Blog Commenting Redux

  • Posted by Eric
  • April 5, 2006

OK, so a Dann supporter (his father-in-law) comes here and posts a comment supporting Marc. No biggie. I’m all for it. I even replied back to it and it was all pretty amicable. Next thing I know I get a carpel tunnel inducing comment from the same person that I promptly deleted, but felt the need to put up in a more workable format (pdf) because I’m not in the business of censoring content here unless it is abusive.

The purpose of the comment seemed to be an attempt to quell criticism of Dann by either bloggers or Chandra. The comment included some Google results related to the IALIF incident that were copied and pasted into the comment section, which I find of no real use. I also found it to be misleading and felt the need to point this out in a later post that included the content of the comment.

Now that the PD article has come out, the commentor wants me to ignore his postings, comments, and emails - but throws in a last jab by saying Subodh has done a good job “spinning this”.

OK, let me be clear. I don’t mind people commenting in disagreeable ways - at all! What I do mind is coming on here and effectively copy and paste spamming the comments to steer the debate your way through sheer force of scroll space. Mr. Lenhoff was wrong. The best way to handle it is to go back in the comments here and say so. I applaud him for using his real name and standing up for his son-in-law, but I disagree strongly with how it was done.

I’m having bad memories of the recent poorly executed Sherrod Brown campaign blog outreach…

Information and Links

Join the fray by commenting, tracking what others have to say, or linking to it from your blog.

Information
April 5th, 2006
6 Responses
Feeds and Links
Comment Feed
From This Author
Del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Categories
AG 2006
Commentary
Elections
Plunderbund
Rants
State Politics

Other Posts
Akron Beacon Journal Endorses Subodh Chandra for AG
Sulzer Challenges Ney to Debate


Say Something!

Because we value your thoughtful opinions, you are encouraged to add a comment to this post. Don't be offended if your comment is edited for clarity or to keep out questionable material. Comments may even be deleted at the discretion of the Plundercrew. You signal your agreement to this by clicking 'Submit Comment' below. Everyone who comments here is responsible for them.

Plunderchat:

Comment Number:
1
Written by:
Chris
Posted on:
April 5, 2006 at 3:16 pm

You delete comments that are long and that — in your words — “copy and paste spamming the comments to steer the debate your way” now?

Ridiculous.

I know Bentley well, and know that he would have just sent the links had he thought that was the way to do it. He put the story there because he wanted you to see the story.

(Again, I like Bentley support Marc, in large part because I know him well and have worked with him. But I suppose you’ll see that as you being objective and me just being someone who knows Marc.)

Comment Number:
2
Written by:
Eric
Posted on:
April 5, 2006 at 3:39 pm

Chris, I posted the comments as they appeared, in case you didn’t notice. Did you view the pdf? There is not much value in all that crap clogging up comments. So yes, I will delete comments that are insanely long and are just copied from Google results. There was zero commentary, analysis, or even opining there.

He didn’t just want me to see the story. He wanted to discredit Subodh. Said as much in his email. It was a driveby comment and not appreciated here. Now that he found out he was wrong he just wants me to forget it? I’m afraid not.

I have no doubt that Bentley is a good guy and I’m glad you like him. I don’t dislike him. I think the attempt to discredit Subodh was weak, though.

Now, what was ridiculous again?

Comment Number:
3
Written by:
Chris
Posted on:
April 5, 2006 at 4:29 pm

I’ve just never heard of someone relegating a comment to the pdf wastebasket based on “it was too long.” Seemed “weak” to me.

Comment Number:
4
Written by:
Eric
Posted on:
April 5, 2006 at 4:32 pm

how is it the wastebasket if i post it? you find THAT ridiculous yet have no problem with copy-paste dumping into comments? come on, man.

Comment Number:
5
Written by:
Len
Posted on:
April 5, 2006 at 9:11 pm

Chris:

It could have been a lot worse. Eric could have torn into the guy like he was a spammer or a troll.

This is a non-issue — even more so if the comment contained no original writing, but was merely pasted from some other site. That’s called plagiarism, by the way.

Personally, I delete garbage like that from my site without remorse…after upbraiding the commenter for being an unoriginal idiot, of course.

Comment Number:
6
Written by:
Plunderbund » Paper-based Journalism Company Refers to Plunderbund
Posted on:
April 10, 2006 at 1:21 pm

[…] In a recent article, an Ohio newspaper refers to events that unfolded on this site - Plunderbund, you know plunderbund.com - and didn’t see the need to either name the site nor link to any of the posts that it referenced. You might remember this post about an attempt by a comment on here to respond to criticisms of Marc Dann in a way that both spammed the comment area and contained a misleading attack on Subodh Chandra. I called BS on it in this post. […]