It seems like my latest feminism related post has devolved into commenters either 1) telling each other how to properly comment or 2) telling me how I’m a horrible person because I’m not moderating the comments. My posts on feminism devolving into flame wars?! Shocking, I know.
So it’s time for a reminder about how commenting works in the land of Blag Hag. If bloggers were like gods (which is pretty much how we see ourselves, with our ginormous egos and all), I’d be very much a deist goddess. I usually won’t moderate comments, except if those comments are:
- Spam
- Hateful, abusive, or threatening
- Trolling or thread derailing
- Evangelizing or godbotting
- Mindbogglingly stupid
With the exception of spam and threats, I only ban repeat offenders. That is, I figure most people will occasionally say something mindbogglingly stupid every once in a while (myself included), and I shouldn’t remove them from future discussions for a single event.
My commenting policy is very lax, and for a reason other than laziness. I don’t want Blag Hag to become an echo chamber, so I don’t moderate comments that disagree with me, no matter how insipid or annoying I find them. A lot of feminists blogs moderate out annoying comments by even the most well meaning privilege denying dudes, which is understandable. Those blogs are meant to be safe havens for women who are sick of hearing the same stupid shit over and over again. They’re not feminism 101 blogs.
As much as I want everyone to feel comfortable commenting here, I think it’s important that my blog in particular not delete these sorts of comments. Why? Because I’m constantly getting emails and comments from guys who finally understand and are improving their behavior. They thank me for being patient with them, and for showing what assholes they were being. If I banned them outright, they would have never stuck around long enough to learn more about feminism.
That and as my dad says, “No man is ever totally worthless, he can always serve as a bad example.”* I view comments the same way.
But also, I’m busy. Like, really fucking busy. Grad school hardly leaves me with enough time to blog, and I do at least skim all of the comments to make sure no one is breaking my rules. And when it’s finals week like this past week, I don’t read anything until the weekend – so sometimes a bad comment will sneak through.
In these cases, the proper course of action is not to repeatedly hound me about moderating that comment, thus bringing even more attention to the trollish remark. You know why? Well, for one, you become a thread derailer, which I rank as a graver crime over a single incident of trolling or poorly attempted snarky humor.
And two, I’m kind of an asshole. The more you get upset about a comment someone left on a random blog on the internet and feel like you have the right to tell me what is or is not acceptable for my own blog, the more I’ll lol and leave it there out of spite, and then continue to giggle at your more and more angered pleas for moderation. At that point it doesn’t even matter if I theoretically agree with you on the trollish comment’s craptacularness. Yep, when I’m not being a deist goddess, I’m more of a chaotic neutral trickster god.
So, go forth and make the comments multiply, but don’t make my head hurt while doing it.
*I still find it somewhat disconcerting that my dad has a blog. Oh, the internet.
Guess it’s a good thing I haven’t commented in a long time. All I do is make mindbogglingly stupid comments.
That’s what I never liked when I blogged, was people telling me how to manage my own blog. I would remind them “My blog, not yours. Start your blog and manage as you wish.”
Your father’s blog is right below yours on the bar, I tend to view both several times a week.
This feels strangely more moving to me than any of your posts for a while, and that’s saying something. As a guy who is getting it more and more (I hope), I’m so grateful to folks online who are willing to deal with us obtuse, Y-chromosome bearing ignorami. On this, as with other topics, a place where people can sincerely ask whatever question is needed to help advance their understanding, and where people can make mistakes without being slapped down, is so valuable.That’s one of the reasons I try to politely suggest that people not slap down so hard – if my attempts to promote civility ever exacerbated a situation, or ever do in future, I am ready to apologise wholeheartedly.
I am male, enjoy your blogs, and support your efforts. I haven’t commented much, probably because I agree with most of what you say and I don’t tend to read everyone else’s comments (yet). Considering I missed whatever caused this particular entry, I can’t really comment further! Where can I find this madness?
Having a lax comment policy is the best way to go. It’s better to err on the side of free speech.
Girls suck! Penis enlargement pills here! Adam… YOUR MOM. So what do you think about Facebook charging a dollar per month starting in February?Did I miss any?
Your Dad’s blog rocks!
Thanks for repeating this. I was meaning to write one of these up, and now I only have to link to you! And congrats on making it through your first quarter. If it gets too hectic and stressful, go see somebody. SSRIs helped me finish my dissertation.
It is worth remembering, as we saw with Jen’s actual post last time, that sometimes someone that is, or claims to be, a feminist says something utterly mindboggling stupid, and that people pointing that out, even if they’re ‘doods’ (or straight, or *shock horror* – both) are not necessarily wrong.
You’re right, of course. My natural tendency toward blog bullying is to fight back mercilessly and non-stop, to not let an attack go unanswered, no matter how redundant the argument becomes, but in fact, ignoring it at the first pointless repetition is probably a far better route to go, for a whole bunch of reasons…I’ll try harder next time….
