Posted 3 months, 0 days ago in 
Loading ...
When we launched the Community.GJSentinel.com Web site roughly six months ago, we hoped it would become a place not only where we published more and longer letters to the editor than we are able to publish in the print edition of The Daily Sentinel, but a site that would encourage public dialogue on issues affecting the Grand Valley and the Western Slope.
It began that way. Unfortunately, comments posted regarding letters to the editor have recently deteriorated into little more than childish name-calling from a handful of people of various political persuasions. That has no doubt deterred other, more thoughtful people from engaging in the online conversations, and all but eliminated any thoughtful public dialogue on important issues. That is changing now.
The most troublesome of the commenters will be blocked from the site. And we will track other comments closely, taking off those that engage in name-calling, threats or other inappropriate behavior.
While the Community site was created to allow more reader participation, it remains a property of The Daily Sentinel and GJSentinel.com, and we reserve the right to determine what content will be allowed there, and we encourage anyone to participate. We ask only that your comments be civil and that they remain on point.
Bob Silbernagel
Editorial Page Editor
The Daily Sentinel
67 Responses to “Community message”
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 9:44 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
And I for one will be eternally grateful for this decision.
Thank you for trying to restore some civility to this type of communication of ideas.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:00 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
It will be interesting to see who is banned from the forum. It makes one wonder what criteria is used for the selection.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well, bravo, indeed. This should prove to be interesting.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:28 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Thanks, Bob. As you know I write letters and have participted in commenting on the letter of others as John B. I have “fallen off the wagon” on a number of occasions by “giving back” what I have felt to be insults and condescending comments. I may be on your list of offenders. I’m perfectly willing and capable to keep it at a mature level.In fact, that’s the way I hoped it would be from the start. I’m looking forward to a place where differences in opinion can be discussed without demonizing those who may disagree with opinions expressed when commenting on letters. Let’s hope it is a new day. John Borgen
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:34 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I can appreciate such a move by the Sentinel. Point this forum in the direction that it was originally intended to go, and maybe we can get some good public discourse on important subjects.
Too often thinking people are discouraged from posting because of the inevitable deterioration of the subject in to childish rants and name calling, and almost every subject ends up off topic.
I look forward to the improvements!
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:59 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Most likely, The Sentinel did not anticipate the level of abuse and vitriol that would come from members on both ends of the spectrum.
There will be future offenses, I’m sure, but, hopefully, they’ll be dealt with quickly.
(Frankly, given a few of my comments, I’m surprised I wasn’t ‘purged’ myself. Perhaps they’re just getting around to it.)
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:10 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Happy with this new development, though I am also one who at times has said inappropriate things.
I wonder if everyone will have a chance to be civil starting today (which I hope is the case), or if some will be barred right off.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:14 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
It’ll be interesting, Ash. Time will tell if some of the offenders have the strength to not resort to old tactics. I believe at least one probably won’t last the day.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:17 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Woo Hoo,
And I am still here. Looking forward to discussing the issues.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:22 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
MacDaddy,
And who, pray tell, would that “one” be?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:24 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Good morning GrandmaSix,
There is a good many of us who are looking forward to civil discussions without all the trash.
I hope you are having a great day.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:26 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Not you, AP. You were brave enough to just start up a new screen name that clearly referenced your old one. Seriously, that’s to be respected. I don’t think you’re hiding from anyone, and while some of your posts have been difficult for me to understand, I don’t recall any of them being abusive.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:27 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think WLJ answered your question, AP.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:29 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I made a comment to grandmaSix Scott.
Do you have a comment on my remark to the Lady?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:35 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
MacDaddy,
Why I have no idea what you are talking about. I happen to be on my laptop monitoring GJSentinel.com and trying to pick a user name when I passed a supermarket. My choices were Win Dixie, Piggly Wiggly or AP. Don’t you think I made a wise choice?
PS. Can we be banned for getting off subject? Like can we banned for not talking about the ban? Who was it called it a purge? That has serious political overtones. I would like to meet this American Patriot guy. He sounds really intelligent, and he is probably really good looking, as well as being sound of mind and body, but alas that is not to be, but I do find myself somehow strangely attracted to Curmudgeon.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:39 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
WLJ,
Nope. My comment was directed toward AP.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:41 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Nope. Curmudgeon’s gone, too. As are the various incarnations of other members. The will reappear, no doubt, but as has been noted in the forums section, some of the more ‘flamboyant’ posters will make themselves known soon enough. In other words, some people just can’t help themselves.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:47 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well Scott, perhaps you can make the connection for us.
