|
Question of the day
Tuesday, May 12, 2015 - Posted by Rich Miller * Things are getting a bit tense in comments these days, so in an attempt to make this environment more civil, I’m going to start banning more words. Words like “moron,” “idiot,” etc. are currently banned now. You might be able to see your posts, but nobody else can. I’ve too often allowed those words to slip through the net, but no longer. This morning, I banned “dope” and “stupid.” If you use those words, your comment will not post. There will be no exceptions. I’m tired of the vitriol. Repeat violators will be banned for life. * This is not a public space. This website belongs to me. No one has an inherent right to say anything that comes to their minds here. Go scream in a park, or on a street corner or wherever. Not here. You’re obviously free to disagree with me, the subject of a post, another commenter or whatever your heart desires. But the level of hostility is just getting out of hand. So keep it civil or you’re gone. I don’t sell ads based on the number of page views or impressions. Ad sales are based on the fact that most everybody at the Statehouse is on this blog and some of y’all are becoming an embarrassment to me and could wind up driving my target audience away. If you are among those commenters who are getting too hot-headed, just know that I don’t need you here, I don’t want you here and you are harmful to my business model. I will not hesitate to kick you to the curb. /rant * Look, I fully understand how people can get angry at times. I do, too, as is clear by the above rant. And I also understand how posts here (like that horrible idea to lay off all state employees) can get people truly fired up. But we can criticize and even ridicule without becoming personal and without resorting to nasty words. We all need to elevate ourselves, and I’ll try to do the same. * The Question: Your nominations for newly banned words in order to hopefully foster a more civil commenting environment?
|
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 10:58 am:
Its your rodeo, and it has always been first rate.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 10:59 am:
I want to publicy apologize for adding to the exacerbating.
I’m sorry.
Saying anything else diminishes that statement.
OW
- The Way I See It - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 10:59 am:
The phrase “job creators” Perhaps the most dishonest phrase on the planet.
Past that, suggestions that people take reading comprehension classes or learn to use “the google” are not too helpful.
Not to be a suck-up, but I absolutely love your instructions about commenting. Should be on every news publication.
- john - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 10:59 am:
Rich, I’ll go with ignorant. We can say things like, “read up on it” or “educate yourself.” We don’t need to call someone ignorant. It taints the conversational tone.
- A guy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:01 am:
Perhaps any mention of the Open Meetings Act?
- walker - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:03 am:
Fair, welcome, an well-justified.
My own fear is that there are so many purely partisan comments, without enough other solid content, that truly interested parties will not continue to follow.
- A guy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:03 am:
I inadvertently used one of the banned words yesterday. My sincere apologies. It did not lift the debate and I’m disappointed in myself for using it. The Liberty tree needed a shake.
- Peoria Guy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:04 am:
Hear, hear. Good policy on your part Rich. Civility is hard to manage on a message board, but without civility the good posters eventually leave and you are left with those that want and enjoy only street brawls.
- The messenger - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:04 am:
how about “Oswego Willy”….
Just a little humor
I also am sorry for stirring the pot.
- Soccermom - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:04 am:
Any neologism ending in “tard”
- ABC Lawyer - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:04 am:
Willy
On behalf of Raunerbots and trolls everywhere, I forgive you. Although you have called me a d$pe, pathetic and other demeaning names, it is I that owe you an apology for provoking such ire.
- Graduated College Student - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:04 am:
“tax eater”
- Casual Observer - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:04 am:
Can we put a hiatus on “Detroit” for a while. People have to constantly be reminded that it’s not relevant here.
- In the Middle - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:05 am:
Good move!
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:05 am:
People, either take this seriously or get the heck out. After that rant you wouldn’t think I’d have to delete any comments, but I’ve already deleted two. Bannings are gonna commence.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:06 am:
Make that three deletions and a banishment.
Anybody else wanna try me today?
Don’t.
- Johnny Pyle Driver - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:06 am:
the more words you ban, the harder it is to type! I don’t know that I’ve ever used any of these words in my short time here, but a comment on them. The first three are words to describe people pejoratively. No problem banning them. No need for em. The last one, though, could be used to describe all sorts of things. A person, an idea, an outcome. Lots of things can be dumb, not just people!!
- How Ironic - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:06 am:
…and in other news, Rich Miller of Capitol Fax has been credited with a 500% jump in thesaurus sales in Illinois. Word on the street is that some newly ‘banned’ words have severely limited blog posters ability to clearly and succinctly critique the Gov’s policies and proposed legislation.
- Rufus - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:07 am:
Absolutely agree with you Rich! We all can be civil and polite. One day, I feel, “empowered” may be added to that list.
