Home » Education » Why I ruthlessly edit comments on this blog

Why I ruthlessly edit comments on this blog

Here’s an email from someone I banned from this blog. If you can’t see why I’ve lost all patience with people like this, then you need to be spending your time elsewhere in cyberspace.

William,

Is there the slightest possibility you might ‘open’ your ID forum to dissenting views?

You have some very dedicated apostles stroking your online ego, and insulating these young scientists from the ‘Borg’ is very Christian of you indeed; however, to many of us on the ‘outside’ your questionable editing practices suggest little more than self-aggrandizing censorship.

You are a curiosity, your theory a religious oddity, and your ‘designer’ is wearing your hat.

Respectfully,

[snip]

As for this blog’s commenting policies, go here and here.

  • Delicious
  • Facebook
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Twitter
  • RSS Feed

43 Responses to Why I ruthlessly edit comments on this blog

  1. “your theory a religious oddity”

    “don’t bother me with the science, I’ve already made up my mind about what ID is and isn’t.”

  2. As usual, his comments are condescending, uninformed and boring. Materialists just do not like to be challenged.

    Dan

  3. At one time, I wondered about your sometimes harsh and peculiar editing practices, but after getting familiar with so much of the opposition to ID, I think I’m beginning to understand them.

  4. I’ve noticed that Bill tends to censor those who are “pig-headed” about their opposition, or just generally uncivil…does that sound about right? I don’t personally agree with his censorship policy, nor with his theory, but I do try to keep my comments within the guidelines so long as I want to be able to comment here. There are plenty of posts I’d like to rant on, and if I want to do some ranting, I take it to PT, Pharyngula, or even UncommonDissent.

  5. I’ve seen many many comments here challenging Bill’s ideas and theories. So, I always find it funny when those at PT or other sites claim that anyone who disagrees gets their comment deleted. I just read a number of comments in the ode to the code post that are clearly in disagreement with ID.

    I REALLY love those who post on their sites nonstop about Bill and claim he deletes any comment that disagrees with him, yet then they turn around and post about people here on the site that are doing just that, posting comments that disagree with Bill! They make mini-saints out of people who make such comments, yet I thought Bill didn’t allow that. Or maybe he does? Maybe he doesn’t? I think they’re slightly confused by their seething hatred for anyone who doesn’t share their own views that they have to lash out in some manner.

  6. Bill,
    If the writer of this note had similar personal insults to make I commend you for deleting them. As a reader of this blog I’m interested in helpful insights about ID and sensible criticism. Insults made into sport yield little. There are plenty of sites allowing rabid anti-ID re-runs the writer can post to.

  7. “your questionable editing practices”

    Uh oh, the ID-ethics committee is on your tail!

  8. People editing their own websites and deciding which comments stay and which don’t- shocccccking. :) I run my own website and I delete comments all the time. I allow idiotic comments, personal attacks, etc. But, I have to draw the line somewhere and have to delete comments that go over that line. It’s called keeping an enviroment of civility- go to PT and don’t even support ID, but merely question anything to do with NDE and sit back while 100 people comment that you’re either 1. an idiot, 2. a raving lunatic theocrat, 3. clueless in all matters scientific, or any number of similar attacks. Be prepared to be personally attacked as well. Then, wait till hate-filled buffoons like PZ Myers misrepresent what you say and then attack that misrepresentation.

  9. Josh,

    What is your website…I like your posts and would like to check it out.

    Dan

  10. “‘open’ your ID forum to dissenting views”? Isn’t that code talk for let me rant and rave on your blog about how stupid you are? Personally I’m glad you restrict comments. Other than a few diehards I don’t think anyone reads past the first ten or so comments anyway. I know I don’t. If this guy had his way you’d have hundreds of comments in each post, each declaring how stupid you are, each unread, and each chewing up valuable bandwidth.

  11. Ditto Jon Jackson.

    There are several blogs where a few people seem to control all comments challenging everything not with thoughtful questions or comments but with diatribes and vitriol. Then, even good people chime in trying to refute the naysayer and it is off to the races. After about 10 comments, the conversation is directed completely away from the original topic. At that point, further reading for thoughtful takes on the original topic becomes useless.

    I didn’t know you edited so tightly, but I’m glad you do.
    It’s a privilege to participate.

  12. Red Reader says: “It’s a privilege to participate”.

    Ditto from me. I appreciate the privilege to be exposed to the [mostly] fine thoughts expressed here as much as I am permitted to interract with their authors. And I’ve never once felt I was being deprived of hearing opposing viewpoints. The lively debates should be enough to convince anyone that there is no unfairness here.

  13. Dan- my site is thebluesite.com (I link it in my name.) Finally figured out I could actually make it show my actual name and not my ‘username’ for this site…too bad I didn’t figure this out till the other day :)

  14. I, for one, am glad to see puckSr off the blog. He seemed to have an axe to grind, had a hard time expressing himself, and didn’t have much to add. I think it’s a service to all of those who, though opposed to ID, have something substantial to contribute.

  15. I was wondering what took Bill so long to ban puckSR. For the entertainment value y’all might be interested in learning a little more about him…

    http://tinyurl.com/b6fun

    ROFLMAO! It just doesn’t get better than this.

  16. I spoke too soon. It DOES get better…

    http://tinyurl.com/8hg84

  17. Man… Argh! Information overload.

  18. EEEEEK!

  19. Maybe Bill didn’t need to ban him. He just needed to put him on a tighter leash.

    A tighter leash! Get it? HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    I kill me sometimes.

  20. What Dembski’s atheistic materialist opponents obviously can’t understand is that in this case censorsip is free speech.