AP asked a question of MacDaddy.
I made a welcoming greeting to grandmaSix.
And you came in with a remark that had nothing to do with my comment to the Lady, but did seem to have a derogatory aspect to it.
It would appear that you feel the need to inject yourself into my conversations and comment on my presence for the purpose of what exactly?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:49 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I’d like to know why Curmudgeon was banned. He’s never been anything but nice. How do you know Curmie has been banned? Have you been sending him private messages behind my back? Curmie, if you are out there, and they banned you, change your user name to something like American Patriot. You can get back on. If WLJ can do it, you can do it. I don’t know. This whole thing seems sort of classless.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:53 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well, that didn’t take long, did it? I imagine The Sentinel will be dealing with returning offenders on a case-by-case basis. I would imagine that simply making an obvious return is not enough for a re-ban; that people in question would have to repeat their offending actions. So, we’ll see. It’s just before noon, now…I expect some re-banning to take place before Dr. Phil comes on…or, if I’m lucky, before the People’s Court. Man, that Marilyn Milian is hot….
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:55 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
AP-
“Classless”! Ha! Okay, that was a good one, I don’t care what political philosophy you follow.
And, Curmudgeon’s posts in the Forum about the Sentinel’s Editorial page are all now “anonymous”..like Willis’s posts about Scott. I assume that means he’s banned.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 11:59 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
MacDaddy,
You still haven’t answered my question. How do you know Curmie was banned? Are you working for the “Webmaster”? Or Master Blaster? Is the embargo on? Are we in imminent danger of being thrown into the methane pits? How did you come by this inside information that Curmie was banned? Who will be the next target of the Sword of Damocles, and who watches the watchers?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:07 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Curmie, if you are out there, forget about using the name American Patriot. Register the user name anonymous. I think we found a way around the ban. How can they ban you for something anonymous wrote? According to them, he is not even registered. So I am not sure whether we need a user name or not? It is up to some little guy who rides around on a big “mute” guys shoulders whether or not they pull the plug. It seems free speech is under new management. So don’t say nothing bad about the little guy.
Input, I need more input.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I can’t imagine Curmie being banned either. He is WAY more civil than most people here, myself included.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:14 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
WLJ,
Sure thing.
Minivan MacDaddy made a comment about “one not lasting the day.”
AP asked who that might be.
You then posted your greeting to grandmasix, not as Willis_Leon_Johnson but as WLJ, indicating you had already re-registered.
I then made the comment to AP that his question had been answered.
Now if you are not the same person as the aforementioned Willis, I apologize. If you are, then as I indicated, AP’s question was answered.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:15 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
: shrug : As I said, I think The Sentinel had its reasons. Reason enough to ban me, too, I would have thought. Either way, I’m trying to behave now. So, it’s best not to discuss who was banned and why, better to just move on.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:18 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ash,
Gee, I can’t understand what is so surprising. To me this just all seems like a rerun. But that is the nature of censorship. It becomes a slippery slope. But it is apparently preferable to have someone else doing the censoring rather than us doing it ourselves, as in the previous “User Code of Conduct”. But that didn’t work very well. I think there were too many people who didn’t like civil conversation. That is unless it is forced on us, which it now is.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:34 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Thanks Bob, or maybe just limiting the quanity of posts for some would create an arena for those to post a more intelligent diatribe
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:41 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
AP,
I think the biggest problem with the code was that everyone has their own defintion of civil conversation, coupled with having no penalties for violating it. What is acceptable to one person isn’t to someone else, and there was nothing that could be done either way.