- Jake From Elwood - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:07 am:
I have a hard time with folks using terms that offend and slight those with mental illnesses, i.e, “Psycho”, “psychotic”, “mental”. I think you have done a good job monitoring use of the R word.
- Facts are stubborn things - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:08 am:
I think the key is to avoid making comments personal —- agree or disagree but no need to attach the person saying it. I have friends that think and have said to me that the state can not afford out of control pensions. I start educating them and not attaching them. The truth never changes and facts are very stubborn things.
- FormerParatrooper - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:08 am:
One of the reasons I read this blog is that the comments are generally more civil than other blogs. Most places are troll havens and nothing productive is found. I have learned much about Illinois politics here.
I will endeavor to meet your standards.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:09 am:
6 deletions and 2 banishments.
This is actually working out pretty well. Self-weeding.
lol
- Kodachrome - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:10 am:
THANK YOU, RICH!
- Casual Observer - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:10 am:
Rich,
Let me say how much I appreciate how well you police this site. I can’t tell you how many times I didn’t click “say it” because I feared your wrath. Keep it up.
- A guy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:11 am:
For the record, I don’t think Willy is mean-spirited and only occasionally shows frustration. I’m kind of tired of “Bite Me”. That could go away.
I think the biggest winners of this policy will be the Governor, the Tribune and Ty Fahner to be honest.
I’d love to see the nickname ascribed to the LG go away. It qualifies as “not nice”.
- bored now - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:13 am:
“democrat” when used as an adjective. the proper word is “democratic.”
“rePUGlican.” i’m not sure that i’ve ever seen this one used here.
both are sly attempts to denigrate that political party and its adherents.
- Juan MacLean - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:16 am:
Turnaround
/humor
ALL CAPS
/serious
- illinifan - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:16 am:
Love this rule…I always believed sharing of ideas goes a lot further than sharing insults.
- Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:16 am:
Alright… I can be Minnesota nice… so when I write, “bless his heart” or he is a “very special person” everyone will get the point….
- AC - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:16 am:
To maintain consistency with principles of civility, I don’t think anyone should be told who should be bitten either.
- #5 - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:17 am:
Is there a banned word list posted somewhere?
- Former Merit Comp Slave - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:17 am:
I found a couple phrases very useful in my 30+ years in state government: “We can agree to disagree” and “I respectfully disagree and this is why……..”
- Capitol Fax Follower - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:17 am:
I thank you, and commend you, Rich, for your taking this stand against inappropriate language. You are unquestioningly helping make this blog a “Must-read” for all of us. We appreciate all of your time and efforts to make this blog what it is: absolutely top-notch.
- silly pants - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:17 am:
this is gonna be an up day
- Wensicia - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:18 am:
I don’t like the use of the word “troll’. I think it encourages, rather than discourages, this kind of behavior. It’s best to ignore these individuals.
- From the Stateline - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:19 am:
The “Where’s the Tylenol” rant from Christmas Vacation contains a pretty representative sample of words to consider banning.
- walker - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:19 am:
What? No four game suspension for over-inflated goofballs?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:20 am:
===I don’t think anyone should be told who should be bitten either===
I reserve that one for myself.
lol
- Mad Brown - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:21 am:
I love it here Rich, you are an amazing asset to the IL political realm. Thanks for keeping all in check. And while it’s true, and we ALLLL know this.. could ‘elections have consequences’ be retired?
- Sangamo Sam - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:21 am:
One of the things that has always impressed me here was the civility of the discussions. This makes this blog even better and it was already head and shoulders above anything else out there.
My nomination for a banned word is “psycho”.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:21 am:
===Is there a banned word list posted somewhere? ===
Nope. When in doubt, don’t write it.
- Levois - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:21 am:
Thanks Rich for making this a place for civil discourse. Unfortunately I have nothing to contribute to this post so I’ll just leave it here.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:21 am:
I don’t like the word “parasite” and would like to see it banned. I don’t see it often, but it is really nasty. This word has been used to refer to government employees and recipients of social safety net benefits. There is bad in every human group, but “parasite” is stereotypical and highly demeaning.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:22 am:
Parasite and psycho are pretty good nominations. Any objections before they go on the list?
- Chicago Hack - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:23 am:
I heartily endorse this event or product.
- Skeptic - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:23 am:
While not as inflammatory, “recall” and “Detroit” would make my list.
- the Other Anonymous - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:24 am:
This is not a word, but I’ve sometimes seen people speculating on a commenter’s profession or bias — calling people shills for a particular person or party, etc.
Truthfully, I know that happens. But I have in the past seen that Rich is pretty good at weeding it out and has the better tools for finding out who the trolls are. It might be better to leave accusations like that — accusations which, I might add, are sometimes just plain wrong — out of comments and rely on Rich and his IP detective skills.
