- Got tips? Send them to tips (at) r8ny (dot) com
- Blog on Room Eight
- sign-up to receive a daily digest by email
- Advertise on Room Eight
- Login / Sign-up
AdvertisementAround Room EightGot Something To Say? Blog It on Room Eight Subscribe
Want a Daily Digest of Room Eight by Email? Sign-up Here! AdvertisersRecent Posts
Advertising SpaceRoom Eight is a member of the NYC BlogAds network. 2008 ContendersBloggersBlog RollNew York Politics National Blogs Misc New Yorkers |
For Clarification Purposes
I love this website (Room8); to me it’s about serious political involvement and education. It’s about finding out what’s going on in NYC politics mainly, but it is also about finding out what’s going on politically-on both national and international stages. It is a rather informative political website. I am proud to have been one of the pioneer contributors to the building of this site. When the founders Ben Smith and Gur Tsabar invited me to become one of the pioneer bloggers (along with about a dozen others selected), I raised my concern about the anonymous commentors who had a penchant for attacking me on a purely personal level, whenever things got hot in the kitchen so to speak, on other political blogs wherein I openly participated. To build this site, I accepted that anonymous commentors were necessary. A few times over the past year, the issue of personal attacks raised its ugly head. I recall on the Daily Gotham website, that Gatemouth was savaged to the point that even some of his ideological adversaries had to step in and say enough. It led to another debate on whether or not commentors should be screened and such; which has been my position all along. I have tolerated the abuse to a point. I have protested when I had to; I have punched back when I had to. Sometimes my editors stepped in and zapped many zany comments. Other times when my detractors tried to spam me out, the editors also stepped in to rectify that problem. In general there has been avid tolerance for detractors-after all it does come with the territory, to some extent. Look, I am not talking about someone calling another stupid, or a fool, or an idiot, or such; I am talking about the types of personal vicious attacks that insinuate felonies and the like. I am not talking about those who disagree with your core positions and use history, logic, common sense or new facts and such to dispute your views; I am talking about those who are just out to spread vicious and malicious lies while hiding away from culpability behind anonymous masks. Those who read this site on an occasional basis are very susceptible to believing the vicious lies that are spread by those writing in anonymously. It is rather unfair. Anyone I take to task here can openly refute my positions on the thread; but when someone in his/ her KKK mask takes a swipe at me, I am blindsided. I just don’t want to enable them anymore, that’s all. Let them get their kicks somewhere else; and not at my expense. Some people have no blog etiquette, and as such (to me) they should be punished. Others have no blog decorum, so what is an editor to do? Do we not ostracize those who insist on victimizing those who openly blog? Or are we to go on as though any libelous and/ or slanderous statement made-bereft of fact or logic-is acceptable? With due respects to William Shakespeare (and with my best hip-hop imitation): he who steals my purse steals cash and trash; but he who steals my good name (that I worked so hard to build) is taking me out of my game. I have offered this solution: registration for those who wish to participate. You register with the editors (even if you use a pseudonym to write in under) which leaves your name, address, phone number, and e-mail, etc, that’s all confidential. You then get a password or create one, which gives you access. This would prevent the abuses taken by those who hide behind the mask of anonymity. Once we verify (check for authenticity and validity) members of this esoteric group, we can all rest easy that they would act responsibly. Then we will have a site where only those who are serious about political dialogue/discourse, will engage in the threads and the post-articles debates. I think this is the best way to do this. I really do. If someone abuses his/her privilege then the editors and fellow bloggers-acting as a collective- can always remove such an individual. Unless this is done, I will have to move on to a more controlled / regulated site to express my feelings on contemporary political issues, if I choose to remain blogging. Even if I do that, Room 8 will always have a special place in my heart. I may choose to become a random blogger, dropping articles on various sites from time to time. I was touched that Mole (Bouldin and Liz also, I assume) seem willing to offer me an outlet on the Daily Gotham website/political blog. I thank you guys. Thanks also to you two guys here (Ben and Gur) for allowing me the opportunities to express myself over the past year, without any sort of censorship whatsoever. Over the remaining time here I may close up on some unfinished business (40th district), while I await your policy decisions. I always hope to reserve the right to intermittently blog here (like Maurice Gumbs does occasionally), whenever an issue really gets me riled up or such/lol. Thanks also to all those who expressed those kind sentiments in the thread of my last post. Thanks to Kevin Wardally, Pam Junior, Chris Owens and all the others who have always been supportive; you have endorsed and validated my existence on the blogs. Stay up y’all; and stay tuned-in all. I really started reading blogs about a year ago when then Councilmember Clarke was running for Congress and I really did not understand Brooklyn politics or its history. You Rock taught me so much that I have to say thank you. I understand your issues with some of the comments made and I want to say all the best.