Every discussion board I frequent has moderation to some degree. This one was unique in having none. While I certainly don’t consider myself blameless in the insult department, I also believe that when I did it was provoked. I’m looking forward to seeing what happens in the future.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:44 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well, everyone believes they were provoked and/or justified, don’t they? I don’t think you’ll hear anyone saying, “I did it, I started it, and I’m not sorry”, after all.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:57 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott,
I have seen you very civil in the face of overwhelming provocation by me. But then I too felt provoked. The question of the acceptance of civil discourse other than self imposed, is to rename the rose. It is a simple matter of discipline on the one hand, or the imposition of arbitrary rule on the other. Americans have always practiced the first to avoid the second. It has always been understood that the judgment of the many is superior to the judgment of the few. It is an interesting human phenomenon that when placed in a position of authority, and left unchecked, such power ultimately becomes totalitarian through the application of political correctness. In such ways, not only ideas but words in our language are banned in the name of preventing offense, and soon, very soon, pretend offense becomes the weapon of choice in suppressing the free expression of those we may not agree with.
Report this post
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 1:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Bob Silbernagel - Thanks for FINALLY taking some corrective action to clean up the “cybersewer” the Sentinel inadvertently created. What happened is a perfect example of why “self-regulation” flies in the face of human nature and is a total oxymoron.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 1:19 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
AP,
Thanks for the compliment. In return I have to say that while I disagree with some of your positions, you have never engaged in name-calling that I can recall. I guess we insult each other politely.
I agree with you on the discipline vs. arbitrary rule, but unfortunately there are always a few without the discipline that ruin it for those who have it. As long as the arbitrary rules simply limit the personal attacks and insults, we should be okay. There will always be those who see nothing wrong with what they say and can’t understand why they were censured, but as long as we’re all playing by the same rules, I think we’ll get along as a community.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 1:25 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Perhaps one of the reasons that AP and Scott could remain civil (while disagreeing on almost every point,) is that they both had the maturity and the strength of their own convictions, rather than fall back on name-calling and personal attacks.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 1:54 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott.
APs question was indeed answered.
” cott
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 12:14 pm PM This User Report this comment
WLJ,
Sure thing.
Minivan MacDaddy made a comment about “one not lasting the day.”
AP asked who that might be.
You then posted your greeting to grandmasix, not as Willis_Leon_Johnson but as WLJ, indicating you had already re-registered.
I then made the comment to AP that his question had been answered.
Now if you are not the same person as the aforementioned Willis, I apologize. If you are, then as I indicated, AP’s question was answered. ”
Since I was in no way involved in any of the posts preceding nor following MacDaddys post with the sole exception of my welcoming GrandmaSix, and you were in no way involved in any part of that post, you had no reason to mention me in any manner.
Unless you felt that it is your duty to start it all over again on a whim.
And it has been duly noted.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Gee, Willis…Scott and AP were getting along, and everyone was having a nice chat. Why’d you have to go and do that?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:07 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
MiniVan_MacDaddy I have read through these posts and I have a question for you. Why did Scott mention WLJ when clearly his only comment was one of courtesy to Grandmasix, and made no reference to any other poster?
Scott has been the instigator in many of these little dustups, and there was no reason for his comment here.
Why are you not questioning Scott on his action?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:09 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
WLJ,
Let’s ask Minivan MacDaddy if he was referring to you in post #8. If it was, then I had a perfectly valid reason to refer to you.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:11 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Because Scott answered Willis, dropped the issue, and started to converse amiably with AP. Willis then decided to revisit the issue. That’s why.
He simply cannot help himself.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:13 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Not one of my oxen to gore Scott.
But you seem to be looking at an assumption that you made regarding MiniVan_MacDaddy and his post. Without prior knowledge of who he was referring to, you jumped to a conclusion and tried to get in a free shot.
I would say the first foul went to you.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:14 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott;
I was, in fact referring to Willis. I predicted that he would have a problem adapting to the new rules. And he, as expected, is having a problem adapting to the new rules. I must apologize that is because of my prediction, he has found an excuse to target you yet again.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:23 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Alpahalph,
From the Editorial Page Editor:
“The most troublesome of the commenters will be blocked from the site. And we will track other comments closely, taking off those that engage in name-calling, threats or other inappropriate behavior.”
