Posts will be light from me for the next few days, but a few procedural notes:
1. Comments suggesting, even obliquely, that armed rebellion is acceptable if [George Bush/John Kerry/Ralph Nadar/me] is elected president are not welcome here. Commentators making such threats/insinuations in the future will be promptly banned. There is no “but-I’m-a-regular” exception. Nor is there a “mere rhetoric” exception. As the words at the top say: “This is the Voice of Moderation” — if not in politics, then at least in how we disagree with one another. Trust me: You don’t want to see what happens when this rule is relaxed.
2. I still owe a response regarding whether the last four years of discretionary spending under the Bush administration are fairly chargeable to the Bush administration, as well as whether Bush is any better than Kerry on “size of government” issues over the next few years. (I like my governments small, as y’all may know.) Short answers: Yes and (mostly) no. Longer answers will follow, but it’ll be a bit longer.
3. I intend a follow up analysis on the Abu Ghraib RICO claim (originally discussed by our departed Katherine, here) — hopefully by Monday. Unfortunately, one of my own RICO cases is starting to heat up, so the post may be delayed.
von
our departed Katherine
Sounds so Victorian…
Katherine has been reading and occassionally commenting, so hope springs eternal that she’ll break free from the bondage of her job search and settle into a routine that permits the occassional post as well.
Okay, here’s a request and you can promote it to a post if you like.
If anyone knows anything about:
–how to track the flights of private, non-commercial planes from their FAA registration numbers or serial numbers. (I’m talking about takeoffs and landings over the last several years, not any sort of current in-flight tracking. Gulfstream jet sized and above, not dinky little prop planes).
or
–what sort of records you can get from the FAA with a Freedom of Information Act request,
please email me at katherinesblog@hotmail.com.
I don’t care what you say: if you’re elected I’m breaking out the ninja gear and hitting the streets. 😉
If von is elected, kitten snipers will be in full effect. We are powerless to stop it.
Am i the only one noticing that the 2 people here banning and threatening to ban people are on the center-right and that they are banning or have been banning almost exclusively the left?
wilfred — we all discussed the issue that led to von’s most recent post. The fact that he is the one who posted as a result has more to do with the fact that e.g. I just got out of lecture than with anything else.
Wilfred, I’d guess I qualify as one of the leftmost posters on this site, and I have to say I’ve yet to disagree with a single one of the Power Bloc’s rulings about a comment or a post – though when aimed at me, I’ve sometimes had to walk away and calm down for a while before recognizing that they had a point.
Point One looks perfectly reasonable to me.
This banning discussion is in reference to what?
Lots of bannings lately at tacitus.org – it would be interesting to see a graph of such incidents across the shore ecosystems of the blogoworld (such as here and tacitus) as the election nears and restraints and patiences thin.
hilzoy and jes, thanks for the info. I was curious and you’ve answered my question. Personally i’m more in favor of reasoning with people before banning. If someone did say something like von suggested, they must be feeling unbelievably frustrated and shut out and communication would be the answer, not banning which is the opposite of that.
wilfred, you’re such a bleeding-heart — “oh, they’re not bad people, let’s try to understand them.” When will you lefties realize that you gotta get tough, that’s the only language these people understand. One strike and they’re out.
😉
If someone did say something like von suggested, they must be feeling unbelievably frustrated and shut out and communication would be the answer, not banning which is the opposite of that.
Statements like the one I mentioned (yes, we’ve gotten at least one; no, I’m not going to point it out) are usually an example of overheated rhetoric — which is not welcome here. (You’ll also find that we’re usually pretty tolerant of even language that crosses the line — I’ve never banned anyone, for instance.) If it’s not overheated rhetoric, however, I have no interest in “reasoning” with the speaker: you don’t reason with someone who declares himself your enemy; you defeat him.
you don’t reason with someone who declares himself your enemy; you defeat him.
While I appreciate what you mean here, I think it bears elaborating on a bit. What you say you don’t do, is exactly what the American in Egypt decided to do, and he wound up with, well a “friend” may be pushing it, but something short of an enemy, for sure. I’m not saying it will work every time, but there probably shouldn’t be any hard-and-fast rule on the subject.
Yup, you’re right Ed. I can be a bit too If/Then in my political thinking sometimes. Here’s exhibit A.
Wilfred: Personally i’m more in favor of reasoning with people before banning.
I’ve found that most offenses get a first warning, and discussion about a warning is not itself a topic that warrants banning.
Seriously, I have political disagreements with a lot of the moderators – especially, of course, Moe Lane! – but no quarrel at all with how they run this blog.
I find that enforcing the rules to keep the discussion polite tends to lead to more communication than letting a bunch of anonymous people scream at each other.
Rudeness should be punished in polite company and warnings given appropriately. Visitors that launch verbal assaults should simply be shown the virtual door.
Seriously, I have political disagreements with a lot of the moderators – especially, of course, Moe Lane! – but no quarrel at all with how they run this blog.
Not that multiple-source validation is wanted or needed, here, but I agree. Allowing discussions to degenerate into name-calling (even in a guilt-by-association way), is that supposed to be responsible moderation? Not to my way of thinking.
Sometimes, if you allow that sort of crap, it can boomerang on you.
That, er, drumming they gave Kevin is par for course on lots of leftie sites. Moderation, like math, is hard.