news-record.com

As Rep. Joe Wilson, Kanye West, Serena Williams, et al., were hard at work in recent days mangling the cause of civil discourse, I got to thinking about our own struggles for reasonableness on the opinion pages.

For those of you who are familiar with the News & Record's Web site, the most consistently challenging issue has been comments on stories and letters.

Thus, we implemented a few new guidelines, including a 24-hour window for letters comments versus an unlimited one.

It was not a universally popular decision.

Some argued that the more objectionable commenters would either be ignored or shaken to their senses by peer pressure. But it rarely happens that way.

I have seen often the very opposite, when one or two people dominate a comment thread in a hard-edged game of tit-for-tat that can be both cruel and juvenile.

And I have heard from more than one reader who has thrown up his or her hands at the tenor of the discussion and simply decided, "No mas" -- that it wasn't worth all the bruises, scratches and indignities.

This is not a problem that's unique to the News & Record.

I hold regular conference calls with the opinion editors from our sister newspapers in Norfolk and Roanoke, Va. They're wrestling the same bear.

And refining their own policies in a search for more constructive conversations.

Wrote my counterpart in Roanoke, Dan Radmacher, in his column today: "When he was first hired by The Roanoke Times, retired Editorial Page Editor Tommy Denton said of the editorial and commentary pages, 'Here is where the bully pulpit and the soapbox become one, extending one of the finest and most enduring of this nation's traditions: the raucous harmony of a free people holding forth.'

"We hoped the blog could be a fascinating extension of that 'raucous harmony,' where people could disagree without being disagreeable and discuss ideas without getting personal.

"Alas, that has been difficult to achieve. Despite pretty strict policing, the comments lean far more towards raucous than anything resembling harmony."

I can feel Dan's pain. That's why we'll stay the course for a while, and see how our own new policy plays out.

Incidentally, my most recent conference call with my fellow editors also inspired me to do something they've done: offer some guidelines on what constitutes civil debate beyond the prohibitions of personal attacks and profanity -- and simply knowing it when we see it.

Some questions to consider when entering the online fray:

1. Is my comment relevant to the discussion?

2. Have I thought clearly about what I've just written before pressing the "submit" button?

3. Would I want my children reading the comment I'm about to post?

4. Would I mind my children posting such a comment?

5. Have I been a good "listener"? Have I given other comments a close enough read before rushing to rebut?

6. If I am not using my real name, would I say the same things in the same tone if I were revealing my identity?

7. If I were having this conversation in person, would I have used the same words in the same way?

Speaking of No. 7, some of you have suggested that an in-person meet-up of regular commenters might be worthwhile. Wrote "scharrison" in one comment two weeks ago: "We need to meet somewhere and come up with a plan to get our act together. It needs to be someplace with padded floors and walls, like a dojo maybe. And it needs to be real easy to find for those that are gifted, like right off Wendover or something."

Some of that message, obviously, was penned with tongue firmly in cheek. But enough commenters chimed in that I was convinced they were serious.

We have held a meeting of commenters and bloggers before, two years go, at a wine bar in Southside then called The Press. (My Landmark colleagues were amused that we chose a bar.) From what I recall, it went very well, attracting folks from as far as away as southern Virginia. And we were a cordial bunch, albeit 100 percent male.

We were surprised at who was whom, as we matched online names and "handles" with faces: brian444, skeetclub savage, Dave Ribar, Doug Johnson.

We answered questions about the blog and the newspaper. We got better acquainted. And we agreed to do it again.

Now seems as good a time as any, probably after the Nov. 3 election. I'll provide more details in the coming weeks.

In the meantime, stay tuned. Stay engaged.

And, remember , a thoughtful whisper often is better heard than a shout.