- CharlieKratos - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:24 am:
If Parasite goes, should Leech?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:25 am:
Recall is difficult to ban because it has legit uses.
Detroit is occasionally on the list. But if we discuss Detroit, it has to be taken off.
- ah HA - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:25 am:
Rich
Agreed, this is your site and people should act as adults…
Hopefully, the posters will be more civil.
- Huh? - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:25 am:
What is nice about this blog, is that Mr. Miller is very willing and able to take control.
- Steve Reick - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:26 am:
I read the site several times a day but seldom comment, and I really think that given the site’s subject matter and diversity of your audience, the comments are relatively restrained. However, it is your site, and adherence to a code of conduct should be the least we can expect if we want to participate. I’m a member of Ricochet.com, and found that its code of conduct has been a great self-policing mechanism, and has certainly helped draw people to the site. I’m sure it will be so here.
- Publius - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:26 am:
Thank you for what you are doing Rich! It has been getting bad that I haven’t read the comments much recently because of the constant attacks and nastygrams
- sss - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:26 am:
Any Kaas phrase? Chumbalone?
- Wensicia - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:27 am:
If psycho is out, should we ban sociopath?
- 47th Ward - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:27 am:
Context matters. Let’s try to keep that in mind. I think Rich’s point is to exercise judgement. That requires more than a list of banned words or phrases, it means you shouldn’t intentional smear or label others you disagree with, regardless of which words you use.
- Nieva - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:28 am:
I have a limited vocabulary being from Southern Illinois. Now you have forced me to spell words that I have to google to see it they are safe to use. Thank God for my state pension that allows me to sit in my recliner drinking beer and watching NASCAR. I will only read comments from now on and can only hope that Willy and the other full time commenters on here will express what I am thinking from time to time.
- Shemp - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:28 am:
===walker My own fear is that there are so many purely partisan comments, without enough other solid content, that truly interested parties will not continue to follow. ====
I mostly agree, but I don’t know that the following falls off so much as solid content in the replies falls off (or gets lost) among the partisan and holier-than-thou comments from both sides.
- Summerwind - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:28 am:
Rich - the pension/budget debate is a story with truly national implications. It’s been heartening to see some specific and constructive ideas put forward by your readers. Given your target audience, wonder if there’s some merit to editing out “snark”, not just banned words. The, the blog might also serve - among other things - as a hub for policy ideas on important issues.
- Johnny Pyle Driver - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:28 am:
I gotta say, I applaud the intention, and like i said earlier, a lot of these words could easily be banned and never said again. But now we’re starting to add words that have various meanings, not all of them negative, in a number of different contexts. Why not just warn/ban offending people, and let the words be words?
- AC - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:28 am:
What about collateral damage? For example, I think funding should be restored to prevent the spread of parasites and blood borne pathogens? If the ban list gets too large, it could limit legitimate uses of words, rather than just those used pejoratively.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:29 am:
I have mixed feelings on dorm room
- Ghost - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:29 am:
Ban all adjectives with the letters a,e,i, o and u.
Been watching the John Adams series. Setting aside some minor inaccuracies, we have lost the art of the polite insult. Our forefathers we so much better at it
i blame social media…. Because otherwise i would have to look inward… And society tells me to look outward for responsibility 
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:29 am:
Rich 11:20 - As Dredd would say, I knew you’d say that.
- General Aubrey - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:30 am:
“Goober” has some negative connotations these days….though when I learned it yesterday I had a hard time not using it in conversation…..
- Cabildero - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:30 am:
Chiraq?
- Bored Chairman - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:30 am:
My vote is to add the following to the banned word list:
Goof. Goofball. Blather. Stupid. Idiot. Idiotic. Bot. Fool. Tool. Pawn. Useless. Liar. Prevaricator. Hater. Hope this doesn’t get me banned.
- Stones - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:33 am:
How about obvious derivatives of names designed to demean another poster? I’ve personally always found these to be amateurish and offensive.
- Ghost - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:34 am:
So no more cathartic releases into the privy of comments….
- Soccermom - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:35 am:
If we ban snark, I’m starting my own blog.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:35 am:
===Why not just warn/ban offending people, and let the words be words? ===
Because I have a main gig, too, so I can’t monitor this site 24/7.
- Casual Observer - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:35 am:
I typically ignore comments that include the phrase “Democrats (or MJM) got us into this mess”.
- Concerned - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:37 am:
Rich,
As a frequent reader of Capitol Fax who makes occasional posts here, I appreciate your goal of having intelligent and civil discussions/debates here.