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:25 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
rm Please learn to read and spell my name correctly.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:32 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Alphalpha,
It was a guess, I admit. But it was an educated guess, and it appears I was right. If pointing out plain facts is a cheap shot, I guess I’m guilty.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:35 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I for one enjoy posting on this site, even though I try to be civil, I don’t always succeed. Why doesn’t everybody stop what they are doing and take five minutes to think about our relationship to each other, and what we would be doing if we couldn’t talk to each other? I don’t like the circumstances presented by the ban, but we are going to like them even less when someone is arbitrarily picked out and banned and then another and another. Why don’t we try talking about something other than our past differences, just for a little while. I’m sorry for interrupting.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:39 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Personally AP, I find it interesting to observe.
Very interesting indeed.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:41 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
MiniVan_MacDaddy, please explain your post #43.
I did not think anybody would consider “WLJ” to be any other than Willis_Leon_Johnson.
I’m not sure what it is that I am supposed to “stop”.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 2:53 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
It’s human nature, for most people, to react when being called names, told they are stupid, don’t know what they are talking about, so on and so forth. We all have an opinion, and we know it’s just that, an opinion. I rarely post because I usually get shot down for it, and my words are twisted by someone else. That I feel is wrong. I don’t mind someone telling me that I may have my information wrong, but it usually is not stated that way. Just because I may not have an education as high leveled as some, doesn’t make me stupid. And yes I have said a few choice words myself, but nothing to ever be banned for.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 5:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Thanks, Bob and the Sentinel. I am dismayed to read a post with 50 comments and finding 80% of them being “neener-neener” and “Jane, you ignorant …” I look forward to the civil dialogue, although I hope they don’t take all the spice out.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 6:27 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Tasha, you “knocked it out of the park” with your post #47…. very well put. You go, girl!
People don’t have to be “book smart” or college educated to be intelligent. In my opinion, anyone who says otherwise is not only rude and condescending but insecure, as well, because they feel the need to put others down in order to try to make themselves appear better or smarter. In my opinion, just the opposite is true.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 6:43 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Good point, Tasha. To paraphrase the old saying: “If you have the facts, pound the facts. If you don’t have the facts, pound your opponent.”
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 9:39 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
“The most troublesome of the commenters will be blocked from the site. And we will track other comments closely, taking off those that engage in name-calling, threats or other inappropriate behavior.”
Sure going to miss class of 52.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 9:50 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
The really important question is whether being “Banned by the Daily Sentinel” is as prestigious as being “Banned in Boston?”
Is being in the company of James Joyce as prestigious as being in the company of Dalton Trumbo?
These are significant questions to ponder as we all venture into the “New World” of Community.gjSentinel.com.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 9:56 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ullr,
“Ullr” what kind of a name is that? Extremely difficult to type! What about us wimps who were not banned? Do you have any empathy for us?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
skippy says: “Sure going to miss class of 52.”
Let us not apply double standards shall we? I have been on this board far longer than skippy, and have noted that the fault does not lay solely on one side, and have myself been the object of “ad hominem” attacks and attempts at belittlement, and it was not from Classof52. Most of the time I have either ignored such individuals, but my tolerance, while quite extensive, is not limitless. And, if someone persists, they quickly came to the realization that ‘tolerance’ does not equate ‘weakness’. Anyone who has ever walked behind another in a forest knows that it is not the stiffest branch that comes back to slap you in the ‘kisser’, it is the one that has bent, and when bent far enough may very well come back and prostrate you.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:04 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ullr, I don’t think that the rants that Silbernagel is talking about can be equated to censorship that you are referring to.
“And please do not try to present anything from the proven liar…”
“…has so few talents and accomplishments that he desperately clings to the little he knows about this world”
“I know …’s arrogance can be insufferable, but we should remember that both … and … are truly insignificant people”
I am thinking that these are the type of posts referred to by Silbernagel.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott, glad to see that you survived the purge.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:26 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
rm - You said, ““Ullr” what kind of a name is that?”
And here I thought you were an educated person!
“Ullr” is the Norse God of skiing. Back in the 60’s, we hard-core alpine skiers carried Ullr medallions in the belief He would keep up safe on the slopes, where we did very dangerous and stupid things to impress our girlfriends in the hopes they would provide us with “delights of a carnal nature” late at night in the ski lodge.
Ullr usually delivered what we hoped for!
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sullivan - You said, “Ullr, I don’t think that the rants that Silbernagel is talking about can be equated to censorship that you are referring to.”
You’re at least partially right.
