test testMay 13th, 2010 at 11:55 pm
I'm hoping that the person who couldn't comprehend what was written but commented (without linking to her SA blog, craven and subpar combo there) anyway got bored with one year's silence and moved on. Good people left too, but past banter experiences have helped me make better choices and question some held irrational beliefs.
It's true I need to let go of a lot of things. I'm just not seeing the value of those comments. I don't visit other blogs and leave comments that demonstrate that I haven't read everything. One could post: "I don't understand what you meant by ____________" or "you write statement A, and that's foreign to me. Is something missing"?
It makes me wonder what the standards for online discourse are. Also, I don't see anything wrong with supplementing facts and references when making a statement or correction (e.g., "Councilmember is one word" "panini is plural of panino" "Dover is the capital of Delaware"), but apparently some people think that's snarky. If the correction is done in neutral language, how is a vulgar retort appropriate? What does it say about someone's worldview that facts are feared and viewed as something to be protected against?
I don't delete comments unless they are obvious spam, or if they seem to be accidental multiple-posts, because expression, uninformed and ill-constructed it may be, is a right, and it's useful to readers to know which commentators to ignore and avoid. How can one tell the good among the bad?
I just ask that people consider when commenting that inferences about their education, personality and cognition can be made by readers.