I have one request please give us the 411 on the 40th. Saw on NY1 that Cuomo said you have to be a resident of the district on the day of election.
I am also disappointed by what some people say on-line.
I'd like to blame the political class, but I used to participate in a chat room of people interested in mass transit issues and history. Some of the people started disagreeing about transit, moved on to a few insults, and ended up in a flame war. About trains! Registration was imposed, and then killfiles (select certain posters whose posts you would never see). Eventually, the webmaster got disgusted and just shut it down. On one level I agree with registration. It would definately attract more writers -- at this rate I'll be the sole survivor. On another, you and I are in a position to speak freely. Now everyone who posts on this top is. True, only Ben and Gur would know the identities, but not everyone would feel comfortable registering at work (although I suspect that if someone has been posting here, an IT person could find that out in any event). So it might mean fewer comments. Nonetheless, it may be necessary. So I propose this as an alternative, if programmatically possible -- unregistered posts would be queued, and someone would have to decide whether to let them through. I have to sympathize with you Rock, as no one has accused me of any felonies, etc. I think the reason is that as ticked off as I am about many things that have gone on, I don't call people out personally. I'm not in a position to -- I'm on the outside. And I haven't taken sides in many elections, which means all those bizzare hangers on in the political world don't see their jobs at stake in what I am saying. (Heck, on my side of the park we don't even have elections, unless they spill over from where you are). These are, or course, the same reasons very few people read and respond to my posts (which is OK by me because I'm writing to provide information to those who are interested enough to use it).
In any event, illegitimati non carborundum.  Larry, you wouldn't know it but I studied Latin at ages eleven and twelve. However, my teachers are probably frowning on me right now, since I don't know what your finish meant. Help me out/lol.
Your Mr. 411 Rock what gives? Tell us what you know? Were counting on you buddy.
Rock what is your opinion about the today's developments in Dr. Eugene effots to prove his residents?
Rock said: "Once we verify (check for authenticity and validity) members of this esoteric group" Since I assume that all the mods are volunteers, I think it unfair to assume they have the time to do all this hands on verification of each and every person who signs up. Are you volunteering to do all that work yourself Rock? I just don't think its practical. If someone gives a name or a phone number, you just have to take their word for it. Since they can lie about that information, and Room Eight doesn't have the staff resources to research all requests for logins, it seems pointless to do as you suggest. A login that is an alias with bogus personal information given is the same as an anonymous login. It makes no difference. Just keep things the same and filter out the anonymous posts if you don't want to read them.
Just to be clear, before I get into massive trouble with Ben and Gur, we're not actively (or in any other way) trying to recruit you away from R8, Rock. As far as comment moderation is concerned, it does work for TDG, though there have been discussions about allowing unmoderated comments. We've always decided against that, in part because the effort involved in moderating isn't really that great, and because of the liability issues involved. Our banning policy is pretty simple: don't be a schmuck (as The Albany Project terms it), and don't post libelous comments. If anyone does, their account is suspended, and if they sign up again, we ban their IP address. Room 8 uses the same software platform we do - the worthless Drupal - so this could be done, and if I understand Ben correctly in his recent bleg, he's quite willing to accomodate you. I think you should take him up on that. I saw on the Daily Gotham where someone said that Rock Hackshaw was going to be writing on that site.
I think my comment about Daily Gotham came out wrong. I apologise. There has been no contact between anyone from DG and myself. No one has ever tried to recruit me either. I was referring to a comment I saw Mole make on the DG blog, which essentially was that I would be welcomed over there. This was relative to the Errol Louis story in the Daily news blog, that DG further followed up on. I apologise if any feelings were hurt or such. MY BAD.
Rock, It means "don't let the bastards grind you down." Presently I am reading Taylor Branch's "At Canaan's Edge", the last volume in his pulitzer prize winning series on Martin Luther King and America in the 50's and 60's. In this book, and the previous books, it portrays quite clearly how many people in this country, in particular african americans, had to fight long and hard to be "anonymous" To be able to go anywhere, do anything, say anything without having it matter who they were or what they were. In those days you had to identify yourself, the very idea of being "anonymous" was looked down upon, because segregation required validation. Segregation required disallowing anyone from just being a face in the crowd. Not just segregation either. In the anti-communist hysteria of the 50's, what your beliefs were couldn't be secret either. Validation. If you wanted to be anonymous, that was like being a communist. To some the scariest thing you could be is a "face in the crowd" that can't be readily identified. Posting anonymously is free speech, it is what this democracy is supposed to be all about. Too many people suffered and died to get the right to live their lives in a manner where they weren't pre-judged, where they could be anonymous if they chose to be and not have it matter. This principle is more important than the flaming. Rock, you can take the flaming and so can I. Banning anonymous posting is un-american. It is symptomatic of that dark era I'm reading about in Branch's book where people wanted validation for all activities, because they wanted to prejudge everyone as a tool for control and things like segregation. Room eight should boldly stand for free speech, even it is flaming by annoying types. It should not require validation of any kind.