Back in the “old days,” being banned from the print edition by then publisher George Orbanek was a badge of honor in this town. Now that the focus is on the online edition, being banned by Bob Silbernagel has a cache all its own.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:35 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ullr,
“Ullr usually delivered what we hoped for!”
Very selfish, do you realize how hard it is to type “Ullr” vs rm for instance?
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:41 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sullivan,
Thanks. I was a little surprised, to be honest. I’ve tried to keep my level of discourse up, but I know there were times when I succumbed to the Dark Side, as it were.
Posted September 4th, 2008 at 10:49 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Scott,
As you probably noticed we often come up on different sides of the issues, but I have come to respect you for the way you present your opinions.
I also have been to the “Dark Side” from time to time but have not been proud of the times when I have allowed that to happen.
Posted September 5th, 2008 at 9:13 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I survived! I survived!
Lord have mercy,
I survived!
Posted September 5th, 2008 at 6:51 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I’ve posted a commentary to my blog regarding this issue. Access it at:
http://johnlinko.blogspot.com/2008/09/compelling-civility-in-caustic.html
Best of luck to everyone.
Posted September 5th, 2008 at 7:26 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Johnlinko619,
You paint with a broad brush sir, just like the Daily Sentinel. Perhaps you would like to pick out something over the past couple of weeks that I have posted that was un-civil. If you had truly been monitoring this site, you would have noticed that many who totally disagree with my political position probably even to my existence have commented on my civility, not the lack of my civility. You might also have noticed that myself and Scott, two polar opposites were the originators of that voluntary code of conduct you referred to. It could be that if you had posted more than once or twice you may have also discovered that your choice was to give in to the bullies and not post your opinion or go toe to toe. The first choice is what they were hoping for. That gives them total control of the forum to present their political propaganda unopposed. I have explained this strategy that they use on at least three different occasions on GJSentinel.com. The explanation by Editor Sibernagel I found to be uninformed, and arbitrary because you see I was branded as one of the more egregious offenders and banned, and this is in spite of the fact that Todd of the Sentinel editorial staff would know better. You may believe that you have addressed the missing posts and censorship, yet your comment totally ignores the original censorship of all the posts on the Anne Landman Flag flap letter. I specifically asked in that case why my post was removed and whether I had broken any rules in a private message to Todd. He confirmed to me that I had broken no rules, and the explanation that I got was that removal of the post was not censorship. It was editorializing by Mr. Herzog. I think it is common knowledge by the frequent users on this site that at least in that case our posts were removed to address liability on the part of the Daily Sentinel in using an old file photo of Anne Landman’s flag pole. So you see Sir, your comments at least in part ignore the real circumstances, and now we are experiencing our second bout with censorship in which our posts are taken down without explanation or reason. How can corrective action be taken when you don’t know what rule(s) you violated. Most recently I have seen posts by myself, and others which were removed that were both civil and on subject, while other posts that were neither civil nor on subject remain. I believe that other users will verify what I am telling you in this comment. Is it possible that you don’t have all of the facts? Is it possible that the Daily Sentinel staff did not go to the trouble to find out who the true offenders were, but rather chose to draw an arbitrary line and all those behind the line were condemned and banned with no possibility of appeal. And their protest of this action was to be ignored, and if their protest was publicly posted then that too was censored. I am not asking for special consideration, but simple fairness would have been nice. Now we shall see if this post stays up because that is the nature of the circumstance that has been created?
Posted September 5th, 2008 at 9:50 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Since Mr Linko has, by his own admission been merely an observer and quite obviously not a very observant observer, one would wonder what he thinks his purpose is in posting anything from this website on his website.
Would it be to get people to go to his site thereby generating ‘hits’ and possibly improving the ranking of his site?
Stranger things have happened.
Posted September 5th, 2008 at 11:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I left the post on my blog because I make extensive use of weblinks, and because I wrote about this site on my blog when it started back in February.
My blog averages about 40-50 hits per day. The amount of traffic is not a concern for me.
The text of my blog post, minus the links, appears below:
When the Daily Sentinel rolled out its’ Community site earlier this year, I heralded its’ arrival as a potentially diverse and vital resource for the exchange of local ideas and information not otherwise available in one location. I log in periodically, and review the letters to the editor regularly. I have posted a comment or two, but otherwise have not been particularly active on the site.
