Pages

Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Was It The Full Moon?



Every so often the various handful (same ones mostly) of people posting comments on this site, get all Looney-Tune and have to be spanked -- threatened with being 86'd or having their over-the- top comments dumped. I understand some of the Tribune's blogs have also been dumped or shut down for the same reason. Clearly, some of these posters just lose it.



And there are a few of issues that some these sophomoric posters keep whining about that may need clarification.



First, accessing a blogsite is a privilege not a right. My Blog, My Rules. Don't like it? Go get your own blog. It's not a "free speech" issue. The uglier your comments, the tighter the rules will get. This blogsite used to allow anyone to comment. A lot of "anyones" got Ugly On A Stick, so I changed the site so people would have to go to the trouble to get an free account and sign on. A lot of the Uglies did that and continued their often sophomoric Neener-Neering. Short of shutting down all comment, I started using the little garbage can icon to dump some of the worst of their posted comments. Or I also would have to step in to play Mommy and spank. I know. It's pathetic. But it does indicate the level some of these folks are operating on, including some people who actually use their real names. Jeeze, you'd think . . . . ?



Second, I am not a "journalist." I write an Opinion Column. Been doing that for about 12 years or so. Opinion Columns go on the Opinion Page of the paper. Opinion columns are supposed to be biased. That's what makes them . . . Opinion Columns. If an Opinion Column didn't have a bias, it would be, oh, say, a Time/Tide Table, or the Stock Market listings, or something. Amazingly, some people don't get that.



Third, and most interesting of all, many of the posters keep claiming that this is a deeply polarized commuity, and if you read the comment section you might think that's so. Worse, that it's a community full of Furies at each others' throats. Ron Crawford, who's been gleefully reporting on the Sewer Wars for years now, has just posted a very cogent Opinion piece on his website, http://www.sewerwatch.blogspot.com/. Worth a read.



While his numbers are guestimates, his point is well taken. I opinied a similar notion in my previous Can(n)on, "Bye-Bye Big Lie." This is not and never was a "deeply" divided community. (Hard to be deeply divided when 30-40% are permenantly out to lunch.) But it was a community lied to and lied about and very nearly destroyed because of that lie, a community that is now trying to re-set itself on a path and a process that should have been taken years ago.



Still, there's plenty of room for spirited debate and . . . Opinions. . . But on this blogsite, I ask that those posting comments, Get a Grip. Or check the phases of the moon on the Tide Charts and maybe stay away from your computer during those Looney Tune times.

22 comments:

Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sewer Magic said...

Richard,

There is more to people than a percentage and this alleged 20% will soon be overwritten by our majority. This majority will find out about the county sooner or later.

Sewer Magic

Shark Inlet said...

Ron's comments are not cogent. Not, at least, according to the Webster definition of the word.

He seems to be saying that we all get along but for a few who are pushing for TriW. The way I see it is that we all get along except for the few who are still fighting against TriW.

Yes, we all ought to take a chill pill and just let the County go about their business. We ought to, as Julie advocates, push for as complete a project as possible, with regard to dealing with wastewater, groundwater and saltwater issues. If, after careful County study of the issues, there are two projects which stand out as both pretty good in some ways but substantially different in others (like cost, location, ability to recharge the aquifer, etc.) we should have a debate on the merits at that time.

Until then, all this effort Ron and others are putting forward fighting the ghost of TriW is wasted effort. All the effort spent fighting the folks who are fighting TriW at all costs is wasted effort.


I actually hope that the County goes with another site and that there are no lawsuits and that the thing comes in under budget and in record time.


Getting back to other issues, I have one question for Ann ... about your deletion of Richard's comment of yesterday. If those folks didn't sign on to the protest letter, Richard's comment was out of line. If the protest letter isn't a public document, Richard's comment was out of line. If those folks did sign a public letter, Richard's comment was A-okay and should not have been deleted.

So, because you deleted his posting, would you tell us why? Was there a factual error? Was that document not public? If it's neither of these reasons, I would appreciate you telling us why you feel that limiting public information on your site is a good thing.

Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sewer Magic said...

Hi Richard,

I'll provide some partial clarification.

I see no reason to disclose information--pertaining to my opinion--to you. This doesn't mean, at all, that I don't know or that I'm withholding anything. I decline to comment.

Shark Inlet said...

Sewer Magic,

I am also curious what you meant by your comment about the County.

You seem to be saying that the County will do something that the majority of Los Osos property owners will disapprove of. Is there something in particular that you believe we ought to be watchful for?

Sewertoons said...

sewer magic,

If you can't back up what you say regarding the County, what is the use of saying it? Scare tactic? Do you get some person kick out of withholding something? Why "warn" us? You are not clear as to your intent.

Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sewer Magic said...

To Sharkinlet, sewertoons and Richard LeGros:

Once again, I decline to comment. I see no reason to provide information to the anonymous and to those with a history of providing misinformation and Nazi-grade hatred.

I provided an opinion and my intent is for my opinion to be heard. As far as elaborating on it, I respectfully decline. I find that elaboration has no true purpose in this setting.

