“You DID NOT originally say that “everyone can make their points without the use of foul or derogatory comments” (which btw who is the arbiter or what is and is not ‘foul’ and ‘derogatory’ – you?). Nor did you originally say that this language is a “part of free speech and legally permitted”. Nor did you ASK that people use language that doesn’t deliberately attack other people.
.
What you DID say was:
1. A comment “should be deleted“ to “Do the right thing
2. Using the blog to “display discriminatory comments is not a justified use“
3. People can “say the worst things about people without using language that should be banned“
.
These statements are very clear and very specific –
– DELETE comment
– NOT justified
– should be BANNED
.
For someone who is so keen on language use (and has established herself to be the arbiter in this area), to come back with revisionist language: (” Of course they are part of ‘Free Speech” and are legally permitted”; ” I’m just asking that people use language that doesn’t deliberately attack other people) is disingenuous at best and reveals you to be someone who is quick to criticize and judge others but is above criticism and error and not to be held to your own standard.”
We know there are two or three people who troll the blog and hate every word. A former deputy mayor. The husband of a former councilwoman. A former fire chief who sent an ANONYMOUS threatening letter to a subordinate. The husband of a former village manager. A dapper little gnome who uses big words to compensate for the total lack of content in his diatribes.
For the few of you it is a simple solution, just don’t log into the blog (but….we know you cannot help yourselves!)
For the rest of us, the blog provides an open forum where we can say what we really feel. And I appreciate that James keeps vulgar language off.
The ratio of posts with 0 comments to posts with at least one comment is about 50:50 on a good day. Most of the zero post links are the national news ones, usually linked to Brietbart, World Net Daily, Reason or other corners of the alt-right echo chamber. The links that get comments are the ones that pertain to Ridgewood, and that’s probably where James should play. The Ridgewood stuff is important to the people who come here. The other stuff is just redundant. If I want to read that stuff, I’ll go to Reddit or Fark or wherever and engage in discourse on global and national matters with people from around the globe or nation. For all things Ridgewood, I come here, but unfortunately there’s plenty of bias and noise here – I believe mostly because of anonymity. People should at least be compelled to choose user names, so when someone says something intelligent, you can register it, and over time build an opinion of who you’re dealing with. Not going to tell PJ how to run his show. It’s his baby. Currently, I am in full agreement with him regarding the sentiment this blog shows the new council. Things are looking up for Ridgewood. Couldn’t care less what PJ or any of the regulars here think about Hillary or Donald, though.
James Foytlin does us a huge service by running this blog. Unbelievably important and I am so grateful. If he chooses to post commentary on national and state issues, that is his prerogative. Does not bother me at all. Thank you James.
Interesting, a former fire chief sent an anonymous threatening letter to a subordinate? What was the threat about……
12:04 – ask the man who calls this blog the YELLOW BLOG. He is all over facebook.
I made comment (last week?) that someone else’s comment should be deleted. It implied something that went way beyond the topic at hand. It was very personal and made implications about a person’s sexuslity. Stuff best left unsaid. Below the standards of most bloggers.
There is a difference between self expression and saying things that are personal and a lie. It is not self expression to tear someone down for sport.
For sure no one wants to know about anyone else’s SEXUSLITY.
For some, free speech is only good when they agree with it… otherwise it should be deleted.
.
Its one thing to oppose speech with other speech. This is the essence of free speech – an exchange of ideas and opinions – even those you find offensive. Freedom is inherently messy. Authoritarianism is inherently neat, but also repressive.
.
Freedom also means including everyone – another basic tenant – even those who are “below the standard”. Some might say that the definition of freedom (speech or otherwise) IS the inclusion of those who are “below the standard”. Let’s not forget that in a free society, “the standard” is a naturally occurring measure which is based on ALL participants. In a repressive society, the standard is arbitrarily set.
too bad they don’t teach 11:33’s comments in school anymore.