Letters to the Editor
Uncle Fester
Published Letters: 1346 Editor's Choice: 12
-
Threads yes, moderation, not so much.
[Read the article: Anonymous no more]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I agree that threads would be very useful to sharpen the discussion and that Slashdot (slashdot.org) is a good site to look at since it's devoted to conversation on "nerd" issues.
I would suggest active moderation: Not just you moderating your own comment threads but folks you pick out of the pack and enlist to help you keep the right tone here. Call them moderators or whatever, they're needed. Maybe they exist already and I don't know it and if they do, fire them or pick new ones, they're not doing their jobs. Give them a free Premium account and some Salon swag. - Rwanderman
However, I would once again emphasize, as I did when Alex Koppelman first raised this issue, that the intelligence and civility of the letters section often seems to directly correlate to the thoughtfulness and civility of the Salon piece. [...] But if you keep publishing things that focus on "the dude vote" or "I'm voting for Obama because he's black," you're just asking for more spam, IMHO. - captainlarab
The problem with moderation is that who will moderate the moderators and what is the moderation criteria. Back to slashdot as a working example. They like to "mod up" certain posts as Funny, Insightful and Informative. Other posts get "modded down" as Troll and Flamebait. You have to dig around to view these posts; they're made invisible.
Slashdot always has an ongoing dispute as to the fairness of the moderation and innate moderator bias. And this is over fairly pointless stuff like the 'evilness' of Apple or Microsoft.
How will conversations about sexism, racism, or politics in general be moderated on Salon? Reading the 'Dude Article' and the non anon. replies to it makes me wonder if anyone is impartial enough to moderate.
-
The Xenophobes: already workin' it
[Read the article: Obama should be proud to be named Hussein]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Again, it is certainly splitting hairs, but so is trying to vilify a Presidential candidate by pointing out and endlessly repeating his middle name in order to appeal to the xenophobia and hatred of the ignorant, don't you think?
It's already starting. As context, there seems to be a fair portion of America that would be pressed to find North Dakota on the map, let alone "the Iraqs". Any knowledge of the cultural history of Arabia, Africa and the Moors is straight out. The only thing they know about Algebra is that they didn't like it. Fear of the unknown is a powerful force. On a talk radio station I listen to in "liberal" MA, they are shifting from all Hillary Hatred all the time to disparaging Obama. They are saying since many questioned the loyalty and patriotism of those with the middle name 'Adolf' during WWII, it's ok to question 'Hussein' in 2008. And callers are going for it. No mention of the fact that Hussein is a common name like Smith.
My two cents is that they want to energize the base (who don't like McCain) to come out and vote instead of staying home, and introduce enough doubt into swing voters that they vote their fear of stranger.
-
@RealityCounts : Republicans for Obama?
[Read the article: Is Obama playing the race card?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]1) They hate the Clintons with a vengeance (almost as much as some Obama supporters) because Bill Clinton actually had the nerve to beat them ... twice. Don't those damned democrats know that the Presidency belongs to republicans?... and 2) They want Hillary out because they know Obama will be much easier to beat in the general.
I think the current situation a bit more complex than you describe. Here's a Wall Street Journal article that's pretty much a warning not to underestimate Obama:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article_print/SB120398899374792349.html
The fact that Obama taught Constitutional Law at U. Chicago might be more helpful than is given credit for.
On talk radio in my neck of the woods, they're already out trying to smear Obama and get that fear and loathing thing going. Yet, on the way to the store the other day, I caught a segment covering the debate last tuesday. First, it's clear that they don't like McCain (this station was pro-Romney). They still hate Hillary big time. More than just about anybody here on Salon. They thought it was righteous for Russert to go after her on her tax returns, First Lady records, and NAFTA, as opposed to most of the commentors here on Salon think. They really hate Huckabee as well. In fact, on the hate scale, I think Hillary ranks 1st, Huckabee 2nd, with McCain and Obama trailing third and fourth.
They're not sure what to think about Obama yet. Both host and callers know they're not supposed to like him, but they do. Both repeat the empty suit mantra repeated often here on Salon. But they liked how Hillary didn't ruffle Obama's demeanor. They liked his "Bomb Pakistan" position, and thought he would be credible commander-in-chief.
This is just a really micro data point, but is an example of what real people are thinking and saying. I think the Rovians have their work cut out for them.
-
@AJCalhoun
[Read the article: Obama should be proud to be named Hussein]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think the Huns had more to do with my family tree than the Moors, but you never know. Fester is more related to Mortisha and Gomez. I'm not muslim, but I have a soft spot for sufism. I would suggest "Wisdom of the Idiots" by Idries Shah, former Afghani ambassador to the U.K. to anyone. The book is a collection of sufi tales, many of which poke fun at organized religion, and deal with the problem of accumulating self knowledge. It's a great antidote to politics.
"The Great Theft", Khaled abou el Fadl (UCLA Law School) makes you think that we should be focusing more on Wahabism and the House of Saud than dudes named Hussein.