The reasons, aside from trying to better manage my time online, include the manner in which discussions within the Forums section of the site, or the comments attached to letters to the editor, quickly degraded into name-calling and hateful ramblings that seemed intentional, as though the end goal was to chase away anyone who was interested in learning something through meaningful discussion. The users involved in this are referred to around the web as Trolls.
Despite attempts from Sentinel staff to impose a code of conduct, which was supplanted by a voluntary agreement among most of the more vocal users to behave responsibly, the attacks and diatribes continued.
Yesterday, Sentinel Editorial Page Editor Bob Silbernagel posted a short message announcing that the most egregious of the Community trolls would be blocked from the site, and comments would be monitored much more closely than in the past.
The Sentinel is correct in taking action, and is entirely within its’ rights to do this. Regardless of the right of free expression (real or perceived), they own the site. They’ve been more than tolerant of some real hatefulness, as well as comment threads that wander completely off of the original topic.
As you can imagine, this stirred up plenty of commentary in itself, the majority of which was civil, regardless of which side of the debate you were on. From a cursory examination of the comments left, most of those who left comments welcomed the announcement. Some users decried this action as censorship, and have also brought up the questionable past removal of legitimate posts and comments by the Sentinel staff. Some of the trolls appear to be trying to get back onto the site with different user names.
This is serious business; in the world of the Internet and e-commerce, reputation is as much a tangible commodity as anything else. Several anonymous trolls from a college admissions website message board are learning this the hard way, and the lawsuit that their targets brought against them may change the manner in which Internet commentary is generated and moderated.
There is an excellent book available free online (The Future of Reputation) that explores the concept of reputation, and how it will impact a society and economy in which one’s virtual persona or image is increasingly valued as much as any tangible service or presence.
The Sentinel and its’ parent company (whomever that may be in the future) are keenly aware of how the manner in which the Community site is used is a direct reflection on the reputation of the Sentinel and the domain GJSentinel.com. I applaud their level of tolerance and restraint up to this point in time, but I also feel that their recent action was necessary. The challenge now is to put some consistency and accountability behind the rhetoric.
I’ve got some observations and advice for all of the parties involved:
Community Users: Start a blog of your own, and moderate the comments before they hit the web. It’s really easy to do, especially with Blogger or Wordpress. You control the content, you manage the dialogue.
Trolls: Do the same if you feel that strongly about things. However, I question the ability of many of you to generate an original thought, let alone a flame or diatribe, without reacting to an idea from someone else.
If you don’t think this will work out, the extraordinary diversity of the Internet even has a place just for you. Go and wallow.
Sentinel: I don’t have time for message boards. There is too much noise coming from trolls and others who muddy the discussion to make any sense or learn anything, and I don’t think that things are going to improve sufficiently in the wake of your enforcement action to change my mind about it. I do like reading the printed letters 2 or 3 days in advance, though.
I realize that not too much is going to change at the paper until after the sale is completed, but I would strongly encourage you to evaluate the YourHub concept, as executed in Metro Denver and numerous other metro and rural areas around the country.
Even if the concept was conceived and is managed by a perceived competitor, YourHub succeeds in the manner in which content can be submitted, the information becomes personalized to a specific town or region, and moderation occurs within those local ‘hubs’.
The result, while not without its’ problems, is a web locale that a community can call its’ own. An extra added value is a weekly print edition specific to that community, with selected stories and other features.
This concept is even more viable now that the Sentinel is producing and distributing a weekly tab that contains highlights of the previous week’s stories. Since I follow the paper pretty closely during the week, this feels redundant to me. I for one would be excited about a weekly insert that detailed stories and events in my particular area of Mesa County.
Free Press: This is your chance to carve a niche. Give it some thought.
I wish the best of luck to Todd Powell and the remainder of the Sentinel staff that built and supports the Community site. I’m really trying to be optimistic, but it’s tough. I believe that the site as it exists now will need to be replaced by something that leverages more of the content delivery systems that are prevalent in places like YourHub.
Until then, I’ll peruse the letters. I’ve found that the Internet, especially the blogosphere, is like a giant flea market; you can look through junk for hours before you find anything of genuine value. I’ve got too much living to do for that.
Have a great weekend.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.