DO NOT POST ANYTHING ON ROOM 8 ABOUT THE THE 40TH COUNCIL RACE. REMAIN QUIET WHILE FACTS ARE EXPLODING ALL OVER THE PRESS AND BLOGS. TALK ABOUT YOURSELF AND YOUR HURTS
RWALLNERNY...........this isn't rocket science . Don't you see the problem when some people anonymously and continuously come on this site and make charges of me breaking the law over and over? I have been accused of thievery, blackmail, fraud, coercion, intimidation, collusion, conspiracy, libel, slander, and the like. It's not about discussion and debate, it's about political annihilation. This has been taking place perpetually on the blogs,for the last two years or so. You will never get it, because you don't want to get it. I don't need to subject myself to this. It's up to Ben and Gur; they will decide what policy changes need to be made. I think I have made my case. I rest now. I wait.
Don't tell me that you aren't picking up the innuendo of some anons, that I am in some way, involved in some type of conspircacy, relative to the outcome of 40th city council race? Who needs this stupid shit? Maybe you do.
Also Rock speaks of Blog Etiquette and Blog Decorum as though such things are laid down in the law, like the ten commandments or something. There is no such thing as standard "blog etiquette" and "blog decorum", and the minute there is such a thing the internet is ruined, because it will have become as censored and regulated as most of the rest of the mass media in this day and age. Each of us are individuals and we each have our own senses of etiquette and morality, and it isn't the right of anyone else, certainly not moderators on a blog, to judge the guidelines others use. Etiquette is the domain of snobs who have a particular view of the world and the order in the world that they think is better than what anyone else happens to think. The negatives far outweigh the positives. Even if Rock does not see it. He's a brilliant guy, he is, but hey he can be wrong sometimes just like the rest of us. And yes Rock I see where you are coming from. I say "sticks and stones...." Nobody whose opinions you'd value is going to put so much merit in what any one person says anonymously or otherwise. The blind mudslinging shouldn't hurt you so much. Thick skin is good you know.
Rock is pissed cuz he backed that loser Wellington.
...is it Wallner's position that the ability to post anonymously on blogs needs to be maintained to honor MLK's legacy and the victims of the red scare/blacklist? If so, I need to re-arrange my "Ten Most Stupid Things I've Ever Heard" list. Please confirm, because that is truly priceless. A few politicos have posted here. In political world, it seems, you have allies and enemies.
Rather than respond to the post, anonymous commentors immediately attacked these folks personally -- mocking their appearance, their losses in recent elections, etc. So those folks just refrained from posting again. Certainly I'm one who believes many of those in our political class deserve some negative feedback. But that isn't quite what I have in mind. The cost of registration, however, is that if you require registation, you will have many fewer non-slimeball comments as well. Someone checks out Room Eight for the first time while at work, wants to agree or disagree with the post, but now has to register from the work computer. Generally, they won't.
Perhaps allowing the poster to delete comments is a possibility. I just got some spam on my most recent, and wouldn't mind removing it if I could. THE TENSION BETWEEN FREE SPEECH AND SPEECH THAT IS ILLEGAL: VIRTUAL REALITY MIMICS REAL LIFE.
Rock's insights need to be protected. Although his views should be subjected to scrutiny, it cannot be allowed to pierce the floor of libel per se. I, for one, am glad that there is legal liability that serves to muzzle reputational bullets made up of pure malice and reckless regard for the truth. Indeed, I have had to resort to issuing a Gauntlet to a newspaper recently: remove the offending libelous per se post or face a lawsuit that will permit the unmasking, provide context with the unmasked identity of the libelous poster, and transfer of wealth as constitutionally mandated to compensate and punish for such bad acts.
The KKK's mask for bloggers isn't what the late great father of the First Amendment, Pat Henry, had in mind. He had The O.K. Corral in mind, where one lived or died based upon the validity of the argument, and the right to get into the corral is what was being protected, no matter the status of the combatants ( a la “...fight to the death for your right to disagree with me.”)
