Washblog

Take a poll on Washblog comments


[Author's note 1/4/06: The comments in the post in question became more focused on the issues and less on the people -- and ended up containing much of real interest. As of today, 26% of the respondents -- 7 people out of 26 -- characterized these comments as showing that progressives need to learn to be more civil to each other for their own political good. Seven percent, or 2 people, said that the comments could convince almost anyone to never attend a Democratic event. That's a substantial minority of the people who responded -- people who are likely to be already battle-hardened blog readers. I take that seriously. Today, Goldy on HorsesAss quotes David Horsey on the comments on online forums: "... In so much of this populist punditry there is an overabundance of ill-informed spouting off infused with incredible rudeness, paranoia, bias and bile." And Goldy responds: "Gee, I dunno… that seems to me like a pretty fair description of the comment threads on both (u)SP ([un]Sound Politics) and HA (HorsesAss)."] On WB, where the dialogue happens primarily among activist progressives, I think it's to our mutal benefit to try to encourage less "incredible rudeness" and "bile".]

I'm not sure what reaction to have to the comments on the post directly below this one:  "Sirota and the need for a pragmatic ideology". But I'm curious what other people think.  This site's managers are in the process of figuring out how to respond to such interactions.  So I've created a poll, below.   Obviously, the choices in the poll below reflect my feelings about the comments attached to Pen's story, though I did try to reach into my imagination and cover what I saw as the possible gamut/spectrum.

Feel free to leave a comment instead or in addition. Because this is about communication and I'm looking for specific information, I'm going to be very liberal in deleting any comment on this post that calls someone's credentials or humanity into question or otherwise appears to me to create or perpetuate uncivil interactions that might discourage people from expressing their opinion here.

< WA Vigils to Commemorate Iraq Deaths -- Starting January 1, 2007 | A Washington Slice of the Largest Movement the World has Ever Seen >

Poll

How would you characterize the challenges to the author on the story directly below: "Sirota and the need for a pragmatic ideology"?
Enlightening and constructive. This helps me, as a progressive or Democrat, sort it all out
As an anti-liberal, anti-progressive partisan, I love to see progressives questioning each other's credentials and humanity!
Boring, besides the point
This is normal and ok. It's the kind of dialogue you get on political blogs. What's the problem?
None of the above or below
I love a fight. That's why I visit political blogs.
This could convince almost anyone to never attend a grassroots Democratic meeting or a progressive event
Progressives need to learn to treat each other better if they want to achieve their political ends.
These people speak for me!

Votes: 27
Results | Other Polls
Display: Sort:
I think Ivan's comments and P-Mans are not only healthy, but NECESSARY for any kind of progress to be made.  I welcome the exchanges we have.

Imagine if you had a trial and only one side got to make its case.  The jury would walk away thinking what a kangaroo court that was.  How could they make up their minds what to believe?

No, you NEED the other sides lawyers to show up and argue THEIR side.  Even if they do it poorly, it provides your side with the opportunity to try your case and actually get the jury to see if you are right or they are.

Without Ivan and P-Man, we'd just be preaching to the choir.

Of course, if they resorted to name calling and personal attacks, that would be different.  Things can get heated of course, but in the end, if someone called me something I'd expect an apology and I'd freely give one if I got too emotional.

Anyways, that's my 2 cents.

by Pen on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 05:08:19 PM PST

* 1 none 0 *


this is politics.

politics is about time and money and ... money and time.

ooopssss... yawn ... also about ideas to dress up the seflishness, and

people get pissed when they think their time & money is going to be pissed away, again, and

I get really fed up with ideas that sound like the same ol shit, and

I don't mind telling people that, and

I really enjoyed & agreed with Sirota's comments when I read them yesterday or so, and

while I disagree with Ivan sometimes his angle is frequently worth a read & usually worth a laugh, and

my first online fighting matches were at 2400 baud with my $100 Zoom fax modem in 1991, and

every place you joined there were always these meta battles, and  

there was always 'it used to be so good here' & 'why can't we all just get along' & 'someone told me that they'd participate but the discourse is beneath them' & 'what should we do', and

6 or 12 or 18 months later the place was an echo chamber for 4 happy people, and

i've seen happen after 2004, and

these washblog meta battles happen at My Left Wing & you should have seen the bullshit at kos this weekend, and

some people get pissed & some people bail out, and

I sure as hell don't know what the answer is.

I think the more of these discussions we have the easier it will ultimately be to form larger coalitions to beat the aristo-fascists - we need lots of adaptable strategeries and lots of people working,

NOT a cadre of synchophants whining about how 'if everyone listed to us then we'd win.'

The way the party is 'organized' pits factions against each other, pissing on each others shoes for a slice of the pie to the detriment of the other factions, and

we need MORE factions and BIGGER factions, cuz we can grow the pie, and we gotta figure out how to talk to each other, and

there is tooooooooooooo much to make progress on, and

the first thing we gotta do is whomp & stomp & flatten these flat earth fucks who want us all living in 1692 Salem, and

we gotta GET RID of 'leaders' who don't want to whomp & stomp & flatten flat earth fucks.

rmm.

http://www.liemail.com/BambooGrassroots.html

by rmdSeaBos on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 07:06:22 PM PST

* 3 none 0 *


I suppose it's fair to point out that I myself only just registered here today, having been led here by a link from Horse's Ass.  Arguably I should have taken more time to get the feel of the place, and normally, I don't post a whole lot anyway (and have in the past generally stayed away from abortion arguments because they make my teeth ache), but today was something of a slow day, the main post did kind of set me off, and I guess it had been a while, so...

Meaning there may be other people in the same boat as well, so you may want to be careful about drawing too many conclusions from this one thread.

by wrog on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 07:49:25 PM PST

* 4 none 0 *


....without the more contentious diaries, there would be far less comments on Washblog.....

;-)

I'm with Obama

by willisreed on Tue Jan 02, 2007 at 11:17:13 PM PST

* 7 none 0 *


Why all the focus on the comments and not on the borderline trollish premises they're in reply to?

"Gee, why all the fuss? I only made a frontpage post calling anyone who doesn't my pro-life candidate for President a coward!"

If you want a civil interactions, yo