Because you three responded to my opinion, my opinion already serves the purpose that I wanted it to serve.

Sewer Magic

Shark Inlet said...

Sewer Magic ...

What the hell?

You waltz in here saying something like "boy you're a gonna regret voting for the 218" and I ask "why, what do you know?" and you reply with "I don't have to tell ... neener neener neener".

If your point was that you can toss out any sort of random off the wall comment and get a response from those who care about the County process ... you made the point ... but was that a point that needed making?

That being said ... boy I miss the good old days when folks from both sides of this discussion would be willing to interact with each other with grace and dignity and a willingness to engage.

Sewertoons said...

sewer magic says:
"I find that elaboration has no true purpose in this setting."

What setting then?

I'll be sewer magic's name was on that list, hence this reaction.

Richard LeGros said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sewer Magic said...

To sharkinlet and sewertoons:

As I said before, I decline to comment on the matter any further because I find no reason to do such a thing. I find no reason because elaboration--especially through blogging--does not spring forth any resolutions, just red herrings.

Additionally, I find it unnecessary to provide information to county employees who actively read and contribute on this blog and others.

I always think about the good old days when conversations evolved to resolutions and ideas were not stonewalled by people who have already made up their mind based on undocumented, unfounded and unproven information.

Sewer Magic

Shark Inlet said...

Magic Man,

I am sorry that you feel so dismal about blogs. I do have to wonder about your interest in adding anything to the comment section at all.

That being said, I would hope that you would actually participate in a discussion next time you participate.

All the best...

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"Getting back to other issues, I have one question for Ann ... about your deletion of Richard's comment of yesterday. If those folks didn't sign on to the protest letter, Richard's comment was out of line. If the protest letter isn't a public document, Richard's comment was out of line. If those folks did sign a public letter, Richard's comment was A-okay and should not have been deleted."

In the 218 vote, the protest ballots are public documents, the ballots themselves and who voted which was are public documents. I made it clear that I didn't want any threats on this site from people implying they'd name names, take legal action agains those people who voted the wrong way, or post names in an atmosphere of threat, as in, here's some names of people who oppose 218- wink, nudge, wink nudge. I had hoped some of you folks would have understood the need for a clean, unthreatening process.I posted the letter because of the issues, not the names. The question isn't why I dumped Richard's postings, but why he felt it necessary to post those names, especially in the midst of what turned out to be a truly ugly, ramped up Comment session by people who had apparently lost their marbles. Why were those names more imporant to Richard than the issues the letter raised? Why was he unable to understand just why I clearly warned people that threats vis a vis the vote were going to be dumped. Was he incapable of understanding the context of his posing? I find that absolutely impossible to believe and equally impossible to believe that you fail to understand that also. That craziness is why I also dumped another poster who was over the top in attacking Richard, including listing his phone with the implied suggestion people call and harass him.

Another poster, if you will recall, spelled out clearly what he felt the true intention of posting those names was. I have to concurr.

Inlet also sez:"That being said ... boy I miss the good old days when folks from both sides of this discussion would be willing to interact with each other with grace and dignity and a willingness to engage."

Uh, Inlet. I think you're waxing nostalgic, dreaming of some time that never existed. You may need to go back and re-read all the blog comments over the past few years. "grace and dignity?" Uh. . . .Three times now I've had to spank on the main blog entry, and have spanked plenty of times in the comment section. I see very little "grace and dignity" from so many of the "anonymous" bloggers. That's the problem with "anonymice." They do not feel the need for "grace and dignity" because grace and dignity usually arrive when people know who are are and can confront you personally for your lack of grace and dignity, not to mention manners and simple good taste. Question: How many of you Anonymice would allow all your comments here to republished and attached to your real names? Right, I thought so. So much for grace and dignity and willingness to engagte in dialogue & etc.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

Thanks for your explanation. While I wouldn't have made the same decision (for I don't think that Richard's intent was harm and because I believe that factual information is always okay), I completely understand your reasoning.

Perhaps you're right about there never having been a time when we were all polite ... but it seems as if things are considerably worse now than two years back when publicworks and spectator were participating...

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

I seem to have missed answering one of your direct questions: "How many of you Anonymice would allow all your comments here to republished and attached to your real names?".

I would ... if I was willing to have my name public at all.

Ann, for the very reasons you deleted Richard's posting, I've chosen to remain anonymous myself. I don't want to give up relationships with folks I love and appreciate and who I believe would disown me as a friend, as it were, because of my position on the sewer if they were to link my name to my opinion.

Some would say that I am a coward for not revealing my name. They might be right, but I've not yet been convinced that anonymity is all that bad.

On the other hand ... I also feel that one should not write anything on the internet which you would not want an open-minded, but still very fair boss to see. Along those lines, it is good to treat those with whom you disagree with great respect.

This is one reason I tend to avoid the Trib forum. While some folks over there have a really solid take on various Los Osos issues, the continually expressed hatred of Julie and Lisa and a few others has really made me feel uncomfortable. I disagree strongly with the two of them on many issues, yet because they are from my species and town they deserve to be treated in exactly the same way I would want people treating me and members of my family. Even when wrong, I want my family members given grace and respect when being corrected.

