Comments for RE: Let's Face It at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 52 out of 20 comments http://www.theind.com Mon, 20 May 2013 08:05:58 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25585 I have no problem removing the veil of anonymity for true public discourse. What truly disturbs me is that a newspaper is giving the Facebook juggernaut page views. Good luck with that. - Tomascco Tue, 20 Dec 2011 20:31:43 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25582 Interesting. We finally learn that Cracklin Patin hangs out in public bathrooms. This by his own admission. Anonymous though it may be. - Gene Broussard Tue, 20 Dec 2011 17:40:01 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25570 KL Ferguson, " one only deserves to be heard if they are willing to stand up for their opinions and answer questions about their thoughts," A. to those of us whose thoughts and beliefs are owed to one supreme diety, pray tell why you KL Ferguson feel privileged to delve, is it to satisfy your abhorrent decadent inquisitiveness of your own liberal illogical mind. - ciano Mon, 19 Dec 2011 21:20:04 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25565 A la Dylan " a change it is acomin Obsequious patronizing, now to the TDA we be a slummin The Pulitizer Prize, we be ah strummin Walter kowtows, arbitration san referendium - ciano Mon, 19 Dec 2011 13:53:59 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25561 Walter, was this change your idea? I would hope that political pressure was not put on you to make the changes. Because, I have always respected you and your opinions. - Michael A. Moss Sat, 17 Dec 2011 14:32:55 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25543 Censored commenting at the politically correct newspaper. Boring! - Frankie Fri, 16 Dec 2011 07:40:19 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25542 Since it may be my last opportunity to post, I don't put a whole lot of weight (or interest) in what the honorable Justice Scalia has to say. He's too easily influenced by Louisiana duck hunts. Was it with the ambulance man? He lost credibility with me when he started sleeping with big business. - BoFred Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:36:09 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25540 RE quote above (taken from my eariler comment) - "identifying one's name with one's free speech is essential to civil discourse and to democracy." Any thoughts you have regarding the above comment, you'll have to take up with Justice Scalia. - Barbara Conner Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:47:02 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25539 RE: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1994-10-13/news/1994286127_1_federalist-papers-political-writings-ohio-law Clarification; See: http://www.amazon.com/Citizens-Federal-Election-Commission-ebook/dp/B004WLO6TE/ref=wl_it_dp_o_npd?ie=UTF8&coliid=IMJR4P3VO34OU&colid=M8SY9F0VXQDX In this resent decision, the Court held that independent expenditures on behalf of political candidates must disclose sponsor. The Court did uphold requirements for disclaimer and disclosure by sponsors of advertisements. So, yes, right to unsigned speech in remains, assuming there is no paid sponsorship of campaigning. More specifically, the dicta by Justice Scalia remains a goal (asperational) of good government: identifying speaker (whether by corporation or individual, and using either paid or free publication) improves public discourse and democracy. Needless to say, dicta is not precedent, but it is persuasive in subsequent decisions. The role of corporate funding of third party campaigning is an "edgy" area where we can expect to see legislative responses. Free speech is still limited by sedition laws, copyright, libel, etc. Personal safety, whistle-blower legislation, and self-incrimination, among others, are reasons for withholding identity. In short, it takes guts to speak or write under one's own name. Madison and Hamilton did eventually specify who wrote which essays of the Federalist Papers. Authorship was an "open secret" at the time of publication. Finally, good writing almost always indicates good thinking. I believe you'll find both in the comments of John and Layne, who are brave enough to use their own names. - Barbara Conner Fri, 16 Dec 2011 00:38:10 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25533 The Supreme Court may have higher regard for anonymous speech than implied above: http://articles.baltimoresun.com/1994-10-13/news/1994286127_1_federalist-papers-political-writings-ohio-law Anonymous political speech has a long and honorable history in the Anglo-American tradition: www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/17/protecting-online-anonymity - mach choux Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:34:45 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25532 Please post the privacy policy displaying how you will use the information TheInd will glean by linking Facebook commenting to this website. I am sure you will get some type of demographic data that will be used for targetted advertising. There are some crazy posts, but there are other ways to accomplish your goal besides partering up with the evil Facebook. There are MANY MANY commenting and moderation systems if this was not about profit. Don't be lazy. - Please post Thu, 15 Dec 2011 17:05:34 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25529 "I see the Facebook comments approach as an immediate solution with drawbacks," An immediate solution to what? The commenting part of the Ind's website was fine. There are already 40 posts on this subject alone. TDA use to get 70-80 posts, sometimes going over 100. Now they get 2-4 posts to their articles. The Ind could have capitalized on TDA's mistake of going to Facebook. Instead the Ind is making the same mistake. After Friday, I will be deleting the Ind from my favorites. I might check in from time to time, but the comments were usually more entertaining than the articles. - Frankie Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:14:39 