WHEN I AM KING…. just kidding!What Sam said; I got slapped pretty hard in that last thread, mostly for being admittedly and ignorantly foolish. It’s nice that it didn’t get moderated away, before I got to check out WHY I got slapped. Trial and error, like walking through a dark room, trying (and inevitably failing) to not step on the little Legos on the floor on the way to the light.
I think you should add “Anything is allowed if you refer me as the Boobquake Goddess.” A deity in a religion often grants their believers special privileges to do bad thing such as killing innocent people and waging war against the infidels.
“chaotic neutral trickster god”that’s what makes it much more fun…
I love your blog, and as a male who strongly believes in equality, and who is raising 2 young daughters, you serve as a positive influence for myself and my girls. PZ mentioned that on his exams he sometimes asks his students to name a female scientist for bonus points. They are almost always stumped. Your name is at the top of my mental list. Thank you for being a voice of reason, and someone to look up to. As for your moderation…. I thought your reasoning was awesome. Happy Holidays!!
*applauds*As an atheist who posts to the internet, I have developed a thick skin. Don’t feel you have to protect me. Besides, as a feminist I need to feel like a victim when it’s convenient.;-)
I’ve found “Oh, christ, not THIS shit again” to be an efficient and satisfying rebuttal given those considerations.
“They’re not feminism 101 blogs.”Well, some of them are ;)
I’ve never had a blog that got any significant amount of traffic (Blogwhore!) but I’ll date myself and say I used to run a dialup BBS that was part of FidoNET and had lots and lots of discussion areas. Maintaining it took up a substantial amount of time, a couple of hours a day when things were running smoothly, and it was completely a labor of love.So imagine how much I used to enjoy the 2 a.m. phone calls from people complaining they couldn’t dial in. Or the script kiddies trying to hack in. Or the dozens of emails DEMANDING that I ban/unban/delete/stop deleting/GIVE ME WAREZ D00D/and on and on. I had people complain to my employer because I made fun of them for liking Rush Limbaugh. I think the only person I ever permanently banned was because he posted he was going to drive to another member’s house and break her arm.Oh, and to get to the BBS the electrons had to travel uphill through the snow, both ways. While wearing onions in their belts.
Jen,I’m a first-time commenter, long-time reader (pre-Boobquake!) and I appreciate what you have to say in your blog. I masquerade as a teacher during the day, and realize that these “censor” moments are just as likely teachable moments. Reading your blog as I have for the past months, I haven’t necessarily had much to comment on. I tend to /boggle at some things, /applaud others, and just let the sleeping dog lie. This post, today, resonated more than many that had come before it. Mostly because it shows the teacher in you. From reading his blog, I probably blame your father. Although your disclaimer says I can”t do that. :(
Hope you aren’t being ageist about your Dad :-) I am sure if blogging had been around in the 60’s when he was a student he would have blogging up a storm. BTW I see R. Terry Jones may be banned from entering the UK to talk.
http://www.blaghag.com/2010/12…
I’m totally chaotic neutral, myself. Bravo.http://www.cold-moon.com/image…
Eh. That’s just sinking to their level. (I’m not judging, I’m just saying…) In each post I prefer to either produce, or refer the reader to, some real content. Otherwise, to me, posting is just a waste of time.Besides, I don’t like to yell, invoke mythical figures, or make unsupported judgments in my posts. So if, for example, I believe someone’s writing to be fecal matter, rather than just referencing it as such, I would point out its varying shades of brown, the bits of partially digested food that it contains, and the distinct and unmistakable odor that emanates from it. Only after doing that could I feel comfortable making that classification.The problem with my strategy is, admittedly, the response to it will probably not be much different from the response to yours, and yours does take a lot less time. -But I’m also usually considering the visitors to this site who might be interested in the discussions, and like myself, randomly read posts from time to time, not always starting at the top of a thread. When I scan posts in that manner, if I see nothing but a bunch of back and forth insults with little or no reference to subject matter, I lose interest very quickly; my assumption is that if the poster could have backed up the judgment, the poster would have done so. Admittedly, that assumption may often be incorrect, but it saves me a lot of time. -Still, excessive redundancy is not much better, so I think Jen’s implied solution is best here, and when I eventually start my own blog, which I hope to do at some point (no impotence jokes please), the operational techniques I use to run it will probably be strongly influenced by those she uses to run hers.
Haha, that’s totally what I thought when I read that PZ post. Female scientist? Jen McCreight!
I had not checked in on that thread in a while. That was….interesting
Bad behaviour from every distinct point of view represented, I think. I don’t exclude myself from that. I have the feeling, however, that reviewing it in future will lead mostly to feelings of amusement. Possibly in psychic self-defence.
haha zoloft is the only thing that got me through mine. thank god(dess)(s)(es) for SSRIs.