While I don’t have any words to suggest for the banned list, I do hope intelligent sarcasm doesn’t get banned (I’m looking at MrJM). I enjoy that even though I don’t attempt that approach.
Thank you for what you do here.
- nobiggie - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:37 am:
I know that no civil discussion can happen in the comments section, and therefore I suggest that more articles be closed to comments.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:37 am:
“corrupt” without supporting evidence.
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:38 am:
Egads, did my request for an IPI exception get zapped? Yikes.
- Ducky LaMoore - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:38 am:
@Bored Chairman
No way the word ‘blather’ should be banned! It has it’s uses to describe some pretty typical politician banter.
- New Kid on the Block - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:38 am:
Great move! You can have civil discourse without being insulting.
- AC - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:38 am:
Soccermom - If this site bans snark, I’ll be more depressed and less informed about Illinois politics. Plus I’ll have to increase the amount I spend on Goose Island.
- Capitol View - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:41 am:
May is the season for high blood pressure and spouts of anger… Rich, you may be asking a lot of spectators and commentators viewing what passes as governing in Illinois State Government.
- Earnest - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:42 am:
I don’t have specific words, but would discourage comments referring to someone’s intelligence or mental health. This comes from my perspective as someone who has known (and is related to) a great many people with cognitive disabilities. I would not want any of the people I know to feel that either they or their opinions are not welcome and valued.
http://www.dhs.state.il.us/page.aspx?item=32276
- walker - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:42 am:
47th has it.
No need to have an extensive list provided we avoid “gratuitous insults” (see Rich’s rules below), and ad hominem attacks, including to fellow commenters. It’s the fact or idea that may be in question, not the person.
- Anonin' - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:43 am:
Wow that was a huge waste of about 5 minutes we can never get back….as long as mope and whack job are o.k. we have not been deprived of 1st amendment right…maybe our 2A rights too.
How about a review of Bruce the Buyer and what shoe drops next?
- Johnny Pyle Driver - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:43 am:
====Because I have a main gig, too, so I can’t monitor this site 24/7.====
Ah, it’s an automatic type of deal. gotcha
- Ghost - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:43 am:
Do you mean ban the word snark; or ban snarky comments…. Afterall you could come up with a new word for snark… Such as using the phrase this is illinois…. Since we dont have blood diamonds all we have her to mine and sell is snark after all….
- Enviro - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:45 am:
Name calling should be banned.
Thanks for keeping our blog posts appropriate for family viewing.
- Honeybear - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:47 am:
I’m frankly having mixed feelings about this. On the one hand I feel it’s super important for people to have a safe place to engage in unbelievably important political dialogue. On the other hand I really want people like Diana Sroka Rickert to be exposed to myriad forms of shaming phrases and words. I mean really want it. I fear poor OW will be banished and I look forward to his comments every day. Sure, he can be cruel but wisdom and truth can be that way.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:49 am:
===If this site bans snark===
I love snark.
There will never be a ban on snark.
However, some of y’all need to realize you’re not that good at it or that others don’t get it, so you may need to label your comments accordingly.
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:49 am:
Honeybear, because of her I half-jokingly asked for an IPI exception and got zapped.
- The Colossus of Roads - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:49 am:
I couldn’t agree more. Keep up the good work.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:49 am:
=== I fear poor OW will be banished ===
OW ain’t going anywhere.
- Long Time Listener - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:51 am:
I would suggest banning derogatory nicknames for elected officials, both current and past. Whether you support them or oppose them, agree with them or disagree with them, they are elected an should be accorded some measure of respect. Personally, I believe it elevates the merits of your argument if you don’t call them nicknames.
- A guy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:52 am:
OW has diplomatic immunity. No one apologizes quicker than he does for running afoul of the blog. Besides, he’s here by court order.
- Juvenal - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:52 am:
“parasite” is a fine word, when used properly, and nearly any framing of a political debate that takes us out of our standard political frame of reference and places us into an ecological one should be fine.
For example, if someone accuses unions of being parasites, I’d simply retort I’d rather give a blood donation to a mosquito than a hyena.
We ought to just drop all of the personal attacks, period. Attack the argument, not the arguer.
- Ghost - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:57 am:
Rich you could add a snark flag to posts….. Something pretty with a red background…..
- Soccermom - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 11:59 am:
Norseman, i agree wholeheartedly.
- Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:03 pm:
“Billionaire” when used as an adjective.
- YNM - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:03 pm:
Sorry … I wasn’t trying to be difficult or inappropriate. Was honestly trying to bring a little humor (obviously unsuccessfully).