  21. Darwinists have long regarded freedom of censorship as an inalienable right. I do to. But not because I don’t like criticism of my views. Informed criticism is fine. Stupid, contemptuous, repetitive criticism is where I’ve lost patience. –WmAD

  22. Mr Dembski has every right to run his blog as he wishes and I imagine that teaching ID to our youth will work in much the same fashion.

  23. “I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption … For myself, as no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneous liberation from a certain political and economic system, and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom.” ~ Aldous Huxley

    Perhaps puckSR’s motives are similar?

  24. My disappoint stems from how arbitrarily the rules are applied. Don’t be boring is a good rule. Sadly all the boring people are not expelled. As a case in point, consider comment 19 above and the signed commenter. Perhaps PuckSR posted way too often, but then see comment 19 above and the signed commenter.

  25. Cool site Josh,

    Do you wrestle? I am a wrestler and I think everyone from your neck of the woods wrestles.

    Dan

  26. hlwarren

    Sorry if my sense of humor bores you. If it’s any consolation you bore me too but you’re still here and unlike you I haven’t whined about it. I guess we all have our crosses to bear, eh?

  27. Gumpngreen

    After discovering some of things that puckSR likes to do in his spare time I can see why he needs to convince himself there’s no God.

    I think that’s the case for a lot of atheists, although I don’t suspect they all have quite such a long list of things they’d rather not have to explain to St. Peter at the Pearly Gates with their angelic mother listening.

    I’m not sure if I’m going to have to explain my actions in this life when I get to the other side but it’s usually better to be safe than sorry.

  28. Dear DaveScot
    You do bore me.
    Goodbye.

    Dear Dr. Dembski,
    Please expell me from this blog. It is too boring for more words than this.
    Thank you and goodbye.

  29. DaveScot:
    1) What does what puckSR choose to do in his personal life have to do with this blog?
    2) Unless i am sorely mistaken,he said on one of his earlier posts that he is a Christian, so why do you label him as an atheist?
    3) Your comments have been way off subject and quite unproductive, so why have you not been expelled from this blog? Mr. Dembski clearly states, “If you post a comment that I don’t think is productive, I’ll probably not just eliminate your comment but you from this blog.”

    [I take infamous's point to heart. Let's stay on topic and keep things interesting. --WmAD]

  30. Furthermore… i found puckSR to be quite productive to debate on this blog, as he provided an opposing argument. I will say that i didnt always agree with what he said, but that is beside the point. Without an opposing argument, the discussion on this site would be quite boring and it is a disservice to this site to ban all those with an opposing view.

  31. Dan-

    Thanks, and no I don’t wrestle. There must be something I missed in my neck of the woods. :)

  32. hlwarren

    If petulant stomping of your feet doesn’t do the trick you might want to escalate to a threat to hold your breath until you turn blue. :-)

  33. Dear Bill,

    You have censored me 5 times. Shall we make it a half-dozen? I am neither for or against you. Is this what frightens you the most? That you can’t peg me as a materialistic atheist?

    What if the designer is the designed? That would be bad news for traditional christianity, no? It would radically redefine what it means to be christian, no?

    In truth, I would love to dialog with you…but you seem intent on shutting me out. Your choice. Until then…

    http://gnuosphere.blogspot.com.....igned.html

  34. gnuosphere by

    Peter Rock Lacroix
    Location:Africa

    Clearly a case of

    http://tinyurl.com/aojma

  35. DaveScot,

    I can’t believe you just wrote that. I’m truly disgusted.

  36. gnuosphere, are you positive it’s a case of your posts be edited/removed? The website itself seems to be a bit buggy. Over the last couple months I’ve seen several other ID proponents complain about posts with legitimate content disappearing for apparently no reason. I’ve personally had lengthy posts disappear as soon as I hit “Submit Comment”.

  37. Cambion

    I hope you’re disgusted because Africa has a double digit HIV/AIDS rate and not because I had the audacity to allude to it.

  38. Millions of people are dying. It’s no laughing matter. I don’t care much about whether ad hominem attacks are used, but it does make me angry when they are based on such a huge tragedy. It’s like finding out someone is Jewish and then making an ad hominem attack based on the Holocaust.

  39. Agreed. Find a source for insults somewhere else…or perhaps it would be better to spend the time picking apart anything you object to on his blog.

  40. No Cambion, you don’t get to play the Holcaust card. The Holcaust was people purposely killing people. AIDS is a disease. There’s no comparison. Buy a clue.

  41. gump

    I’ve had comments never appear after submitting too. It’s probably because it contains spam keywords. I’m not sure how many levels of user moderation exist. Clearly some registered user comments are sent to a moderation bin where Bill has to give a thumbs up/down on each. That makes the theads get a little weird as the later-approved comments appear at the position (numbered) where they would have been if they’d posted immediately after submission.

    One question that keeps popping up from time to time is whether Bill has something running that allows authors of comments subjected to moderation to see their own comments while no one else can. People think it’s some insidious thing that only Bill does so that people who’ve posted critical comments never see any response to them and thus it looks like their opinion has been ignored by everyone. WordPress does have a similar feature for article authors but I’m not sure about comment authors.

  42. DaveScot,

    “The Holcaust was people purposely killing people. AIDS is a disease. There’s no comparison.”

    In either case it’s millions of people dying for no reason. In either case a tragedy. Your comments make light of the suffering of those in Africa.

  43. “In either case it’s millions of people dying for no reason. In either case a tragedy. Your comments make light of the suffering of those in Africa.”

    Everyone dies. Get used to it. The Holocaust was a man-made purposeful attempt to slaughter a group of many millions of people based upon a perceived inferiority. AIDs is a terminal disease brought on by a naturally occuring virus. Moreover it’s an an almost wholly avoidable disease if one makes a reasonable effort to curb hedonistic desires.

    Don’t take life so seriously, Cambion. You’ll never get out of it alive.

Leave a Reply