Brussels Journal Comments
From the desk of The Brussels Journal on Tue, 2006-02-28 13:54
Our attempts to make The Brussels Journal a quality website are being thwarted by people who use the comments section to either (a) post long articles of their own, (b) copy/paste full texts published elsewhere, (c) abuse others by using offensive and indecent language that civilised people do not use in conversation, (d) post comments that have nothing to do with the article to which the comment is added.
Consequently, we have blocked access to a number of users and will do so systematically to everyone who abuses the comments section. All his or her comments, including those posted previously, will be deleted. Comments that contain the words f**k, sh**, a**hole and the like will be automatically removed. There will also be a restriction on comment length. It will not be possible to write comments with over 2,000 characters (approx 300 words).
Henceforward the most recent comment posted will appear at the top.
The idea that using caps is
Submitted by Seattle Man on Fri, 2006-03-10 16:23.
The idea that using caps is associated with any particular race, religion, ethnicity etc etc is a new and strange one to me. I thought it was associated with individual -- rather than group -- characteristics.
As to your presumption about minority status -- as if that is even remotely relevant -- you are indeed presuming.
Re : The idea that using caps
Submitted by A New Believer on Fri, 2006-03-10 16:57.
Ohh sorry Man, somehow have a hard time connecting you with Seattle.. reminds me of Chief Seattle,and cannot seem to connect you with his name at any rate. Could be because Chief Seattle would not have given a rat's rear end whether caps were used or not! Well presuming surely, but when it seemed as if only those that were minorities and using the you objected to the caps use. Wwhat could one surmise otherwise. Anyway, nice to know that you are not ..a bigot! *smiles* Well, you know how us ignorant savages are! *UGH!* We get it all wrong sometimes,must be our irrelevance...
great to know that there are committed
great white fathers out there to help us see the errors of our thoughts, and keep us walking along that good red road!
You take care now you hear.
p.s. try not to drool too much over the Rothschild name, they are very nice people.
Pretty much like everyone else, though a lot of style and grace. You should spend some time with Phillippine and her Chateau D'Armailhac Grand Cru Classic. No you would prefer the N.M. banking exploits better I think! Have fun oh Man who lives on the wesstern coast!
Odin be Praised! Baldur Save Us!
Thank you for the vote of
Submitted by Seattle Man on Thu, 2006-03-09 12:02.
Thank you for the vote of confidence, Gordonz. But such a time-consuming task is beyond my capability as I am too busy drinking lattes and smoking salmon. But yours is a nice idea.
As to A New Believer's assertion that --
"Freedom of Speech ...means EVERYONE has the right to speak even if we disagree or do not believe in what they say!"
-- well, since the owners of this site have wisely set forth rules for commenting, I don't think her assertion is entirely true. This blog is private property and the owners get to set the rules. I was simply suggesting that they could go farther in restricting access. My feeble but harmless joke wasn't directed to any one person much less to any race, religion, or chip-on-the-shoulder etc but simply to a written style I find annoying. If she doesn't, fine.
I won't comment on her other interpretations and accusations except to ask her to reconsider them and ideally to withdraw them.
Re Thank You For the Vote!
Submitted by A New Believer on Thu, 2006-03-09 15:12.
When I came here to this private property blog, I signed up to be a user and was granted the privilege!
So yes I realize I am in an exclusive club!
But the club owners had a banner unfurled and waved it! One of the ideals this club spoke of protecting was Freedom of Speech! And I found that they gave a liberal dose of it (meaning a goodly amount to one and all) If you doubt this..look back at some of the garbage I have read coming from muslims, and some of their non-muslim friends as well as sympathizers. If Paul Belien asks me to I will take anything under consideration. I have a great and genuine respect for him as well as many of the other Europeans herein.
As for me I do not have a "chip on my shoulder" but I do have that over 500 year old struggle thingie. Being Lakotah, we probably have the biggest mouths of most of the Indian Nations. And we do take umbrage quite easily, but then we also will fight till the bitter end as well. Remember our battle cry, is "O
Great Spirit I am so grateful for every day of life you have given me, that Today is a good day to die!"
(shortened means Hoka Hey!) Now what I took from your writing I cannot in good conscience reconsider or take back. As I understand it one of the caps writers was mixed Asian, I from time to time use caps in things.. I am Indian. I have seen some muslim arabs use them, maybe they are brown. All I know is. We seem to be minorities and you are not. Now if you were not inferring anything remotely that
way then all is well. But maybe you need to think your sentence structure out, because that is what it seemed to read, to me. Guess it is like the cartoons hunh, the difference being I am not out here trying to scalp white men. I merely discuss what seems a bit odd to me! So I am afraid you will find me like the Danish, not apologizing for what I perceive to be as true!