I know that I have cutback on blogging, for the anonymous insult-orgy is tough enough to deal with and one ponders, "Why bother?" And then, my friend, I resent be affected by blog-bullies and I return to the school yard for the next issue albeit, with the legal hammer at the ready; just like life itself. So, virtual discourse mimics real life discussion in a public square.
Perhaps, legal liability of publishers of newspapers or blogs is our best solution, for they will engage in appropriate self-filtration that removes the staining libel per se so as to avoid having their bank account smashed by the Hammer.
So, Rock, rock on undaunted to express your views as they serve the vital and noble purpose of informing the public discourse and making the lives of hardworking everyday Americans better, and the people’s government honest.
The meek will inherit the earth, and with our Constitution, are able to self-govern!
Dated: 3/3/07
/s/
Ravi Batra
Manhattan
THE TENSION BETWEEN FREE SPEECH AND SPEECH THAT IS ILLEGAL: VIRTUAL REALITY MIMICS REAL LIFE Rock's insights need to be protected. Although his views should be subjected to scrutiny, it cannot be allowed to pierce the floor of libel per se. I, for one, am glad that there is legal liability that serves to muzzle reputational bullets made up of pure malice and reckless regard for the truth. Indeed, I have had to resort to issuing a Gauntlet to a newspaper recently: remove the offending libelous per se post or face a lawsuit that will permit the unmasking, provide context with the unmasked identity of the libelous poster, and transfer of wealth as constitutionally mandated to compensate and punish for such bad acts. The KKK's mask for bloggers isn't what the late great father of the First Amendment, Pat Henry, had in mind. He had The O.K. Corral in mind, where one lived or died based upon the validity of the argument, and the right to get into the corral is what was being protected, no matter the status of the combatants ( a la “...fight to the death for your right to disagree with me.”) I know that I have cutback on blogging, for the anonymous insult-orgy is tough enough to deal with and one ponders, "Why bother?" And then, my friend, I resent be affected by blog-bullies and I return to the school yard for the next issue albeit, with the legal hammer at the ready; just like life itself. So, virtual discourse mimics real life discussion in a public square. Perhaps, legal liability of publishers of newspapers or blogs is our best solution, for they will engage in appropriate self-filtration that removes the staining libel per se so as to avoid having their bank account smashed by the Hammer. So, Rock, rock on undaunted to express your views as they serve the vital and noble purpose of informing the public discourse and making the lives of hardworking everyday Americans better, and the people’s government honest. The meek will inherit the earth, and with our Constitution, are able to self-govern! Dated: 3/3/07 P.S. sorry about the post above with the wrong format. As long as anonymous responses are in a que and don't go up automatically, such that a moderator has to pass on them first, that solves the problem. Because a moderator looking at the bad flaming comments would automatically delete them instead of posting them. Rock would never see those comments and neither would anyone else. Problem solved and people can still anonymously post. If that is in fact the problem, and not as I've suggested, that Rock wants posting to be not anonymous so he can make judgements about who is posting. re: Bouldin, the ability to post anonymously should be kept because the importance of free speech is more important than some people's thin skin. It has nothing to do with honoring anybody, just understanding that people fought and died for free speech. Thank you sir. Your comments were timely and truly needed. I have raised this issue before, and it seems to me that many fail to get to the meat of it; especially the ones that say over and over and again "that I protest too much" ( a la Shakespeare).I am not afraid to give and/or take, in the natural exchange(s) during civil discourse; in fact, that's expected. But when (as I have seen you face on some blogs Ravi) there seems to be an organized and deliberate pattern to the personal attacks; with all the bitterness, lies, rancor,ridicule, innuendo and the like, I don't think that it is unreasonable to request that some sites(like this one) be made esoteric. I don't think it's unreasonable to request that we make Room 8 a serious site, only for those who are serious about political discourse. If some feel that this is snobbery, then let them.
I hear what Rock is saying, but I disagree. Free speech means just that, free. Doing away with anonymity would silence any number of people who have serious information to drop or juicey gossip from posting here because of their job and/or relationships. Come on Rock. Stop being thin skinned. You know damn well that you have been an active part of the rumor mill for years. That's how you get a fair amount of the stuff you get. Now when folks post some of the rumors out there that concern you, as false as they may be, you want to cry foul and take your marbles and go home. And you want to do it by wrapping your self in some sort of banner of etiquette and high minded discourse BS. Come on man, this is politics! The rough and tumble of it is not always pretty and can't be conducted like some sort of graduate seminar in politics. Rock, if you can't stand the heat, you're right, you should get out of the damned kitchen. Rock you be ashamed and upset only for your poor work in the Sharpe campaign. Eugene,the Clarke's and 1199 kick your ass. If you can't cut it in campaigns, you should get back to writing. To the commentor at 2:19 pm: my consistent position on this issue, predates the Sharpe campaign, so do refrain from absurd comments, since they just aid in shoring up my position/lol.