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25527 I'm in full agreement with AmyLynn Schexnayder, though I can see the difficulty in implementing a proper system from the paper's point of view. I see the Facebook comments approach as an immediate solution with drawbacks, which I hope they seek a replacement system for soon. I think a comment system that includes certain standard online message board features would be better. You could allow for anonymous posting, but also allow users to hide comments from whoever they choose. Let the community police itself, basically. I wonder if there's a system already developed that they could incorporate fairly easily... - Crawford Comeaux Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:47:49 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25526 Walter and TheInd editorial staff, THANK YOU! While online response tools, like comment boards, have given individuals more opportunity to respond and be "heard" in a public forum, and in some cases be published, than ever before, one only deserves to be heard if they are willing to stand up for their opinions and answer questions about their thoughts. Otherwise, what's the use of stating it in the first place. Thank you for taking this huge step back in the right direction. - KLFerguson Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:39:13 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25525 I support this move, even though it'll result in me commenting much, much less than I already do. (Big loss, huh?) It's scary being anything 'less than' conservative in this town; I believe others are right in pointing out that many voices will be, unfortunately, silenced. But at least it'll expose the bigots for who they are. KATC's Facebook page is priceless. I've taken soooo many screenshots and made lots of locals famous in other corners of the Internet. EIther way, a half-hearted bravo for this new policy. Hopefully it'll encourage liberals and moderates to be more vocal and thoughtful in their arguments. - LookSomeThings Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:22:55 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25524 by AmyLynn Schexnayder "First time commenter, last time commenter: Just my personal opinion, but I think anonymity has it's place in media." ------------------ Excellent. - James Melancon Thu, 15 Dec 2011 14:14:26 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25520 "Just my personal opinion, but I think anonymity has it's place in media. I know that it breeds awful comments, but I also know professors (and presumably other professionals) who use anonymity to comment in forums when they fear repercussion for their views. So, you've lost the awful voices but also the needed voices from inside." Great insite Amy!! The knowing voices from "the inside" will now fall silent. My swansong.....It's been fun Walter, but you will come to find out, that what drove hits to your site was the FREE exchange of ideas and banter. That's all. - Compassionate One Thu, 15 Dec 2011 13:11:11 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25516 First time commenter, last time commenter: Just my personal opinion, but I think anonymity has it's place in media. I know that it breeds awful comments, but I also know professors (and presumably other professionals) who use anonymity to comment in forums when they fear repercussion for their views. So, you've lost the awful voices but also the needed voices from inside. For example: a nontenured professor w/ important insight that is contrary to the party line, is not going to "own up" to his or her opinion when this sort of thing can and does happen: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/30/education/30professors.html (links to W. Cronon article about professor being hit with FOIA about his support for the local organized labor strikes). My point is only that in a day when work emails can be used against you as they now are- anonymity has it's place. To lose the important voices for lack of will to stifle the awful ones (which is how this appears), seems a bit lazy, in my opinion. What you may have invited is a deluge of anonymous emails now, which is a bigger waste of time. (Good luck with _that_.) And by the way, as a non-Facebook user: I know you don't _have_ to use it, but whenever I see FB used on sites for comments I think- cheap, pedestrian, and uninspired (I cannot be alone in this). Finally, and this is important, if someone posts using FB- who owns the comment? The poster, the ind or FB? Something to think about if you are wanting such control. It may just be a login feature, but still, you've invited a third party into a forum with legal (see above link) implications. (And please don't let my dislike of FB cancel out the real message of my comment- which is above- you _will_ lose dissenting voices that cannot speak without anonymity.) - AmyLynn Schexnayder Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:11:08 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25515 If your anonymous comments here haven't been making a difference, then maybe this is the wrong avenue for your complaints. Think the city or one of its government officials is acting illegally? Don't go crying anonymously somewhere! Make your case & present it to someone who can spur effective change! Perhaps a lawyer or an ethics commission? Otherwise, you're likely to be written off as some conspiracy theorist nut, as many who comment on theind's articles typically are. If you're so concerned, go be an agent of change. Do something about it. Armchair commentary really doesn't make a lick of difference. You may feel better because "you're being heard" by getting to post publicly somewhere, but if nobody's listening, what have you really accomplished? - Crawford Comeaux Thu, 15 Dec 2011 10:49:48 +0100 http://www.theind.com/re/9524-lets-face-it#comment-25511 by P.J. O'Rourke "bullies and punks will have to go back to writing on the walls in public bathrooms." ----------------------- Wait a darn minute. You can learn a lot on the walls of public bathrooms. Take Walter for instance . . . - Cracklin Patin Thu, 15 Dec 2011 08:52:36 +0100