I banned someone from commenting today, using an IP address. Maybe he’ll be back, I’ll try and get on it if he does. It’s hard to know if I even got him…
Thanks to Charles Keating for doing some detective work, and apologies to Richard Silverstein, who told me a long time ago about trolls and who is one of the people this commenter impersonated. Richard has pushed me to be more responsible. I’m going to try. I apologize to among others Clara, who this commenter was especially rude to. And to all commenters who had to put up with this crap and readers who thought this site was about ideas.
I was saying to my wife this morning, I have poor leadership skills. I’ve always been irresponsible in life, and loosey-goosey. Well, having a blog represents a form of leadership; and I find I’m happy to be a censor. The rules for this site are: I will tolerate abuse, even name calling, even some invective and mild obscenity. I touch on sensitive issues here; and it only seems fair that people should go after me and others with all they’ve got. But raw obscenity, scabrous namecalling, impersonation–that’s over the line.
Richard Witty, we hardly knew ya! (just kdding, just kidding…godd riddance to peanut of gideon)
Phil,
You opened a can of worms. Blogiots don't like to be censored, and those that remain will press their limits.
Hey Ed you scumbag, I'm still here.
My feeling is that a blog is like someone's living room. It's not a democracy or a public square. The blog host does not have to justify who he bans or why. It is fair play to lay out ground rules and expectations for behavior but in the end, it's the blogger's private world.
If someone doesn't like the blog host's banning policies, they can bitch about it on their own blog.
No apologies for banning, Philip. It's your place.
Hey Phil:
Instead of banning me, why not ban some of your many Nazi sympathizers here? The psychotic "Clara" whose honor you rose to defend, has herself recommended collective punishment against Jews everywhere if they don't follow her advice and repent.
Fuck you, Phil, you cowardly wannabe Goebbels.
I don't think paul malfara posted that last comment. Obviously wittle wideon is trying to extend his welcome here even further.
I don't understand the difficulty. Clara is a psychotic jew baiter, is she not?
Yeah wideon, not only do you treat women well, your other commentary here is really spot-on.
Like how bout the one where you had a spastic fit (in Charles Keating's name–why not your own?) because Phil had said Spitzer came from Park Avenue?
Turns out he was only the son of a multi-millionaire property tycoon in a different part of New York.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article3559410.ece
"…
After the terrorist attacks of 2001 on New York and Washington, laws relating to money-laundering were significantly tightened, requiring banks to file so-called 'suspicious activity reports' whenever there is evidence that clients might be trying to sidestep routine regulations.
Spitzer’s transfers to a company called QAT International Inc – later revealed to be a front for the Emperors Club – were reportedly considered by the bank to be an attempt to avoid another law that requires all transactions over $10,000 to be reported to the US Treasury. Breaking down payments with intent to avoid reporting is an offence known as 'structuring'.
Yet Spitzer is the son of a multi-millionaire property tycoon and has substantial assets of his own. The notion that as few as three payments from his account of less than $10,000 might be considered suspicious 'raises as many questions as answers', said Dershowitz.
'We are talking about a man who is a multi-millionaire with numerous investments and purchases,' he said. 'It’s simply none of the federal government’s business that a man may have been moving his own money around in order to keep his wife in the dark about his private sexual peccadilloes.'
…"
.
"The notion that as few as three payments from his account of less than $10,000 might be considered suspicious 'raises as many questions as answers', said Dershowitz." – MM
The lesson is that if you're going to wire $10,000 to a prostitution ring, just wire the whole $10,000 in one shot.
I've sent plenty of wires over $10,000, and every one of them is recorded in a FinCen file. So what? The ugly little secret is that the government is so deluged with millions of SARs and CTRs that they can't possibly check them all out, unless the sender is named "Osama" and the memo references "Hijack 9/11."
I don't know how Spitzer, as a prosecutor, didn't learn the simple rules for navigating the system. Part of the reason is that he was state, and not federal. Rudy Giuliani wouldn't have made such bonehead amateur mistakes. Plus, he stuck with amateurs to satisfy his kinks.
It still makes me nervous that he's at large, though. Not that there's anything wrong with cross-dressing. I tried on my girlfriend's pantyhose one time, but didn't like the way it made my legs look. LOL!
MM,
Of course that post wasn't mine!!! Pork sword of Gideon, up to his old tricks. Hi, Bill. How are you doing?
The revered Ben Franklin said that a newspaper isn't a public stagecoach that's obligated to carry everyone with the price of a ticket.
On the leadership issue, I read a book called, "Airlift To Wounded Knee," by Bill Zimmerman–about the insurgent airdrop to the Indians besieged there in the 1970s. What impressed me was that although Zimmerman was the nominal "leader" of the group because he had been tasked with organizing the airdrop, he allowed them to operate by natural consensus and led from behind. Only on two occasions did he exercise authority, once when the group was deadlocked on a decision and once when a quick decision was needed. But even though Zimmerman was Phil's kind of guy the airdrop WAS successfully made–in part because Zimmerman was exactly the kind of leader that such an ecclectic bunch needed.
I'm dying to know who the real person was who was impersonating me.
Phil, no doubt about it maintaining one's blog well is tough. It takes more time than it should because of the assholes, trolls & those whose bile you want to respond to. And I completely understand your reluctance to wade into the sewer that some commenters bring through their commenting. You're right–you don't get paid for it. All that being said, spending the time is worth it for me because just like my home garden, I want my blog to be as welcoming, interesting & attractive a place as I can make it (at least to those who appreciate my efforts).
And I agree with Leila, blogs are not the public square. They're a small personal piece of internet real estate. They ARE like one's home, again as she wrote. I don't let guests take a dump on my front porch. And if someone wants to mock me or impersonate someone or use crude sexual remarks they don't deserve the time of day.
I'm Richard Silverstein & I did write this comment.
Interesting Leila and RS, though I see blog comments as more like a hybrid format, part town hall, part graffito wall.
(If you hit up a wall using someone else's tag, you sure as hell will get the shit beat out of you when you're found out.)
(Likewise, in the town hall, I don't believe poopy jokes go down very well.)
"You opened a can of worms. Blogiots don't like to be censored, and those that remain will press their limits."
How many of us would you allow to remain, given censorship powers?
I probably don't know enough about Richard Silverstein's problems with commentators, but I think it is interesting to see who is attracted to Philipp's argument and why.
But interesting many seem to have been faked here and so far we did not have this huge bruhaha. But of cause if you use your real name you might be bothered. No?
http://www.google.de/search?q=%22charles+Keating%22&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a