.
Odin be Praised! Baldur Save Us!
I don't know. You still have
Submitted by Seattle Man on Thu, 2006-03-09 05:05.
I don't know. You still have a lot of kooks here....the ALL CAPS folks.
Maybe people who want to comment should bring a note from their doctor testifying to their sanity.
Re: I don't Know! You Still Have
Submitted by A New Believer on Thu, 2006-03-09 05:37.
Freedom of Speech as I remember it Seattle Man means EVERYONE has the right to speak even if we disagree or do not believe in what they say! Being Native American Indian ( figured I would clarify that for you), does that mean that ONLY the Great White Fathers get to speak now? ( grunting like all ignorant savages do!) UGH! Perhaps, the speakers are impassioned Asians, Mexicans, Native American Indians, Indians from India, Arabs, Africans! Do they not have a right to speak also even in capitals!
I have seen many muslim arabs in here, speak in capitals. Few have complained. I also know many americans embrace anything or anyone that looks light and bright, as being alright and okay, including arabs. Yet look down on other americans as not being so alright or okay because we are not. Maybe, if some had ignored what we looked like and taken our words and feelings to heart; many would not be feeling the knives in the back that those "white looking" muslims have placed there. I do not mind some Capitol letters, the heart is in the right place...is yours?
As for letters of sanity from our doktors that might not be a good idea, they would all be able to produce theirs upon release from their respective hospitals and institutions ( the kooks that is) .....
.but the telling point is..could the rest of us all produce ours? I do not know, still you have......
Odin be Praised! Baldur Save Us!
Those Terrible CAPS people
Submitted by Gordonz on Thu, 2006-03-09 08:16.
I say that from now on, seattle ham should have complete editorial control over all postings... just in case one of those "CAPPER'S" sneaks in.
It's much better to rely on people like seattle sham to show us all not only what is relevant, but how to express it!
...AND WHERE THE HELL IS MY DOUBLE MOCHA SMOKED SALMON SKINNY LATTE? I'M TRYING TO GROW A GOATEE HERE!
I agree with Nickonomics
Submitted by Seattle Man on Wed, 2006-03-01 14:05.
I find the organization of this blog -- the arrangement of sections -- quite confusing.
Of course that may be because of my secular orientation which fails to see the hidden organization beneath the surface!
Front page aggregates
Submitted by Luc Van Braekel on Wed, 2006-03-01 14:34.
The principle is simple: we have different sections (represented by the buttons in the header bar), but (since a few weeks) the front page contains articles from all English-language sections. Hence, when you want to return to the front page, do not press "English", but "Home" (which is not a button in the header bar, but can be seen in what is called the "breadcrumb path", like "Home > Quotes").
Henceforward the most recent comment posted will appear
Submitted by von Schlichtningen on Tue, 2006-02-28 20:57.
at the bottom?
Top or bottom is indifferent to me. As long as it does not change too often.
Thank you
Submitted by von Schlichtningen on Tue, 2006-02-28 20:23.
This will make a most excellent site even better.
A technical comment
Submitted by kareljansens on Tue, 2006-02-28 19:57.
Given the new restriction of length, would it be possible to indicate somewhere how many characters are left? It would make it easier to round up a comment.
I agree, some people were
Submitted by Nicolas Raemdonck on Tue, 2006-02-28 19:36.
I agree, some people were annoying me with irrelevant posting.
It was a little bit confusing sometimes because I was posting something as an answer to an other post but the subject had nothing to do with it.
Jihading the Webb
Submitted by truth serum on Tue, 2006-02-28 19:09.
Personally, I think we have been jihaded (is that a word?) ever since the cartoon affair began. Muslims coming to this site took it upon themselves to try and convert people or use the classic bait and switch tactic to draw people into an argument. They could not make a good case for the subject at hand, so they would change the subject to something they were more comfortable with.
It just so happens that there article today on this subject.
The Internet jihad Washington Times op/ed
http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20060227-093415-6488r.htm
Re: Jihadding the Webb
Submitted by A New Believer on Tue, 2006-02-28 23:19.
Good Lord, you read a "Moonie paper" and you are talking about
bait and switch. I prefer the Washington Post first, New York Times second, USA Today third, and any of Rupert Murdoch's rags after that.
That is scary, you are starting to sound like Nermin and Peace now? Or will my dissension label me as a muslim as well.
I will save you the asking. NO! I am not a
muslim. My name refers to my newness to Odinism, before you ask!
