It’s boring to come back to the subject of comments again, but it seems I must.
It was claimed by someone yesterday that my moderation policy means that all the interesting discussion on what I write takes place on other sites. I checked one such site that was named — to discover that the same ten or so names that appear time and again here appear there — as they do on Comment is Free and on their own right wing libertarian blogs.
Let me make my position abundantly clear: libertarianism of the form that these people promote is intended to be and would be abusive of the majority in society. Of that I have no doubt. And please note, this abuse will be by intent, not as an unfortunate consequence. In that case, I don’t think these discussions are interesting. Nor, I am quite sure, do most people who read this site. The fact that it seems that ten or so names dominate all the discussion on these issues over many sites suggests that it is a minority activity undertaken outside the mainstream by what I will politely call enthusiasts, who have little or no relationship to the reality of UK political debate.
I am continually encouraged by the engagement of the mainstream of UK and international politics with this site and what I, the Tax Justice Network, the Task Force on Financial Integrity and Economic Development and others have to say.
I do not have time to engage with those who want to engage in irrelevant discussion, often asking me to repeat endlessly what I have already written and which they could find for themselves if they so wished, suggesting their action is deliberately time wasting. So I will be enforcing the moderation policy whenever I think this is happening more rigidly now. Quite simply, I have better things to do. Comment that adds to debate or informs will always be allowed. When it wanders off that line it will be deleted. Please don’t waste time trying to post it in that case.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Well said Richard! These same names are extremely boring to have to scroll through in order to find real comments.
This comment has been deleted. It failed the moderation policy noted here. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/comments/. The editor’s decision on this matter is final.
This comment has been deleted. It failed the moderation policy noted here. http://www.taxresearch.org.uk/Blog/comments/. The editor’s decision on this matter is final.
😯
There is one cogent reason for moderation, that is third party defamation issues, notably in the UK. Another is length. As Grannie used to say, moderation in all things.
@Demetrius
We usually agree – but on this I have to add an additional reason
I run this blog in what is, in effect, my unpaid time
I clearly would not do it if I did not enjoy it
I do not see reason why I should use my time to reply to those who want to promote what I consider abusive
And I also happen to think – like any editor – I can select what is published without obligation to accept all that is offered
For these combined reasons a much more selective policy is entirely appropriate without in any way restricting freedom of comment – which apparently, as I’m told, takes place elsewhere anyway
Second that.
Please note: some of the usual suspects are now asking why I’m deleting their comments
How often do I have to explain?
@Colman Stephenson
Thanks
As much bile is spat from all sides, left and right, tribalists of every hue. And they always stand behind a wall of self-righteousness. Labour supporters on the Guardian’s CIF are every bit as blind to their own bigotry as Daily Mail readers are to theirs.