consumed a lot of my time, particularly when they resorted to ad hominem attacks and factual errors that had to be deleted or responded to.

There were also periodic spam attacks that had to be cleaned up on the comments page (I don't know if these were perpetrated by the same sad losers, but they were also a big waste of my time).

In the end, because "Jay" has gone to the lengths of changing his "handle" in order to bypass the block function on the site, I am just going to close down the comments section.

I notice that many progressive sites have had to do this, no doubt for the same reason I'm doing it. It's unfortunate, because intelligent debate is badly needed, but to have it work, there has to be an editor to maintain some kind of standards, given the infantile and puerile minds that are out there, apparently with little else to occupy themselves. ......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.thiscantbehappening.net/?q=node/123

[magellan]

1. That's exactly what they want

Shutting down intelligent debate is their goal. Give in and they win. They move on like a swarm of locusts to stifle another democratic discussion.

DU is the perfect example of how to keep destructive RW pests under control. It can be done on any scale.

[happyslug]

2. Censorship is good

DU survives do to its willingness to Censor its members. This Censorship is meant to encourage discussion by making sure one side or the other do NOT get the chance to dominate the discussion by using tactics of silencing the opposition.

Censorship can be bad if abused. DU has never cut out anyone for saying their piece (provided it is NOT an attack on another person or a clear violation of the Rules). DU Rules are designed to make sure non-relevant topics are kept off this board (i.e. I remember when DU adopted the Sex topic ban, not to stop discussion on sex, but to avoid all the stupid sex threads put on DU by people who just wanted to discuss some sex joke or other similar topic).

The Rules are tightly enforced AND known to most people on this board. If you follow the Rules even the most Right wing person can post here, just do NOT attack another person. The rules basically forbid each DUer NOT to attack another DUer or what he or she said but to discuss those ideas. You can attack the comment, the idea, the dogma behind what that person said, but not the person him or herself.

Like most medicines, Censorship is best when done in small dozes to end problems early. If done correctly Censorship will enhance a discussion not stop it. Now we have to be careful when applying the censorship, to make sure the Censorship does NOT interfere with the discussion of ideas and what is needed, but if done to enhance discussion Censorship is good. That is how Censorship is done in DU and hopefully will continue.