On a serious note … I agree with banning things such as parasite (I might add “leach”) and psycho (or other similar words that make light of mental health issues and are meant in a derogatory way).
- MotherJones - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:04 pm:
Where does “Baron Von Carhartt” fall in this discussion? Because i love that moniker.
- Minnow - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:05 pm:
I was deleted for an ignorant retort to a drive by poster while back. I am way too old not to have known better. Thanks Rich
I agree with soccermom. Snark can sometimes add humor to situations. I would miss it.
- Wensicia - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:07 pm:
I think nicknames and descriptives are ok if they’re are not vulgar or inappropriate. They’re often used as snark.
- OneMan - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:08 pm:
I would suggest
Raunerbot
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:10 pm:
===OW ain’t going anywhere.===
Sam/Frank. Explains it all.
- Wensicia - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:11 pm:
Oops, “they’re not”. I’m glad we’re not deleted for poor grammar.
- Vote Quimby! - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:11 pm:
==If we ban snark, I’m starting my own blog.==
I’d follow soccermom anywhere.
To the post, I’m glad you stepped in Rich but sorry you had to do so. For me, this is the last bastion of intelligent, civil discourse….I haven’t lived in IL for over four years and still can’t stay away. I hope it remains
- Anonymous - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:13 pm:
Parents basement is thoughtless
- OneMan - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:14 pm:
Also some sort of switch that could be flipped (perhaps by some of us who have been around a long time
) that would require someone to watch an Oscar video before posting a comment.
- Empty Suit - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:14 pm:
Here’s two;
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C_Kh7nLplWo
- JoanP - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:15 pm:
Good for you!
When I first started coming to this blog, I was impressed by how generally civil it was. But I have noticed a tendency lately for things to get heated.
It’s possible to disagree with someone - even vehemently - without personal attacks.
So thanks for this.
- Precinct Captain - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:15 pm:
Thug.
- Chris - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:18 pm:
jeebus, at this point, Rich would need as many interns as Rutherford to patrol all the suggested words/phrases and assess the nuance of each.
I do, however, support the banning of all constructs of ‘-tard’, and would note that Rich seems to have a *very* good handle on those who are actually trolling, so there is less need to call it out than in many other forums, thus think that ‘troll’ has very circumscribed effect here.
- Earl of Sandwich - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:19 pm:
Ban “Slip ‘n’ Sue.”
- Earl of Sandwich - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:23 pm:
It’s getting heated because people are concerned about the way things are going. It’s not hippity hop to the barbershop anymore, if it ever was.
- Gooner - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:32 pm:
Thanks for posting this.
I’m one of the people who was driven away by some of the personal stuff (rarely directed at me, but I just didn’t want to read through it).
My suggestion would be “Democrat Party.” It is one of those cable news phrases intended as an insult but that really just reflects on the lack of creativity of the writer.
And not to digress but as others have alluded to, when you ban certain words, you really do force people to be more interesting and creative. There are ways to make a point without calling people any of words in question.
- Bill White - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:32 pm:
A preview function would allow for thoughtful reconsideration and better spelling.
- Calling u out - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:33 pm:
I love it… Headline reads….
Rich Miller’s Capitol Fax teaching ppl how to be kinder more gentler human beings!
- Kerfuffle - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:35 pm:
I love you guys. This is going to make me smile for a couple of hours!
- Anonymous - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:36 pm:
Attacking people who otherwise agree with you but don’t believe in man made global warming.
- Gooner - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:37 pm:
By the way, as bad as it has been, it still is far better than when conceal carry was pending.
That brought in a whole bunch of angry new people and it also brought out the worst in a lot of people.
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:39 pm:
I’ll suggest RECALL. Recall is not a realistic action in Illinois. In addition, recall should only be used for Blago-like corruption. Many people who are unhappy with someone will through out this useless term rather than offering serious discussion.
- AC - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:49 pm:
It saddens me that comments here need to be actively policed, and that without it would devolve into what you see in the comments section of nearly every major newspaper. While it keeps me coming back, it doesn’t necessarily increase my faith in humanity. Considering the unique insights that Rich offers, along with commenters here, and you realize how this is truly a one of a kind place.
- Formerpol - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:49 pm:
Good idea. The internet and Twitter and newspaper comment sections depress me by illustrating how ignorant and mean-spirited are too many people. Don’t ban certain words no matter what the context (I just used the word ‘ignorant’ as a valid adjective). But some words - like ‘troll’ and ‘goofball’ and anything Nazi-related - have no redeeming uses whatever.
- The Muse - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:50 pm:
Can you ban any word using the last four letters “t-a-r-d” as a means of demeaning someone’s mental faculties? It contributes nothing to any kind of dialogue and is never, ever, funny.
