The discussion as to whether I have the right to ban people from this board has been stimulating and, judging by the thread length, exhaustive. Unfortunately, my rights to do so as the one whose name is on the board was never in question; sure, I have THAT right. But I’ve always believed that just because you CAN do something doesn’t mean you SHOULD do something.
I was also amused by the people who jumped up and waved their arms, announcing with determination and repeatedly that they were the ones I was talking about when I was referring to people who show up just to cause problems and insult others. It was kind of like “Spartacus,” but without the nobility.
But the buck does stop here, and in my own ruminations, I couldn’t get past the famous phrase that was written–apparently not by Voltaire–but by Beatrice Hall in an essay entitled “Friends of Voltaire” (which was not created to thwart the endeavors of an organization called “Enemies of Voltaire,” but that’s another subject.) Ms. Hall, in summarizing Voltaire, stated that his philosophy was “I disagree with what you have to say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.” Voltaire voiced similar sentiments, but the oft’ quoted wording is Hall’s. No matter how I tried to justify it in my own mind, I couldn’t square that quote with my desire to eliminate the few for the peace of mind of the many (Mr. Spock notwithstanding.)
So I’m not going to ban anybody. I’m not going to shut them up
However, I am not going to open the door for this forum to become a dumping ground for toxicity, either. Moreover, I don’t want people who are reasonable, intelligent individuals to feel they can’t come here because they can’t stand dealing with a handful of disruptive influences.
So here’s what’s going to be. Everyone starts off with a clean slate. Past is past. However, I anticipate there will be more political discussion as this incendiary election year proceeds. Here’s what’s going to be for the future. People have been saying that I should set the ground rules for this place. Here’s the groundrule:
We will be civil to one another.
That’s it.
Now that’s more a guideline than a rule, because I don’t expect perfection. I don’t expect that no one will ever slip up. Me, you, anyone. And I sure don’t need a thread to devolve into, “Hey! You weren’t civil! You violated the groundrule of this board! Get ‘im!” I do expect, though, that everyone is going to try. The simplest way to do that is to focus on what the person says rather than the person himself.
I think one of the best examples of proper comportment was the way my father handled himself a few months back. A whole bunch of opinions were flying about regarding Israel. Many were speaking from ignorance. My father shows up. First thing he does his introduce himself. Gives his full name. Next thing he does his gives his credentials as to why he’s qualified to speak with expertise about the subject. At which point he does so, without insulting others who hold different opinions.
One other thing, for the sake of convenience: At my instruction, Glenn is going to be reversing the order of name-to-post. Until now, the name has been at the bottom of the post, like a signature. No more. Now the name will be at the top. That way, if there’s someone who you just don’t want to deal with, you see his name and know to skip to the next post.
I have thoughts as to what to do if someone becomes exhausitively, relentlessly abusive. But what I’m hoping is that the preferred level of discourse will discourage that ilk from showing up or staying around.
If not, well…there’s other ways.
So that’s what’s gonna be.
PAD
• 
Recent Comments