Can I remind commentators of the moderation rules of this site?
Lots of pedantry and “ya boo” commentary from libertarians is still arriving in my in box. If you wish not to be offended please do not bother to send such comments in. They will be deleted. Editorial freedom is something I’d have thought libertarians would defend, but it appears not. I uphold it in the interests of those who do not wish to be subject to such abuse when they in turn comment here.
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!
We also appreciate discussion of a subject.
The whole point of the comments section on a blog is to ‘discuss’; that can mean conflicting opinions. You censoring all opinions other than those that agree with you is misleading to anyone reading your blog.
@Bobski
You may discuss
But only within the terms noted
And the editor’s decision is final
I see nothing unusual about that at all
And it is certainly not misleading to anyone since I make it very plain this is the case
@Bobski
I see opinions conflicting with Richards on this blog every single day.
Colman
If there is an opinion that opposes Richard Murphy’s blog, then it should be backed up by the necessary research, if not coherent ideas. This is not a newspaper blog, or the samesuch.
There are ideas here that introduce solutions or directions towards solutions to some problems that affect us all. If the best people can do is to be insulting by repeating stuff that has been rebuffed time and time again, then of course Editor’s say is final.
It would be interesting for the ever growing newcomers if the odd one were let through and then disseminated, to see what this blog is all about, but think of the time that would take. Much of it is already done within the subject of the thread.
I am sure a lot of us that have been following this are simply bored to reply to the ‘libertaterian’ argument and so do not reply any longer. For that reason why not moderate?
Once in a while maybe, Richard, but I agree, it’s pointless repeating yourself. People come on here knowing what to expect. If they have cogency, share it, if they repeat a failed set of sociopathic soundbites, bin it.
Sorry you are getting bothered by such nonsense. If I don’t agree with someone’s views I need not look at their blog. But it is often good to look at ones which do have other views, even only on the basis of “know your enemy”. Even then if I do disagree there is little or no point in being abusive, it simply detracts from my own argument. As for your own sometimes yes, sometimes no, sometimes I better have a longer look at that. At least we both agree about 61579.
@Colman Stephenson
Thanks – and to all who comment within the agreed limits
It’s not as if the right-wing blogs aren’t highly censorious. A year or two ago I sent about thirty comments to the Daily Telegraph (UK) blog and the only one that appeared on their site was one expressing agreement with Simon Heffer(!) for saying that the BBC Proms were a great British institution. In other words, unless you are on the hard right or expressing agreement with one of their writers, you don’t get on the site. Given that from my limited appraisal of the Telegraph blogs there are a lot of libertarians hanging out over there, there seems to be a serious case of double standards here – i.e. it’s OK to censor blog comments as long as you’re on the right wing.
@Howard
As ever, one rule for ‘us’ and another for ‘them’ on the Right!
At least one (and I think only one) left wing comment has been deleted by me