Total Pageviews

Tuesday, April 12, 2011

Online integrity

It's getting a little testy on our online forum because the moderators are finally starting to enforce some rules and the usual suspects are squawking. Some are asking for a free in -for -all format and others are whining about equality. Still another poster day goes by the name of justamom would benefit by reading the constitution.... The Victoria Advocate online forum is not censoring anyone, nor can they infringe on anyone's first amendment rights of free speech. It's not rocket science; the Advocate staff is just reemphasizing the rules for posting. The implicated individuals are in denial; they know exactly what they're doing, but they want to do more of it and want others to agree with them. The waywardwind continues to make a plea for the return of Kenneth Schustereit, but he doesn't have the foggiest idea, what transpired to get Kenneth banned. Was it multiple warnings or a disagreement that couldn't be reconciled?

I have mixed feelings concerning Lamppost's latest blog. On one hand, it would certainly get my ire to get emails like the ones he has posted. I have never have received an unflattering e-mail but a lot of my online friends have. I know two females that got threatening e-mails because they took a liberal side. Those emails worked because they left the forum but the individual that wrote those emails is still posting today. That's the reason I have mixed feelings. About three years ago, I threatened to expose the blogger who wrote those threatening emails by submitting the evidence online. For some reason, he took a long leave of absence, so I forgot about it. There is a cabal that not only wants their opinion to be seen and heard, but like online evangelists, they want to convert everyone to their line of thinking. I would like to think that I would never divulge an e-mail that was sent to me in confidence but according to Lamppost, he didn't solicit nor was he expecting an email from Dale Zuck. If that is the case; he is under no obligation to keep an e-mail secret; especially if it's an ongoing feud. I know for a fact that the Ron Paulites (don't tax me bro) types are anti- taxes zealots who will demagogue anyone and anything, if they think it will raise their property taxes by $1.25. People like that can't wait to get into office, so they cut anything that might raise their property taxes. They are driven by ideology and their wallets. Don't take my word for it, compile a list of their comments, and I bet at least 90% of their posts have to do with taxes.

Am I being hypocritical for complaining about personal information being revealed online? I complained about a login script that was doctored without the express permission from the Victoria Advocate. Lamppost's blog did divulge the contents of two e-mails but evidently it was within the rules because he had done that before. Perhaps we're taking a kinder and gentler approach now, where questionable blogs and comments will be deleted...I guess it's about keeping a free flowing respectful environment.

I've had a couple of blogs that were directed at me, but I considered the source, so I never retaliated. I used to write a contradicting blog because I didn't want unsubstantiated material to stand for a fact. I also remember the "mosque at ground zero" blog I wrote last year where another blog with the exact opposite view was placed above mine. Then there what I call the "AM radio blogs."..It’s a place where those interested in participating, can have their ideological food fights until heart content.Then again, some die the lonely death of dismissal.

Am I being a hypocrite again?Is there verifiable proof that the Advocate treats one group or an individual better or worse than others?I haven't seen it.... Is there another way at looking at the whole situation? Of course there is, so why don’t you tell where I’m wrong.


Edith Ann said...

It's only MY opinion, but I absolutely believe the Advocate has a double standard. They have validated that time and again.

If a critical remark is made about the Advocate, it's deleted. Complain about the price of the Sunday paper, or the lack of a TV guide, it's deleted.

People post links to all kinds of stuff and it stays. Let someone post a link to my blog, it's removed. Everytime.

I personally think Lamppost is moving into a bullying mode. Seriously--what was the point of posting the emails? The only point was to embarrass or shame Zuck. There was nothing threatening in the email, goofy stuff for sure, but not harmful. I am curious why the Advocate finally removed them.

And for the record, Lamppost was critical of folks who post things when other aren't looking, which is exactly what he did by waiting until nearly midnight to post the blog. He received the emails much earlier in the day.

And pay attention--g4further will post a comment shortly after Lamppost 99% of the time. Talk about having more than one account.

Anyway, I think until you experience it for yourself, you would not take note of the favoritism. Is it a big deal? At times it pisses me off, but in the grand scheme of things, it's not!

I have a blog where I can write what I want and NO ONE deletes it!

Mike said...

Edith Ann
I agree that you have a phenomenal blog that is visited daily by a lot of like -minded individuals, who get to post without fear of being deleted...You do have a worthwhile alternative.