Churadogs said...

Inlet sez:"Ann, for the very reasons you deleted Richard's posting, I've chosen to remain anonymous myself. I don't want to give up relationships with folks I love and appreciate and who I believe would disown me as a friend, as it were, because of my position on the sewer if they were to link my name to my opinion.

Some would say that I am a coward for not revealing my name. They might be right, but I've not yet been convinced that anonymity is all that bad."

The problem with Anonymice is that Anonymiceness is a double edged sword. Because there is NO accountability, people are free to let all sorts of ugliness out that they would NEVER do if their name and face were attached to it. It's the ugliness of the swastika scrawled on a fence at midnight. It's the ugliness of the big lie that's repeated enough and ends up doing real harm to real people, again with no accountbility to the liar. It's the cowardice of the mice to inflict damage on people while hiding in the dark.

Sadly, too many people are willing to believe anonymice and their lies, instead of approaching everything posted here by phony names as . . . phony. You can see for yourself, they often don't. Instead they just loose it and get Ugly On A Stick. Pathetic.

As for having to give up relationsips with friends because of your opinions? How thin a relationship is that, that they would dump you because of your stand on the sewer? And what should that tell you about your "friends?" I've talked to many strangers and friends, some of whom disagreed with my opinions, but I've never had a friend or acquaintence or neighbor or anyone declare me persona non gratis because of my stated or written opinions on anything, let alone the Sewer Wars.

And I suspect that is so because my name is on my opinions. I have never had someone come up to me in the supermarket, introduce themselves, then start spewing to my face the ugliness that shows up on this comment section. And that's because the anonnymiceness of this comment section allows people to forget their manners and any basic decency they have, revert to being juvenile as possible, and be as ugly as they want to be because they will not be held accountable for their words or actions.

Sewertoons said...

Fine, then let's just take what is said on the merits of what is said. Maybe there is truth in ugliness. Maybe ugliness holds an honest opinion. Maybe ugliness is in the eye of the beholder. I have just seen NO facts back up some of the ugliest spewings here - so take it for an OPINION with NOTHING to back it up. People are entitled to their opinions and I can choose to read or not read. But I will only change my mind or believe something when I see FACTS. I would hope those intelligent enough to care would do the same.

We all should get along in this town - if only in be civil to each other's faces in public. Maybe this blog acts as a release valve to allow that in some small way for some few bloggers. I'd rather have the ugliness here in pixels than have someone yell at me in public (or scrawl ugliness on a fence or the like). Hopefully they can work out their issues with a shrink and not in public.

Not everyone is secure enough to be able to tolerate the ambiguities of emotion while remaining friends with those on different sides of issues. But they still remain people one might like to exchange ideas, experiences, or help with on other topics. I have to side with shark Ann, as lost here is the subtlety of degrees or type of relationship. It can be deep in some ares and best left alone in others. (I do not discuss religion with my parents for instance).

Another point. Lies are spread every day by people with names attached.

Shark Inlet said...

Ann,

You have a good point about some folks who would cut of a friendship because of this issue. However I am unwilling to cut of my relationship with these folks just because you want me to reveal my name.

I believe in a different sort of internet than you do, I think. I believe that if someone is rude or petty, the typical reader can spot it and the author of such comments will suffer a loss of credibility.

In the same way that a "real person with a real name" might refuse to say certain things because of a loss of credibility in person ... an anonymous person interested in maintaining an online presence needs to live by the same rule of thumb.

Sewer Magic said...

Good afternoon bloggers,

I'm starting to feel that in order to have a more intimate debate, everyone has to come out as themselves. I would be more than happy to disclose my identity if everyone else did the same thing because I know that what I say and feel is genuine; with facts in my back pocket, there's nothing that can stop me from expressing my opinion.

The concept of Anonymous concerns me. People are concerned about relationships being severed for their beliefs, but if one is confident with their beliefs, what are people truly afraid of? Sounds to me it's more a guilt trip than actually protecting relationships.

I think that full disclosure of everyone's identity would make the debates a lot more interesting because the opinions expressed are exclusive to you and you alone.

There would also be accountability and less venom. People like Crapkiller say extremely slanderous things because they know they're hiding behind a very convenient curtain. Let's say Crapkiller was Sharon Fredericks for instance. If she came out as Sharon, then Sharon would have no choice but to accept responsibility for the vindictive comments that she could make. Then the debate would boil down to essential talking points.

In other words, people cannot afford to say slanderous, obscene things because of the liability factor.

In my opinion, those who are the most concerned about severing ties with others because of what they think are already at a loss and they've already burned bridges because of their incoherent beliefs.

Sewer Magic

Shark Inlet said...

Magic Man,

If you really believe what you say you can always reveal your identity first as a way of inspiring others to make the same choice.

Myself, I'll be reluctant until several of the recent posters critical of my words have revealed their identities. KEH, in particular, has been pretty critical of me and I would be greatly comforted by his willingness to tell us who he is.