- Arizona Bob - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:51 pm:
A move long overdue. Kudos, Rich.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:54 pm:
Can you hold off on the “Psycho” ban a little longer? The new “Psycho Governor” Talkingheads mash-up enhancement I’m working on doesn’t work if I can’t have everyone yelling out “Psycho Governor, Qu’est-ce que c’est
Fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-fa-far better!”
- cdog - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:55 pm:
I think the policing of comments is what keeps this site both informative and entertaining. Without Rich’s structure, and dedication to preserving it, the comment environment would degrade very quickly and this site would lose the impact and influence he has nurtured. Job well done and cudos for exercising your editorial privilege.
(I have been edited and it surely put me on pause to think! Sometimes my metaphors and humor are a little too direct and they don’t make it to prime time.)
To contribute to the discussion of what should be edited and banned, I would like to see a zero tolerance for bullying language. It’s just un-American to attack the person with hate-filled words. A few months ago I was severely and personally attacked by a regular. It was so virulent that I was thankful I had chosen to use a nickname. And, the whole thing was brought on by just thinking differently about an issue.
Thank you, and thanks for the great info and the great snark!
- titan - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:55 pm:
I love the snark, and the spirited debate.
I hate the personal attacks.
Congrats on the new policy.
- RNUG - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 12:59 pm:
== It saddens me that comments here need to be actively policed ==
Unfortunately, that is a fact of life on any open blog or message board. I admin a message posting site that used to be open and ended up with a “banned words” list longer than my arm. Even with that, it still took a lot of my time. Finally had to made it a “closed” site in the sense you had to be logged in first before you could comment. So I completely understand where Rich is coming from.
I know I’ve inadvertently had a post caught by Rich’s filters now and then. When that has happened, I’ve just shrugged my shoulders and re-phrased it. Like most of us long-timers here, I try to avoid that but occasionally one slips through.
BTW: I always have a thesaurus on my desk; don’t always use it but it is there.
Rich, one additional “banned” suggestion that I haven’t seen made yet - dupe.
- L.A. - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:01 pm:
Longtime listener, first time caller.
Sorry that you had to go this route, Rich, but it was getting a little heated around here. I love OW’s posts, but the word “d*#e was starting to get old. Otherwise, OW, keep up the good work!
And, please tell me that “Raunerbot” is not banned……
- George - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:04 pm:
Optics–way overused here
- Anon - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:05 pm:
a good portion of the users on reddit have started using an /s tag on comments meant to be sarcastic in nature. may be a good thing to try out here.
- BlameBruceRauner - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:10 pm:
Well, I been policed many times and I apologize for those whom may have seen my inappropriate posts.
Im for banning any mention of the IPI.
- PrairieLogic - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:18 pm:
I have not posted here before, Rich, but I do applaud your good-faith efforts to encourage intelligent dialogue. To that end, I offer a few catchphrases to employ when your sense of civility is tested: . . “Why, (Name of Offender), that is very thought-provoking. Wink.” Or . . “You make quite a point. I’m sure you must have thought about it for quite awhile.” Or simply, “Well, (Name), you certainly have given us something to think about.”
- Old Shepherd - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:18 pm:
I suggest that invoking Godwin’s Law should be banned. There is no one in Illinois government or politics that should even be mentioned in the same sphere as Hitler. Doing so only makes the person making the comment look foolish, and trivializes the atrocities of Hitler and Nazi Germany.
- Confused - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:18 pm:
Wingnut.
- zonz - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:27 pm:
Ban the word “Anonymous”
It’s frustrating/difficult when multiple posters use same handle.
- Mildly Amused - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:33 pm:
I never read the comments on other sites, but I often do here. That is a great credit to Rich and his readers. One quibble with the suggestions: While “psycho” as a standalone word is a good candidate, I do hope that won’t ban discussion on psychological services, psychotropic drugs, etc. I’m not sure how often those come up here, but they are relevant to state government.
- MrJM - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:37 pm:
(It may already be banned, but) the word “Obama” and its derivations are almost never employed on this site in a manner that is relevant or constructive.
– MrJM
- Demoralized - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:39 pm:
Raunervich
- mcb - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:45 pm:
I disagree with banning of parasite, too many legitimate and descriptive uses.
Like: Part of the problem facing Chicago schools is the parastic effect that surrounding communities have on the available resources, such as property taxes.
Or: This proposal would be a parasite because it would simply pull funding from the programs it aims to help.
Just two made up out-of-context examples.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:46 pm:
mcb, I think you just made the case for banning the word.
lol
- Under Further Review - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:50 pm:
Are we still free to criticize elected officials as opposed to calling other commenters names?
