What is hypocritical is that in a recent post they said,
We’d post a reply to her blog, but since it is argumentative, by her own rules she would deny us posting any factual information.Now we would post a reply on Delaware County Political Reporter’s blog as well, but they do not allow comments and have no contact information. So you mock the rules for leaving comments on your blog where comments are not even permitted? A bit hypocritical to be sure.
In the spirit of full disclosure, we have been a little critical of Mr. Brenner (actually critical of his campaign not him personally) but we allow comments (and we don’t even have the requested restrictions Mrs. Brenner demands on her blog)
UPDATE: The ever so subtle and adult blog has a new post asking a number of questions for the Brenners. I would ask, how the hell are they supposed to answer them when there is no contact info on your blog nor do you allow anyone to comment? I know you read this, so why not answer MY questions, sweetheart.
2 comments:
Haha, how interesting!
Let me start by saying that I am not a writer for the Delaware County Political Reporter.
If you run a blog there are three options concerning comments.
1. You can choose to allow comments from anyone without moderation. This option allows for discourse based on what is written or whatever someone wants to soapbox about. And if you blog attracts enough attention, there is a tendency for it to spiral down into nasty comments being tossed back and forth. One only need to look as far as the alleged Andy Brenner blog. Topix is another example of anonymity run afoul ( I know it is not a blog, but the analogy is valid). Hate abounded there form every side and intelligent discourse was, for the most part, tossed by the wayside.
2. You could also deny any comments. This allows for rhetorical questions and ideas to be pondered by the readers. Of course this type of blogging limits the reader to the author or authors point of view.
3. You can moderate comments. This is the most subjective. We have no idea how much or how little moderation is taking place. The moderator could only post comments that agree with their own or only rule out obscenity and trite comments.
No matter which option you choose there are consequences to your choices. I would be alright with option one or two. At least no one can hide anything with one or two. The Political Reporter does get enough traffic where hate would run amok.To keep the integrity of ideas intact (right or wrong) comments are not allowed. I see no hypocrisy in that choice. They cannot potentially be hiding anything from their opinions and their opinions cannot be ridiculed with hate.
Blah blah blah, I'm not endorsing any site but I can see why they made the choice and can see how they could still critique SaraMarieBrenner.
Post a Comment