Actually, the first one that comes to my mind is Madam Curie. -But if we restrict the category to currently living female scientists, I guess I have to admit, Jen’s the first one I think of, which is kind of sad really, as I know her more as an entertaining spokesperson for rational thought than as a scientist; her biggest fame so far comes from the boobquake, which she herself honestly pointed out was not even a valid scientific experiment, but a joke that went viral. In addition, even if it had been a real experiment, it wouldn’t likely have precipitated any (ahem) earthshaking discoveries. This is not to rule out the possibility that one day she will become famous for some amazing and fantastic discovery in the world of genetic biology; but Jane Goodall (first to discover the use of tools amongst animals) and Rosalyn Yalow (developer of the radioimmunoassay (RIA) technique) each probably deserve the title of “first female scientist to come to mind” a whole lot more than she does. Worse, I was not familiar with the achievements of either of these women until I Googled “living female scientists”. It wasn’t very easy to find them in that search, either; it was easier to find Shirley Ann Jackson (whose easily found credentials are multitudinous, but all in the form of awards and recognition), and Sally Ride (whose fame comes from being an astronaut rather than from any particular scientific discovery or invention). (This not to say that Jackson’s and Ride’s contributions to the field of science were necessarily any less important, just that their fame derives from non-scientific achievements, and that those women whose fame actually derives directly from scientific achievements are not as well recognized.)
Lulz. You win.
Oh, I won’t debate that Jen’s maybe not the first person who -should- come to mind, but as I read her blog and PZ’s around the same time every day, she was already on my mind.I have to kind of cringe over the fact that you hadn’t heard of Jane Goodall, though. But now you know!
I’d heard of her, but didn’t know that she was the one who first discovered tool use among animals. It’s a pretty important discovery, but she’s now mostly famous for her activism, which goes straight to my point. I was specifically looking for living female scientists with landmark achievements in their field. It also goes to my point that your cringing resulted from the assumed fact that I hadn’t heard of Jane Goodall, while my actual ignorance of Rosalyn Yalow’s very existence before doing that search had no such effect. My guess is that you’ve never heard of her before either. And it doesn’t just apply to females, either; the first two living male scientists that come to my mind are Dawkins (another well-known spokesperson for rational thought) and Hawking (the really smart guy in the wheelchair who was the voice of the computer in “War Games”). Can you name their most famous scientific achievements without looking them up? Here’s an experiment:(The exclusion in part one is because I don’t wish to taint the experiment with scientists that are likely to be fresh in your mind.)Step 1: In one minute, without internet research, how many currently living scientists other than PZ and the ones I’ve already mentioned here can you name whose scientific achievements you are familiar with? You don’t need to be able to name all of their scientific achievements; if you can just name one, the name goes on your list. (You don’t have to name the achievement, just the scientist.)Step 2: Same one minute time limit, but this time try to name scientists whose name you are familiar with, but whose specific achievements you are not familiar with.Together we’ve mentioned McCreight, Goodall, Yalow, Jackson, Ride, Dawkins, Hawking, and Myers. That makes eight, so let’s (over)compensate:Robin Williams, Jamie Lee Curtis, Sandra Bullock, Jack Klugman, Jack Nicholson, Stacy Keach, Katherine Helmond, Terry Gilliam, Goldie Hawn, Al Pacino, Sylvester Stallone, Kirstie Alley, Didi Conn, Linda LavinOkay now,Step 3: Other than the 14 that I’ve just mentioned, how many professional actors can you name in a minute that you have seen performing. Again, just the names, and you only have to be able to name one role.Step 4: Same thing, but this time for public performers that you don’t remember in any particular role. (They don’t have to be actors; they may also be vocalists, instrumentalists, stand-up comics, etc. Even politicians qualify, as long you think of them as performers, and don’t remember the content of any particular speech or debate that the politician was involved in.)Step 5 (or 5 thru 4(N+1), where N=the number of random friends mentioned in this step, depending on how you look at it…) : Given that this a blog aimed at the scientifically minded, my guess is that you are in that target group. Have some random friends whom you do not know through scientific circles try the same experiment and see what happens.
Jane Goodall’s also been losing face among her field for years now. (I’d actually need to double check that bit about being the first to discover tool use among animals, it seems like something that would have been observed prior to her time. Although admittedly most animal behavior science breakthroughs have happened in the last 40 years or so.)But Goodall is notorious for using anecdotes and appeals to emotion in her observations of chimpanzee behavior. Saying things like, “You can just see it in their eyes!” gets you a black stain in most animal behaviorists’ book.
