Comments on: Another Entry in the Annals of “People Who Haven’t the Slightest Idea What They’re Saying” http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/ DEVISING A SYSTEM FOR REMEMBERING EVERYTHING Sun, 21 Mar 2010 07:11:34 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: Schmits http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-189342 Schmits Sun, 31 Jan 2010 23:50:15 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-189342 Good ?dea Good ?dea

]]> By: Doug http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39202 Doug Mon, 04 Aug 2008 07:05:07 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39202 or indeed from the spiffy skiffy future... or indeed from the spiffy skiffy future…

]]> By: clvrmnky http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39200 clvrmnky Sun, 03 Aug 2008 22:39:53 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39200 @Doug: clearly our host never looks back; it distracts from the now. @Doug: clearly our host never looks back; it distracts from the now.

]]> By: Doug http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39197 Doug Sun, 03 Aug 2008 19:43:43 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39197 "I read their increasingly foamy, otherwise unseen messages, saying that I’m just another censoring tool or whatever." Reading comments in the banned queue would seem to indicate you have rather a lot of time on your hands. I ask you, sir, are there no cats? Is there no bacon? Has tape become unknown in the wildes of Ohio? “I read their increasingly foamy, otherwise unseen messages, saying that I’m just another censoring tool or whatever.”

Reading comments in the banned queue would seem to indicate you have rather a lot of time on your hands. I ask you, sir, are there no cats? Is there no bacon? Has tape become unknown in the wildes of Ohio?

]]> By: Patrick M. http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39201 Patrick M. Sun, 03 Aug 2008 13:08:45 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39201 Gammarad - Did you go on an author's blog and trash their characters and become surprised when they told you to die in fire? And because they told you to die, you stopped reading their books? Are you wondering who the nutbag is in that scenario? Gammarad – Did you go on an author’s blog and trash their characters and become surprised when they told you to die in fire? And because they told you to die, you stopped reading their books? Are you wondering who the nutbag is in that scenario?

]]> By: mythago http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39199 mythago Sun, 03 Aug 2008 04:18:27 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39199 <i>When you put things out for the public to play with, consent is the *default*. You can take it away, but the taking-away has to be clear and explicit.</i> Larry, if you want your blog to be that way, you're free to do so. But there is not Great Moral Order that says if you start a blog, you must put up with whatever crap commenters wish to dish out, and you are not allowed to stop them unless you are 'clear and explicit'. Although, you know, John *has* been clear and explicit. If you click on "About", there at the top of that blog, you'll see there is--a comments policy! Wow! It's like there is a clear and explicit taking-away of your imaginary right to march in here and say whatever you want. Using your store analogy, you're arguing that it's OK to barge in to John's grocery store and start playing splatball with the avocados without buying them first ("hey! you opened this place up to the public!") and then lighting up a cigarette in violation of the huge No Smoking policy that is prominently signposted ("you can't take away my right to smoke unless you do so clearly and explicitly - no, MORE clearly and explicitly than THAT!"). When you put things out for the public to play with, consent is the *default*. You can take it away, but the taking-away has to be clear and explicit.

Larry, if you want your blog to be that way, you’re free to do so. But there is not Great Moral Order that says if you start a blog, you must put up with whatever crap commenters wish to dish out, and you are not allowed to stop them unless you are ‘clear and explicit’.

Although, you know, John *has* been clear and explicit. If you click on “About”, there at the top of that blog, you’ll see there is–a comments policy! Wow! It’s like there is a clear and explicit taking-away of your imaginary right to march in here and say whatever you want.

Using your store analogy, you’re arguing that it’s OK to barge in to John’s grocery store and start playing splatball with the avocados without buying them first (“hey! you opened this place up to the public!”) and then lighting up a cigarette in violation of the huge No Smoking policy that is prominently signposted (“you can’t take away my right to smoke unless you do so clearly and explicitly – no, MORE clearly and explicitly than THAT!”).

]]> By: Mary http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39198 Mary Sun, 03 Aug 2008 03:49:14 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39198 The first amendment to the Australian constitution (which wouldn't usually be referred to by that name in any case) would probably be related to the 1906 referendum, which moved the beginning of the term of federal senators to 1 July (from 1 January). Thanks to this bold move on the part of the Australian people, anyone can say whatever they like in your blog. Sorry. The first amendment to the Australian constitution (which wouldn’t usually be referred to by that name in any case) would probably be related to the 1906 referendum, which moved the beginning of the term of federal senators to 1 July (from 1 January).

Thanks to this bold move on the part of the Australian people, anyone can say whatever they like in your blog. Sorry.

]]> By: Gammarad http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39196 Gammarad Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:16:00 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39196 Oh, the nutbag writers with blogs who think they have the right to restrict who can leave comments... Wait, I have that backwards, the nutbag writers with blogs are the ones who don't think they can edit gerunds out of ungrammatical commentary without violating the first amendment. And think it's polite to ask for things kindly. Most sane writers with blogs realize it's completely appropriate to suggest that commenters should die in a fire when they opine in a comment about a character's seeming rude to try to get another character to eat something she doesn't want. That's ever so much better than someone asking for something "kindly" ..... (well, that's what got me to stop reading a novel series after enjoying the first 3 books in it very much, the writer saying she wished I'd die in a fire. Completely unrelated to present company, just brought it to mind, the whole trying to distinguish the nutbags effort you know) Oh, the nutbag writers with blogs who think they have the right to restrict who can leave comments… Wait, I have that backwards, the nutbag writers with blogs are the ones who don’t think they can edit gerunds out of ungrammatical commentary without violating the first amendment. And think it’s polite to ask for things kindly. Most sane writers with blogs realize it’s completely appropriate to suggest that commenters should die in a fire when they opine in a comment about a character’s seeming rude to try to get another character to eat something she doesn’t want. That’s ever so much better than someone asking for something “kindly” ….. (well, that’s what got me to stop reading a novel series after enjoying the first 3 books in it very much, the writer saying she wished I’d die in a fire. Completely unrelated to present company, just brought it to mind, the whole trying to distinguish the nutbags effort you know)

]]> By: Thomas Armagost http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39195 Thomas Armagost Fri, 01 Aug 2008 22:13:05 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39195 Someone is "ice-pick-to the-eyeballs wrong" about the First Amendment? Time to read Syndic again. Someone is “ice-pick-to the-eyeballs wrong” about the First Amendment? Time to read Syndic again.

]]> By: Casey http://whatever.scalzi.com/2008/07/25/another-entry-in-the-annals-of-people-who-havent-the-slightest-idea-what-theyre-saying/#comment-39194 Casey Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:19:29 +0000 http://scalzi.com/whatever/?p=1109#comment-39194 *applauds* You have NO IDEA with how many people I've had to have this exact conversation. During the whole Livejournal obscenity smackdown where they deleted a bunch of communities and such, every other person yelling OH NO FREE SPEECH was making me twitch like mad. *applauds*

You have NO IDEA with how many people I’ve had to have this exact conversation.

During the whole Livejournal obscenity smackdown where they deleted a bunch of communities and such, every other person yelling OH NO FREE SPEECH was making me twitch like mad.

]]>