Odin be Praised! Baldur Save Us!
To Truth Serum,
Submitted by mtk2006 on Tue, 2006-02-28 20:15.
I agree! I like your phrase. "Jihadding the Webb." Or maybe a "Web Jihaddist".
So when someone is oversaturating the discussion with excessive volume in their comments, one could declare:
"Do I see a Web Jehaddist in our midst?"
"Hey hassan, are you jihadding the web?"
Still not sure if that works very well but you get my point.
Anyone else have any ideas. Kind of a self policing policy so the editors don't have to be on top of things all the time.
Of course, I think it would need to be mainly about volume of content, NOT ideas. Different opionions is what makes discussion so interesting and draws us all here in the first place.
Just my 2 cents worth.
My Compliments to the Editors, Writers and Contributors
Submitted by mtk2006 on Tue, 2006-02-28 18:31.
I could not agree more!! Job well done. I used to frequent the Newspaper Index Forum and left for the exact same reason you mentioned. I came here and eventually found the same thing happening. It makes me wonder if this is happening at the other forums.
We should come up with a phrase or name for it so we can call people on it when it happens again here or in other forums.
The occasional long post is understandable but this squelching of discussion via information overload was very counterproductive.
*********
I like this idea: "report abuse" function.
**********
I prefer the newest posts to come up first. Maybe the "first" vs "last" post function could still be optional per the preference of the member. As it was before.
*********
I am also not a big fan of just posting the URL and that is all. My preference would be to copy and paste the one or three sentence "money quote" f/b the URL (or make the quote a link) from the reference material.
However, I am not sure if that violates copyright laws.
********
Again, you all have my respect for a job well done!! This site is top notch!!
Copywrong
Submitted by Bob Doney on Tue, 2006-02-28 20:37.
However, I am not sure if that violates copyright laws.
In England technically it would. Any direct quotation without permission would. However, I would imagine most authors would be pleased to be cited, especially as the accompanying link would attract more readers to their pearls of wisdom. It seems to be netiquette in most places anyway.
By the way, presumably HTML tags count as words!!
Bob Doney
Comment lenght
Submitted by Paul Belien on Tue, 2006-02-28 21:03.
To give you an idea: the above text is 922 characters and 153 words. Comments can be twice as long. If that is not sufficient we can consider to allow 4000 characters (approx 600 words), but we want to avoid the previous excesses.
Thanks Paul
Submitted by mtk2006 on Tue, 2006-02-28 21:24.
I should think this standard (300 words) would be sufficient to allow anyone of us to make our points adequately. With the occasional longer post as needed.
It is always a good exercise for us all to work on our discipline in being concise. This certainly does not come natural to me. :)
I have some problems to read
Submitted by Nicolas Raemdonck on Tue, 2006-02-28 21:54.
I have some problems to read other articles when I return after reading an article, by clicking on the button for English. The site puts the interview with the sovjet dissendent first and the other articles (that are posted after that one) disappear, like the canary in the mine.
Problem solved
Submitted by Paul Belien on Tue, 2006-02-28 22:56.
The piece about the canary in the mine was posted on our "quotes" section.
This piece (about the comments) is on our "odds & ends" section.
The "English" section contains news articles and opinions.
If, however, you enter our site via the frontpage (www.brusselsjournal.com) you will find all the articles that we think are important on one page.
excellent decision
Submitted by Cogito on Tue, 2006-02-28 17:22.
I haven`t been reading and writing many comments lately exactly for that reason.
succes!
Well done!
Submitted by Seattle Man on Tue, 2006-02-28 16:08.
Though I might suggest that comments read more coherently if the oldest are at the top.
crap links.
Submitted by Dog of Flanders on Tue, 2006-02-28 15:52.
The inline external links to "Thruth Laid Bear" and/or clustermaps are erratic and cause serious problems.
Report abuse
Submitted by joppe on Tue, 2006-02-28 14:59.
A "report abuse" function, only accessible to members could also provide some relief from malicious spammers.
At last. I'm even tempted to
Submitted by Tadeusz Litak on Tue, 2006-02-28 14:58.
At last. I'm even tempted to start reading comments now.
There is a war between the ones who say there is a war and the ones who say there isn't (Cohen)
It's ok ...
Submitted by Poul Nielsen on Tue, 2006-02-28 14:54.
With this limitation.
A lot of people was just copy'ing article's from the internet (I think someones copyright was offended by that), instead of bringing their own comments.
I don't think any newspaper or any site, can provide space to what people have wrote about different religions.
If they want to refer to a sourche - they could just provide the link to the source.
Pls. keep up the good work Brussels Journal