For the record: my involvement in the Sharpe campaign was limited(for personal reasons). Yes, I did support and endorse him; and yes, I did lend my name to the campaign; but truth be told, I attended the campaign meetings on a minimal basis, and was not involved in the day to day running/operations of the campaign. Not that I think it would have changed the outcome in any significant way, because I do believe that Sharpe started too late. He started in the middle of December; all the other candidates were months ahead of him. If he had started earlier, I am suspect that he would have done better - not that I am saying he was going to win. The endorsements of Una and Yvette Clarke
( plus that of the 1199 union) were quite formidable in this special election. Once Eugene snared these endorsements, Sharpe was way behind the eight-ball, and was trying to overcome some heavy artillery pounding. Sharpe also suffered from the curse of high expectations. He ran a credible third, but many expexted him to be first or second, since he had run before in this district, and had high name recognition in this race-when compared to the other candidates. Losing races is nothing to a veteran like me; remember that. I have proudly lost many many more races that I have been involved in, than won. It comes with the territory.
2:19, you are really ignorant and I must say not very bright at all. It is nice to spit out what you call the truth and hide only cowards do such a thing. At least let Rock and the posters know who you are if what you say is so true. As quiet as it is keeped everyone knows that if it was not for people like Major Owens and Rock Hackshaw and also several others Una and Yvette would be nobody. Remember it is people like Rock who have paved the way inspite of what you say. At least this guy does not sell out and has principles. His losing in races are not because he was not qualified but because he did not kiss ass and stands for what he believes. I have not been part of the discussion. But it seems to me that the people on this blog cannot take any critics. Some of the people on this blog are now acting more like a political thug by seeking to find out who is questing them, so they can silence them. Why are they always asking who is the messenger? So you can get even with her or him? Sounds more like politics. Journalism needs anonymous sources. How else would secrets about how we got into the Iraq war get out. How else would reporters expose corruption in government?Where are the blogers standing up for the right to protect a source? A few have, but more should understand how important anonymous sources are to get to the truth.
I have not been part of the discussion. But it seems to me that the people on this blog cannot take any critics. Some of the people on this blog are now acting more like a political thug by seeking to find out who is questing them, so they can silence them. Why are they always asking who is the messenger? So you can get even with her or him? Sounds more like politics. Journalism needs anonymous sources. How else would secrets about how we got into the Iraq war get out. How else would reporters expose corruption in government?Where are the blogers standing up for the right to protect a source? A few have, but more should understand how important anonymous sources are to get to the truth.
Anonymous sources are important it can lead to the truth, however when we do get to the truth a face is needed. You can not go into a courtroom and be accused of something by an anonymous source. How we got into the Iraq war is no secret. If you are a thinker and know the process you would have known it was coming 15 or 20 years ago. What is wrong with saying who you are if what you speak is truth. I respect Rock and anyone who has said what he has said and not only said his name but showed his face.
Rock said of Wellington Sharpe: "He ran a credible third, but many expexted him to be first or second" He got 681 votes, sorry but I don't think that is very credible in a city council race. You can find more people out on the average city block in the neighborhood than that. What was his $ to vote numbers? Must have been pretty high. Face it the turnout was poor in this election, the winner's numbers were low and the runners up numbers were anemic. Nobody was that credible here, as the numbers indicate very little interest in the election, and that indicates there were no compelling candidates. What is the latest with Dr. Eugene? Is he going to make public his lease? Who thinks Rock can beat Eugene in September?
Who said that Rock is running for something? Last time I checked, he said emphatically that he wasn't. With all this crazy stuff in the 40th and not a peep from Rock, I have only one question. Is Rock Dead?
Post new comment |
Hot Topics
Political Update
Gov WireGoogle AdsSearchRoom Eight Extras |
delicious
digg
Like Spike told Da Mayor- I got it. I hear you. I'm gone.
Guess I'll have to read closely for those anonymous post (like we ain't gon' know its you- lol) Damn, in a perfect world, you would have succeeded Maurice in the Council or Assembly. And Chris would be in Congress. World ain't perfect and neither are we.
Peace.
A Fan.