Public figures can be treated differently under the rules concerning defamation according to the SCOTUS. Private citizens have more rights. Politicians chose to be in public life, so criticism goes with the territory.
- Robert the Bruce - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 1:56 pm:
Thank you, Rich. I continue to enjoy your blog, posting occasionally, and the personal attacks recently have been tiresome.
I too vote “psycho” and anything with “tard” and “parasite” be added to the list.
I’d vote against things like “Detroit” and “corrupt” and “recall” being added to the banned list.
I see a big difference between arguments that are easily defeated/ignored and name calling.
- Skeptic - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:00 pm:
“low-information voter” isn’t ban-worthy, but it certainly needs to be discouraged.
- Nick - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:05 pm:
Rich, I second the nomination for “Democrat Party”. If people don’t know the proper name of one of the two major parties, they have no business posting on here.
- Stones - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:06 pm:
I somewhat disagree with the word “corrupt” depending on the context used. If someone hasn’t been convicted then then I agree the word is inappropriate. If we are talking about our two previous Governors who were convicted and did time then I think it’s totally appropriate.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:09 pm:
I nominate “bureaucrat” and “bureaucracy”. It is almost always used as a pejorative against hard workin’ people by people in the same role but do not realize the fact.
- Slippin' Jimmy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:09 pm:
I cannot think of many reasons to ban free speech but since you are not the government and this is your playground, I will abide by your rules or play elsewhere.(no enmity intended, whatsoever)
- The Historian - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:13 pm:
To everyone, but RNUG in particular:
Doing what I do, one of the most useful sites on the web is www.thesaurus.com
- Judgment Day (on the road) - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:13 pm:
Have a tendency to use ’st*pid’ in regards to laws/potential legislation - guess I’ll have to change to “poorly though out”; “extremely poorly thought out”; “EXTREMELY poorly thought out”, etc.
Oh, well. I’ll make it work…
Can I still use “Technophobe” when referencing legislators?
- Bogey Golfer - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:16 pm:
Thank you. When used sparingly, like tabasco sauce, snark can be funny. When used like ketchup, it’s overdone.
- Judgment Day (on the road) - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:16 pm:
“bureaucracy” is also a process. Kind of tough to ban a ‘process’.
Just a thought….
- Big Mike - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:21 pm:
Nicely stated, good sir!
- Big Mike - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:22 pm:
What about “Cubs”?
- anon - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:25 pm:
Not surprising that this comes up right after the pension decision. An unprecedented amount of name-calling and rhetoric has surrounded the issue all along. The “fire all the workers” yesterday just being one example. Personally, I would like to ban the use of the phrase “pension reform.” And any reference to lobby groups funded by wealthy donors as “watchdog” organizations. I find the manipulative use of those misleading titles far more pernicious than calling someone a moron or a dope.
- Biker - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:27 pm:
Let’s make like Florida and ban the words “Climate Change” / snark
- Political Animal - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:33 pm:
I’ve often seen comments removed for disagreeing with opinions and posting facts/supporting links. I understand it’s a private space but I wish there was some way to guess what would be acceptable.
Can I just assume that supporting Rauner or IPI policies means a comment won’t make the cut?
- Excesseively Rabid - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:35 pm:
I don’t spend the kind of time on here that you pros do, but it’s a great source of information and I enjoy it. The atmosphere has been getting overheated, polarized and nasty lately in a way not even seen at the depths of the he-who-shall-not-be-named debacle. And the usefulness of reading the comments has gone down as a result. Maybe that’s a reflection of the (your banned words here) environment we have in state politics at the moment, but time to settle it down. When snark is outlawed, we’ll learn to use boojims.
- LaughingJane - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:39 pm:
And Rich, just to clarify, you’re not going to make us all hold hands and sing Kumbaya at the end of the day, correct?
- MrJM - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:43 pm:
If true, you consult an optometrist or a psychiatrist.
– MrJM
- anon - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:50 pm:
To the extent some of this is coming from public sector workers/retirees, there has been a huge period of stress and anxiety waiting for the court to rule. We need to release some of that tension by lashing back at those who so persistently have attacked us. Chalk it up to post traumatic stress and hope that it too will soon pass.
- Anon221 - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 2:52 pm:
Excessively Rabid- did you mean “boojum” instead?
The Hunting of the Snark by Lewis Carroll-
last line
For the Snark *was* a Boojum, you see.
http://literature.org/authors/carroll-lewis/the-hunting-of-the-snark/chapter-08.html
- That Guy - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:25 pm:
“another victim heard from” The phrase is dismissive, arrogant and lazy and is a poor substitute for actual discourse. It’s intent is to provoke instead of enlighten.
