Letters to the Editor
Anonymust
Published Letters: 2031 Editor's Choice: 74
-
I'm glad I'm not the only one, Mary
[Read the article: I hate your column and all the letter writers too!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...who has that association, but we seem to be in the minority, and the others think they are in charge. Perhaps they are.
I think even the teenage flamers have their place here. And how do you define what it is that advances or elevates?
How does anyone decide to invite into their home? Ideology is far less important, but civility does count for something. So does one's ability to communicate when you're online. Dragging the discussion off into the weeds and mud doesn't accomplish much except to turn away some gentler (or perhaps less tolerant) souls who really might have something worthwhile to contribute. You have to wonder what we all miss out on...
Usually the trolls just show themselves to be trolls and people ignore them.
We must be reading different threads, then. I really think it begins to affect my health when I read some of those tirades. (Must be age.) Perhaps it really is just a game among warring trolls, but, frankly, why bother, when I can go elsewhere for conversation that isn't being drowned out by jerks.
I have engaged a few in my day because I saw hope that they just didn't understand, but then I gave up for the most part.
Usually, I don't rise to the bait, but sometimes...
And I've been touched that over all on Cary's column people do care to take the time to reach out, even if they are doing it more to be heard than to offer a helping hand to the LW.
Can't argue with that, but I still find the noise very jarring. Here's my answer to Cary's question about our personal reactions to the contentious comment threads:
Perhaps other people grew up in household with a lot of yelling and really like that kind of interaction. I am not one of them. There was plenty of yelling when I was growing up, but I gave it up when I divorced my first husband. Free speech does not include the right to abuse others.
But what else should/may/can I expect? Even at Salon? We live in a bizarro world where our fearless leader thinks only his rules apply, no one else's, and he claims the right to hold others without cause, and to use torture if necessary to learn absolutely useless information. Wow! What an example! It really is the law of the jungle right now. I'm just waiting for it to be over... like a realllllly long labor, or illness or something like that. You know. It's only temporary. It can't last.
-
Thank you, Duckylee, for noticing increased civility
[Read the article: I hate your column and all the letter writers too!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]because, frankly, I was having a hard time keeping it in focus, since I did get caught up in one of those back and forth arguments... after I posted again. Usually, I will not post more than once, just for that reason!
Mostly, I appreciate your mentioning that you welcome a discussion of what a salon is. It's been on my mind for awhile now, but this was the first opportunity to bring it up when it was also an appropriate topic.
Ombudsman? Only if they get a real one. Can you imagine anyone wanting that job? At least after a week or two?
-
I hope you have another trip planned...
[Read the article: Reality setting in at the White House?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...and very, very soon. And then another one right after that.
-
How ironic it would be...
[Read the article: I hate your column and all the letter writers too!]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]...if any changes in writing content and quality are not really the result of editorial decisions, but because a segment of Salon's audience is driving away the very writers they might prefer to read.
Oh, well.
-
I really needed that!
[Read the article: Anderson Cooper in jail?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Thanks for the link. To think that I might have missed that column otherwise, while searching for interesting political news. ;~)
-
I got Weingarten, but totally misread Ulfansius
[Read the article: Anderson Cooper in jail?]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]Ulfansius, I had hopes that your reaction was just one more layer of irony. At least, I thought that was one way to read it. Oh well...
Well, at least now we know why the MSM was not amused by Colbert. It was too close to the truth, and for those who thought Weingarten was standing too close to it, too, he was not funny.
For the record, he is a humor columnist, and was, in fact, the one who discovered Dave Barry. How about that?! Funny now? I actually went looking for Weingarten online, because I recognized the name, but not well enough. Apparently, I've been reading too much serious stuff lately, or else I might have found him sooner. I did wonder whether he had ever been a sports writer, but did not find anything to confirm that notion.
I was only joking awhile back when I said something about Irony being dead, that it was killed by Absurdity. Maybe it's really true. If Irony isn't completely dead, is it just in its Last Throes?
I do agree, however, that the best news come from overseas, and not just the reporting, either. Their news really is better (maybe greener) than ours.
-
Just a real-estate tear-down?
[Read the article: War is swell]
[Read more letters about this article: Here]I think that the Republican elite believe that they can tear down and build up the operations of government as they wish. They spent the 80s and 90s telling us that government was the problem, not the solution, then after 9/11 told us that the government can beat terrorism, but only if we give it full powers and our blind trust.
I think James Levy might be on to something here, that the neocon cabal thought they could do here what Bush thought he could do in Iraq. Tear it down and rebuild.
It's always about the ends and means, which is why progressives, liberals, and Democrats should avoid using utilitarian arguments whenever possible. Once you agree to argue in those terms, then it just becomes a matter of whose interests are being rewarded (ends) and whose sacrificed (means).