I’ve been thinking about adding a new rule to the commenting guidelines, but then went back and re-read the existing guidelines, and decided (following as my precedent Griwsold v. Connecticut) that the rule I wish to declare is certainly suggested or implied (or something) by the existing guidelines. And so I’m going to announce an interpretation of those guidelines. And, since this is a common law blog, I’ll point out that this interpretation has always been there, it just hasn’t been articulated yet.
Here goes: The existing guidelines give me sole interpretive authority in deciding whether a comment violates the guidelines. And the existing guidelines provide that repetition violates the guidelines. So I’ve granted myself the authority to deal with anyone who says the same thing over and over again.
Here comes the fancy footwork, logic-wise: A comment that completely lacks coherence has no content. Therefore any two comprehensible comments have the same content-value of zero. Anyone who makes two incomprehensible comments has obviously said the same thing in both comments. (that is, nothing). SO they are repeating themselves and therefore violating the commenting guideline against boring us with repetition.
I will consider excercising discretion and forgiving (to steal a phrase from Clive Stafford Smith, who used it to describe another lawyer’s briefs) inspired gibberish. But henceforth, when anyone comments twice in a thread or twice in any day and my reaction is “What???”, I will consider setting that person to moderated status, or in extreme cases, simply cancel their priveleges altogether.
So I can see what you’re saying on the thing about the repititious nonsense.
I understand where you’re coming from on the stuff that doesn’t make any sense that is said over and over.
It’s really good that you’re going to deal with folks that just keep saying the same thing again and again and again. : )
Unusual that learned council would miss the most pertinent reference available while researching this conundrum – Roberts Rules of Order…..
One man’s drunkard’s walk is another man’s Faulkner.
I was bad to do stupid stuff when I was a jerkfaced high school jerkface. We had to write a 100 word current events report every Thursday. The Russians put the first satellite into orbit during the week, so I thought that might be a good choice. So I licked my trusty Ticonderoga No. 3 pencil, and followed the muse: “The USSR launched the first satellite into orbit. Now there’s an object in space transmitting a constantbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beepbeep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep.
I got ninth period (detention) that day for “disrespect.” If it hadn’t of
been that, it would’ve been something else. I was bad to get a lotta ninth periods. But i ain’t never saw a face on a hardboiled aig.
You say penumbras. I say penumbrae.
Oh Summer, you lull us into dark corners after the heat has boiled our brains! Then we come out yelling or worse, repeating and repeating—-
Surely you meant two (in)comprehensible comments…?
I like the reference to Griswold – that was a “hold on to your wallets!” moment for sure.
At wherever risk of banishment I’m having difficulty understanding.You wish to articulate a known interpretation of guide lines. In where my misunderstanding 1) trouble with commenting on any subject matter as that subject matter would violate submitting a comment in some form of repetition. It is after all the subjects which the comments pertain to. 2) You give an appearance by selective targeting of certain comments as they relate to possible personal endeavors.
Respectfully, that is your right as this is your blog site. Additionally, 3) your ” Fancy Foot Work” to it’s form of logic would baffle a common mind. And this is correct. Therefore any two comprehensible comment has the same value, (that is nothing ) zero.
Whether or not comprehensible any comment is in violation of the repetition rule, as its comment regards the subject matter earlier had. Furthermore,I detect that perhaps at the point of submission of this post you were /// angry.
Then there’s the provocative comments here that are changeling your intent to enforce your rules or they are merely old acquaintances.
I feel as though I’ve broken a rule or two just commenting,yet I wanted the challenge to comment on such an odd posting. Of course I agree with problems you describe and that your personal decisions would probably be the best way in dealing with. RRO’s
Jane, I’m confused by your comment.
(and no, I wasn’t angry. I was more bemused than angry. But I’ve had a lot of complaints about one specific person’s comments, and they had become disruptive in the way they would put multiple bursts of nonsense in a comment thread. So I was in a joking way saying I was going to deal with it.)
Ben, what do you mean “was” ?
Sorry, Observer … that should be “wuz.” Thanks for catching that.
Lol, Jane!
Very nice.
dadgum… reading all of this jibber jabber on this one post makes me feel like everyone has turned into that Robert guy
Razor’s got a brand new crisp Benjamin to bet that the IP addresses of some commentors are the same.
Hydra-headed dueling idjits. It’s got to be the result of some kind of chemical dump exposure. Or else they’re eating a steady diet of lead paint chips cuz they look like little candy confetti sprinkles used as garnish on cup cakes.
You have a point there. Jane and Robert are part of the same family.
slithy toves indeed.
I can hear it now, “Your honor, I submit Exhibit A: these folks. And Exhibit B: these logs of blog comments made by them.”
Midtown Farmer’s Market – Any reports?
What if somebody says the same thing over and over again, but not in two separate posts, but instead the same post, and it just goes on and on and on, but it’s not quite up there at the level of “Dude, it’s a split level pad” followed by “What’s the frequency, Kenneth?” (but really I’m talking about comments rather than posts because “posts” in the context of this blog are controlled by the blog owner, if you can dig it that way, or even if not, and we’re not talking “dig it” like an old steam shovel, are we? Hell, no!). But would that, like, be enough to make the NMC bulldog break his chain? Tell the truth, or get out of the church, don’t you think? Like, High Noon Iwo Jima, Baby, I always say. So there you have it, in a nutshell, if you get my drift. But all in the same comment, not repeated in another one. Put that in your pipe and smoke it, like all night long, v-e-r-y s-l-o-w-l-y, and consider that it’s all in one comment, and not repeated, but way out there just the same (balls out). If that happens, who you gonna call? You by gum, betcha it ain’t gonna be Funk & Wagnells.
bulldog?
Note to self and NMC. Start adding paint chips to your drinks so it all makes more sense.
so you don’t think doubledecker rum punch is adequate for this, Razor?
Well since it was a joking way. Here’s another joke did you hear the one about the pot calling the kettle black. Also at this point the winner of the most drunker s walk of backward talk would be NMC. congrads. of course I’m only joking within the incredible perimeter’s set in a joking fashion.
The first three response’s were really cool. It’s good Jane pointed out possible flaws before amending the rule for submission. May be we could do 2 out of 3. And it’s that Robert, dude Bro. Re: this event It was a comment to a comment. In closing I was wondering if these comments are so out there. May be I should pull the plug. Just joking HA, ha, ha.
Razor I’m unable to tell you which here. Suffices to say please note it ain’t the paint.
There’s a part of this post that is completely serious, Robert: If you or anyone continually puts up incomprehensible comments to the point that they are disruptive, I’m going to stop the commenting.