- ChiTownSeven - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:26 pm:
Rich - I’m glad you’re banning the name calling. It doesn’t add to the debate. Anyhow, here are the top three words that you should ban if you want to increase civility on your blog:
1. Rauner
2. Trial lawyers
3. Illinois State Medical Insurance
- Soccermom - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:28 pm:
I yield to no one in my, um, pronounced distaste for the IPI. But if you want to insult Diana Sroka Rickert, feel free to send her an email — you know, with your name in the “from” line.
- walker - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:30 pm:
Political Animal: Please keep reading and commenting. Many comments supporting Rauner and IPI positions have been seen here. I have written some of them. It’s not about the subject, but the tone of the message. This is about what Rich has outlined in red below.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:33 pm:
===“another victim heard from” The phrase is dismissive, arrogant and lazy and is a poor substitute for actual discourse===
It stays. The truth is there are people who actively seek to be “victimized.” It’s tiresome.
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:33 pm:
“Self-weeding.”
Whenever I try this I just wind up overeating and watching cartoons.
I think a good thing to do is what Rich has been recommending all along: Take a deep breath. Stop and think about what we’re about to say. Maybe then we can find appropriate ways to express negative thoughts in snarky and creative ways. We can try to channel our very strong negative emotions into creative and acceptable expression.
- Michelle Flaherty - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:34 pm:
“Oscar the Puppy”
- walker - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:38 pm:
Rule of Thumb: If you’re not MrJM, Michelle Flaherty, or Wordslinger — masters all — please label your irony.
I was funny here once. /s
- zonz - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 3:40 pm:
Please please can I continue to poke fun at the Godhead for the BRU-CREW?
…………………..
MAY 12, 2015, 3:46 PM EDT
Brownback Has “Lots of Ideas” But No Specifics On Closing Budget Gap http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/sam-brownback-budget-gap-nope
- downstate commissioner - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 4:21 pm:
Well, I see I got deleted, which didn’t surprise me; but Rich read it, and the message really was to him anyway…
- steve schnorf - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 4:47 pm:
political animal, no unless you are blank
- persecuted - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 6:26 pm:
I would like to change my nickname to “keg’s kid” in honor of my father who was a WW2 conscientious objector because of religious reasons but, nevertheless, became a purple heart recipient.
I do not have a single word to add to your banned list, but would like to encourage objectivity.
- Streator Curmudgeon - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 6:41 pm:
While I like Baron Von Carhartt and King Bruce, I find the words “Brucie” or “Brucey” demeaning.
- Gooner - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 6:58 pm:
Based on this thread, can we can an updated list?
- Bemused - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 7:00 pm:
I’m sorry but being a fan of George Carlin all this is enough to at least raise my eyebrows. Having said that and being one who has more than once been deleted without comment, Rich does keep this thing within bounds. Even though there are more than a few commenters who have no more business posting than I do, I learn a lot by reading.
- Gooner - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 7:00 pm:
Also, can Amalia, Walker and I get an exception for use of those words if we hijack any threads to discuss the Premier League? I don’t know if I’m capable of discussing Tottenham without use of those terms.
- bird - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 7:05 pm:
I don’t ever say much negative on comments but the “ing” thing does get on my nerves. I think any person who went to college and graduated should atleast have learned to speak proper english. Someone needs to have a talk with the Gov. It’s embarrassing.
- Catrike - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 7:48 pm:
Chicago’s debt was downgraded to junk status today. Better not ban the “D” word. We may be needing it.
- Wordslinger - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 7:59 pm:
Catrike, you confuse the fiscal mismanagement of government with overall economic decline.
Orange County, CA, one of the wealthiest areas in the country, went bankrupt.
Does Newport Beach remind you of Detroit? Disneyland, maybe?
- downstate commissioner - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 9:08 pm:
Bemused, I was deleted earlier on this very thread, but I don’t think that Rich deleted me because I said: “I don’t like censorship.” But like you, I learn a lot from this blog; if I felt he is completely wrong in deleting me, I can either not read it or read it and keep my mouth shut…
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 9:30 pm:
The recent support for Detroit being kept makes me want to plead for it’s banning. It’s a crutch for people who can’t think their way through the state/city finance issues.
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 9:46 pm:
The Raunerbot - Tuesday, May 12, 15 @ 9:09 pm post is loaded with things to ban.
- Challengerrt - Wednesday, May 13, 15 @ 7:55 am:
are you banning nut or nuts too?
- ChelseaBlue - Wednesday, May 13, 15 @ 11:18 am:
Gooner - I was thinking the same thing about Arsenal…. We’ll be fine as long as he doesn’t ban “boring”.