It was her…http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J…I’m not familiar with her work; I had heard her name, and at some point I’m fairly sure I’ve probably seen her on TV in a short clip. I knew that she did something with chimps and that she was an animal rights activist or an ecology activist or something along those lines. I also heard they based a movie on her; I think it was called “Gorillas in the Mist”, though I never saw it, and I’m not even sure whether it was biographical, pseudo-biographical (e.g. in the way that “The Rose” was to Janis Joplin), or just “inspired” (e.g. in the way that “Outbreak” was inspired by the true story related by “The Hot Zone”). After I did the search, I remembered seeing a TV segment on her discovery, though I don’t remember them showing her in that piece. Anyway, that was a landmark discovery; it changed our understanding of chimps, and of the animal kingdom in general, considerably. My guess is that if she did get all woo-woo on us, it was later on, and wouldn’t you know it, that’s in the part of her life that she has received the most media attention for.Did you try steps 1 to 4 yet? If so, I’d love to hear your results.Mine are, sadly:Step 1: Zero. (I just now thought of one, female, as it happens, but that doesn’t count because I didn’t do it within the one minute time limit.)Step 2: 1 (I actually thought of 3, but it turns out that neither Isaac Asimov nor Carl Sagan is still alive.)Step 3: 7Step 4: 1
I know what you mean. But I think a direct post can be helpful and justified. Where some one is being a dick, then pointing it out with evidence is just fine with me. So hypocrisy, lying, misrepresentation, straw men etc all get pretty short response from me. I call those things when I see them, usually gently first time and then full on the next.And in turn I get called myself periodically. All part of the deal.And when someone changes their position then I recognise that. Hope that the same treatment comes back to me too.For any who are finding the posting here a bit rough sometimes, just pop over to Pharyngula for a fun filled afternoon. It’s an orde rof magnitude more brutal over there…
Sam – I disagree: the behaviour wasn’t really that bad on tat thread… There were some sharp comments, but mostly those posting them had something real to say underneath. I thought it was all pretty well mannered…
Sure, most had something to say underneath. I just consider that choices made in how to say it were poor. I think we can all agree that a lot of things would be better if various things by various people had been handled differently – I have no desire to go into it in more detail than that.
I think the policies that you put forward in this post are good, but I can tell you that you would probably get more guys to “see the light” if you didn’t call them “assholes” who say “stupid shit”. A logical point would do fine alone. The latest post on feminism has you criticizing another feminism. Why aren’t men allowed to do the same thing? Why are they always called “sexist” or “privilege denying dudes”? Those of us with Y chromosomes can be right every once and a while too, ya know.
Maybe off topic, but too good not to share – Have you seen this yet? Steve Martin and the Atheist Hymn –
Yeah, it’s just relatively rare. However, some feminists will shout down any male who disagrees, calling them “dicks”, “privilege denying dudes”, etc. Some, and I’d include Jen, just use terms like “privilege denying dudes” when they actually suit. I suspect a humble reaction asking in what way one is denying privilege would get a good result from feminists of the latter ilk.
Um, actually Goodall gets the most media attention for being “the chimp lady” and all around primate behavior expert. Her wooish failings are mostly a topic of conversation among her colleagues.
That doesn’t really contradict anything I’ve said. The first name you thought of for her was “the chimp lady”.
Replying to EdenBunny because I can’t directly: Um, no, that wasn’t me. I only jumped in to point out that Goodall isn’t exactly a scientist these days so much as an anthropomorphizing hack because my field overlaps quite a bit with animal behavior. You were originally talking to someone else.
So the gist of the comment policy is “Don’t piss Jen off”? I think I can avoid that.
I’m confused; what is it you’re “um”-ing about? Nothing I’ve posted that you responded to contradicts anything you’ve said.Although I read more of the wikipedia article, and it turns out that my guess was wrong; the questions about the legitimacy of her methods is not just recent.Regardless, whether she is a pioneering scientist or a whiny erring woomonger, I think you, Kyrosion, and myself would all agree that most of her media popularity is not a result of her scientific achievement. As for my experimental suggestion, that was really directed at everyone reading this. If that’s what you were “um”-ing about, then I guess I should have been more clear, and I apologize.
Whose idea was that ridiculous headboard anyway? O.o*ducks*
“Banished CommentersFeministtotheRescue – For constant thread derailing and general pompous jackasseryGary Rumain – For excessive racism, homophobia, and trollingNever Was An Arrow II – For trolling, thread derailing, godbotting, transphobic and homophobic comments, all with a nice patina of general stupidity.David Mabus / DM / Nostradamus / Dennis Markuze – For incredibly devoted spamming and impressive levels of insanity. The reason I installed a nicer commenting platform (thanks!). Probably has caused me to ban most public IP addresses in Montreal.”One of these things is not like the other . . . .
So should we offer our moderation prayers to Loki or Puck?