Letters to the Editor
softdog
Published Letters: 186 Editor's Choice: 8
-
Re: caiubi - shouldn't this be moderated?
[Read the article: Nepotistic tough guys and their coddling parents]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I don't like shooter's opinions, caiubi has threatened him in a way which violates all of Salon's rules and should get the writer banned.
Real or not, this is just the sort of trolling which becomes grist for "death threats on Salon" hyperbole, in addition to being wrong.
Isn't Salon monitoring these boards? Isn't this exactly the source of all the angst from Salon editors over the need to moderate these things?
-
WayLazy
[Read the article: WayLay]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]What bullshit. If you're doing a weekly strip, a filler panel - with clip art no less - is worse than skipping a week. What the hell - has Lay entirely lost it?
-
Pure speculation with the word "science"
[Read the article: We're prejudiced, now what?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]"So, given our present state of knowledge, fMRI activation of the amygdala should not be taken as unequivocal evidence that the fear and anxiety are the primary unconscious responses to racial or ethnic differences; the activation could represent a nonspecific state of heightened emotional arousal."
Translation: I'm not a sceintist, these studies don't yet prove anything, so everything which follows is my own speculative opinion based on my unprofessional bullshit assessment.
I loathe this sort of lame-ass, irresponsible non-scientist bloviation which doesn't ask all the vital questions: What were the exact conditions and conclusions? How rigorous was the studies? What do other conflicting studies say? What do other nueroscientists say?
Because the last time I checked, neuroscience is still ambiguous about a great many thought processes, especially ones which involve multiple and conflicting instinctual reactions. All this does is pander to those seeking to wrap their own bullshit up in "science!"
Way to go with another example of Fox News style journalism, Salon. What's next? A "rape is part of nature" article?
-
The Problem Is You Haven't Ended It
[Read the article: My boss wants me to apologize to his wife]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]She had a relationship so messy it was a major reason she quit her job. His behavior was dramatice enough for her to tell him to get therapy. So why the hell is she still talking to him?
Her claim she "yanked myself out of the picture" isn't true until she ceases all contact except what is unavoidable.
I think the letter writer is still evading this issue by framing it as "an emotional affair" and "friendly contact" which minimizes her own responsibility, and makes it hard to face how it's still going on.
If this had been physical workplace affair, or even a normal dating situation, his intense freakout would be a clear danger sign he wouldn't get past the breakup unless all contact ended.
If this had been a longtime pal who confessed a crush, I could understand if she hoped they could go back to just friends.
But she changed her life to get away from this guy and he imploded. She needs to let it go. Cary hit it on the nose by calling it "conspiratorial intimacy" - prolonging the problem under the facade of distant friendship.
I'm sure some will lambast the LW for whatever flaws have led her to string this along. I just think she needs to admit it was a real affair, a real messy breakup and then she can really let it go.
-
Wow. I'm impressed
[Read the article: Our best friends are scarily, heedlessly in debt]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]The last two Tennis responses I've read have started with to succint clearheaded answers then by the poetic digression.
I must say I'm impressed and find such a structure far less vexing than some muddled (and to me, unhelpful) rambles of previous months.
I like it when sense is not sacrificed for elouqence or vice versa. Musing is far more enjoyable when framed by more clear answer.
I suspect editing the book provided a fresh perspective and voice. No matter what has inspired it, keep it up Cary.
-
Give me a break
[Read the article: Mind your manners online]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Let me be the first to make an uncivil observation - he who smelt it, dealt it. Salon frequently publishes material designed to angry up the blood and increase page views. Then you whine when invective follows provocation.
Take Camille Paglia and her tired intellectual irritant schtick, which which would be deemed trolling if done outside a sanctioned column. Or the article by Nordhaus and Shellenberger, which was incendiary enough without the "Stop Your Sobbing" headline and crybaby cartoon - yet most replies remained thoughtful even if they did contain swearing.
Or consider the current state of the Letters To Editor, which Salon brought upon itself by ignoring well established concepts about message boards. The letters didn't magically transform from an respectable edited feature into an uncivil pit by themselves.
Salon chose to change the format. More importantly Salon chose to have loose control and no registration requirement and minimal controls, despite the obvious risks. I think my first letter in the new format warned how it might devolve into Craiglist's Rants and Raves.
Then when the inevitable occured amd Salon had the gall to act shocked and complain about vitriol as if they had no say in the outcome. As if Salon wasn't capable of giving everyone a time out then restarting with a more restricted system.
I doubt this will occur, as it may involve increased costs and work, while the current system bring in the necessary eyeballs.
Instead I expect little more than small tweaks which may not effect the established level of discours and guilt tripping essays about manners which I think overstate the problem.
It seems to me the readers are a bit more responsible than they get credit for, and Salon is far less.