I'm not sure of all the details but throughout the years I've seen the Advocate let a lot of critical remarks against the paper, remain intact. Not saying that the opposite didn’t happen; just saying I don't know the ratio of deletion to allowing.

I certainly don't think Lamppost is moving to a bullying mode, but I do question his motive for yesterday's blog. I also question Dale Zuck's motive for the two incoherent emails. I think it opened up a window into Zuck's all- American personality that he was trying to present. I think it's an ongoing feud between a couple of cliques. It might have something to do with the local GOP..... I don't know why Lamppost's blog was deleted, but it may be sending a message or maybe the Advocate received a lot of complaints.

Ha, I've experienced favoritism of one sort or another, my entire life; I'm certainly able to recognize it. I call it keeping score.

I guess it depends on what the meaning of "is"," is."...... You look at things as an investigator and I take more of an analytical approach.

Thanks for your response.

Edith Ann said...

This comment, "Anyway, I think until you experience it for yourself, you would not take note of the favoritism." was in the context of an Advocate poster.

I think we all experience favoritism in our lives, and I agree, it's called keeping score.

Mike said...

Edith Ann

Yes ma'am ,I knew exactly what you meant but I would have to evaluate both parties before determining whether it's favoritism or justified. Remember the old saying " never argue with the man who buys ink by the barrel."...:-)

I guess we have all been put on notice to follow the rules or suffer the consequences... That's the reason I've gone through about 12 yellow pages and 4 days of trying to find the right words for my next Advocate blog.... It's extremely hard trying to lay equal blame on the democrats ,when the Tea Party is driving the republicans to the far right.... If I write what I really feel, it's gonna seem too partisan and I might be accused of stirring up the locals.... I don't want to change so much that I'm not the same Mike, but rather some made up blogger of civility, by withholding the truth.....Does that make any sense?

Edith Ann said...

Yes, it makes sense, but why are you thinking you cannot be biased? Why do you feel there is a need to change from where you are at?

You write a political blog. I am pretty sure the expectation is that it will be heavily slanted one way or another. That is why folks read you. Doesn't mean that is all you can write, but when it is a political topic, we expect to see you on the Dem side of the aisle!

Personally, I think the Dems need to be called out and held accountable so that they can snap to and we can get rid of Rick Perry. We are going to be in a world of hurt when this budget is fully realized. The education cuts alone are unconscienable! We are 48th or 49th in the nation in education and we're going to take more teachers out of the classroom? Because some butt-head won't listen to reason? Right!

When I quit fretting over who might be offended, it was easier to write.

Folks have an expectation that you are going to speak the truth, even those who love to poke you with their FOXNews talking points. Just write. You have a fan base that will be there.

Mike said...

Edith Ann
As usual you're exactly right; I like the statement "When I quit fretting over who might be offended, it was easier to write.".. It fired me up, but now I have to start all over..:-)

Your smart enough to understand that a political blog has to have a slant one way or the other or it's not a point of view. It becomes a summary of both views. I can't imagine a pro-lifer saying nice things about the opposition. I think you're right ;the people that think, I'm a hypocrite probably just skim the blog and post their preconceived talking points.

I just read that the new voting districts will favor the GOP, not surprising but unseating the GOP super majority is a monumental task. I don't see the grassroots effort.

Thanks for the kick in the butt... I'm holding you responsible..:-)

Rebecca said...

I want to blog, but I think I got my butt kicked so bad every time I talked about education - even if it was just about ideas - that I got discouraged. It breaks my heart when people are so critical. I guess, to me, I get confused as to why an idea would make someone so angry. I'm really too immature for the internet. Matt Ocker called me hyper-sensitive - and I'm still mad about that. LOL

Mike said...

You have to carry the burden of being one of the nicest bloggers on the forum...:-)

You do teach; that gives you the expertise; you can rely on that to carry you through.

Dust yourself off; get back up and do so blogging..:-)

Rebecca said...

blogging instead of venting the in comment section of Jared's blog? LOL

Edith Ann said...

Rebecca, Listen to Mike.

Matt's bark is worse than his bite, most of the time. With the rest of us meanies out there attacking everyone, someone has to be the nice guy.

That's your job, Rebecca.

Rebecca said...

Oh, good cop bad cop. I get it.