The latest in banning

All in fun Larry. Although I do think you focus too much on the O. You were a kick down at the broho and it really didn't come up. You seem to have this drive on Olyblog about it though. More power to ya, but (no offense) you come off as a whackjob with a vendetta. It's ok Wilford, you can be cool and let go of the O, for real. =D

Ooops....I forgot to copy and paste....

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 4:44pm.

"This IP has been banned from The Olympian Online comments"

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

Oh no!

Submitted by DC on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 5:27pm.

Thats something impossible to get around...

Two Words Larry...

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Wed, 10/10/2007 - 9:34pm.

PROXIE SITES

Use one! LOL! There's also programs you can purchase that will allow you to post even if you're banned! I'll gladly PM you the name of the one I'm using! LOL!

I don't understand why you can't even see the comments on the thread just because you're banned. I can see them and I'm banned! Until I log on using the program I can PM you the name of! hehehe!

JstPlnOnry

"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown

My honesty wouldn't allow me

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Thu, 10/11/2007 - 6:32am.

Proxie sites would violate my code of honesty. Let The Olympian keep the word of the people from me, I say.

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

oh settle down larry

Submitted by Rob Richards on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 5:19pm.

just a little sarcasm for you.

I am able to read comments

Submitted by Guglielmo on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 7:03pm.

(and post them)even though I am one of the previously banned. Perhaps you should have been more graceful when the ban was lifted. I think you shot yourself in the foot dude.

Rob...did you miss

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 7:16pm.

My tongue in my cheek?

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

Gug...

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Mon, 10/08/2007 - 7:22pm.

LOL....now THAT is funny! Thanks for making my day!

Just the point that you have shared that tells me that my critiques have been aptly placed. I find it absolutely hilarious that The Olympian would be so moved by my criticism that it would isolate me in terms of reading the comments of other readers. THAT is power of the press, or the blog as the case may be. LMAO

Interestingly enough, a certain public official told me today that he is telling The Olympian nothing other than what he absolutely has to, or is public record. It appears that both sides can refrain from allowing information. Nothing worse for a newspaper than losing communication with public officials.

Actually, I thought I was doing the honest thing by using my own name at no bogus email. My blog on Olyblog gave possible credit to The Olympian for possibly lifting "bans" in general. Probably you are correct, in my attempt to be honest and straightforward, I "shot myself in the foot".

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

AL - You Seen This???

Submitted by JstPlnOnry on Fri, 10/12/2007 - 5:35am.

Question To Vickie Kilgore

"Do not mistake for conspiracy and intrigue what can best be explained by stupidity and incompetence." - Unknown

My comment on the Olympian's comment forums

Submitted by Rick on Fri, 10/12/2007 - 8:38am.

William is absolutely right: the Olympian should play much more active role in moderating the comments, helping people to stay focused on the ideas, and making everyone feel welcome.

Mike expresses a common misconception about the meaning of free speech. He implies that it would be an infringement on his rights if the Olympian were to be more active in moderating the comments. In fact, the intent of free speech is to insure that everyone has the right to exercise uncensored expression. Thus, Mike has the right to start his own newspaper (blog, pamphlet, etc.), in which he can say what he likes. However, he has no right to demand, for example, that the Olympian print his speech on the front page of its newspaper. This would not constitute censorship by the Olympian, just editorial judgment. Likewise, Mike has no right to say anything he wants on the Olympian's comment forums. This is not censorship -- he can still say anything he wants on his own blog -- it is the Olympian exercising journalistic judgment about what's appropriate for such a forum.

Thus, the issue at stake is not free speech, rather it's an issue of building an inclusive community forum that helps people engage each other in respectful ways. The Olympian creates this forum for the community, and it is perfectly within the Olympian's rights to make rules about how the forum is used. I think the Olympian should give more thought to using guidelines to increase the participation, thus ultimately increasing the amount of diversity and speech in this forum.

When you think of the long and gloomy history of man, you will find more hideous crimes have been committed in the name of obedience than have ever been committed in the name of rebellion. -C.P. Snow

Rick, I couldn't agree more...

Submitted by Anonymously Larry on Fri, 10/12/2007 - 9:49am.

...with exception (now what fun would it be if we agreed 100%?)

Whereas The Olympian owns their product and allegedly controls what is said, published and how it is said, published, they would be wise to not get involved in the interaction between the readers, providing that no real rules are broken.

I mentioned about my experience in allowing a minister in Elma to publish an unedited commentary about the occult influence of our horoscope feature. His content was frivolous at best and nothing more than opinion based on belief, but by not censoring him and allowing him his "day in court", we avoiding an ugly boycott of our advertisers in a small town that didn't need additional economic impact.

Whether The Olympia wants it or not, they have a tradition, thus a responsibility, of being a conduit for reader exchange. It is a tradition as old as newspapering in general. To strike out against any member of the community in terms of providing editorial and commentary service because of a presumed resentment, would be the equivilant of the Sheriff's office telling them that they no longer qualify for complete law enforcement service because they published a negative editorial about officers. How about the Prosecutor's office denying service because they were upset with the criticism of their job.

You are spot on about "freedom of speech" and yet I think you only made it part way on the "responsibility to the community" in terms of exchange of ideas. The great part about this, though, is that blogs are developed when other media drops the ball on community commentary.

http://thurstonblog.blogspot.com/

OlyBlog.net

OlyBlog is devoted to citizen journalism, including hyperlocal news and discussion specifically about Olympia, Washington. If you care about this community and are tired of corporate media, then this is the place for you.

If you'd like to contribute, please register for an account. Here is a list of local news beats that need to be covered. You can post your news as a personal blog entry, and it will be reviewed (and possibly edited) for promotion to the front page. Once you've established a record of responsible blogging, you can become an autonomous user. You can also send news via email. All members of OlyBlog agree to abide by our comment and fair use policies. If you are frustrated about something said in a comment thread, go here.

Now playing at: