This week's column.
It seemed like a good idea at the time.
When we created a letters blog five years ago, we envisioned a place where printed letters would go on to spirited afterlives in cyberspace — where others could comment in real time on those letters, and where even the original letter writers could take part.
And it’s still a good idea.
The letters blog quickly became the News & Record’s most popular and has remained so over the years.
But we also got something we didn’t envision: name-calling, personal attacks and, occasionally, racial and ethnic slurs.
Some of the beat-downs can be especially merciless. A UNCG student was savaged for writing a letter about the emotional challenges of having a father in prison.
Other writers had their manhood, womanhood and patriotism questioned. (At least nobody has talked about anyone else’s mama. Yet.)
The problem usually isn’t what some of you say; it’s how you say it. We worried that what was supposed to be a virtual town square was devolving into Thunderdome: “Two commenters enter, one leaves.”
Part of our concern is for other commenters; part is for letter writers. After all, these exchanges inherently favor commenters, who don’t have to reveal their identities, and most of whom don’t. By contrast, each letter writer must use his or her own name and must provide a valid address and telephone number.
Also for letter writers, the length requirement is specific and unbending: 200 words, counting every single word, except headlines and the writers’ names and cities.
Commenters could write as much as they wanted. For as long as they wanted. Until now. Effective last week, letters blog comments are allowed on each posted letter only for 24 hours. Then each comment thread automatically will be closed. This should enable us to better monitor the comments.
In addition, we will send e-mail warnings to commenters who violate our guidelines for decency and tone. We also will ask you to provide your (real) name, address and phone number, for our eyes only. If you violate the rules again, or refuse to provide the requested information, we will uninvite you from the blog — that is, we will ban you.
Our house, our rules.
Some of you applauded. Wrote “Loyaltee” on my blog: “Many times I wonder why? Why can’t we disagree, tell each why we disagree without personal attacks, combative and oppressive words?”
Many did not. “Arguably, I’m an adult,” countered “rahrah.” “And while I might understand the censorship of blatant insults, especially those containing profanity, what exactly constitutes racism and sexism can be quite subjective. Besides, leaving those comments available for viewing can show other readers whether or not the writer is worthy of a response. I also fear that satire and sarcasm may be misinterpreted.”
To rahrah’s point, we don’t intend to be heavy-handed. But these typically have not been close calls.
Wrote “Yvonne”: “This response, Allen, reminds me of grade school when the bad behavior of one or two kids would cause us all to have to stay inside for recess. As an adult who can make my own choices as to whether to read or not read a post, to get offended or not get offended, to respond or not respond, I think everyone else has that same right/responsibility.
“I say this as one who uses my own name and as one who has been terribly maligned, by some, over the years (since the inception of this forum). No one forces me to read or respond to insults.”
Yvonne is right. Our problem children are a vocal minority. But they are loud and disagreeable enough to make the blog an unpleasant place for everyone else.
It only takes one jerk to ruin a cocktail party.
Again, from “JDR”: “My issue ... is some of the best exchanges take place over several days.”
We did consider that. But we believe 24 hours usually is plenty of time to say all that needs saying on a topic.
A final word from “JDR”: By The Way … I HATE your new policy. ... and P.S. .. note that your own thread is open well beyond the 24 hours .. maybe you are trying to set an example .. ??
“... and P.P.S. .. "We are simply asking adults to behave as adults." No you're not .. you are imposing a control on others you have not imposed on yourself.”
To be frank, we briefly considered an even more radical remedy: requiring all commenters to use their full, real names, just as the letter writers do.
The policy seems to work beautifully at The Wall Street Journal, where the 1,207 comments attached to a recent Peggy Noonan column about Sarah Palin (talk about a hot-wire topic) were spirited but thoughtful — using real names.
Part of me still favors that approach. But we’ve decided not to go that far. For now.
The bottom line: We want you to be part of the discussion. We value and respect your views, even when we disagree.
We only ask that you return the favor — to us, to others, and to yourselves.
