All My Heroes Are Dead

And I'm not feeling so well myself...

ACTUALLY:  I feel great!  I am always refreshed to recall the classic Bush-Dukakis debate of 1988.  That was most famous for the Duke's answer on capital punishment in the scenario where someone had raped and killed his wife; the Duke promised to smother the offender in oatmeal and social science statistics.  But a less well remembered clunker was his answer to "Name your heroes".  Just the intro:

COMPTON: Governor, today they may call them role models, but they used to be called heroes, the kind of public figure who could inspire a whole generation, someone who was larger than life. My question is not, who your heroes were. My question instead is, who are the heroes who are there in American life today? Who are the ones who you would point out to young Americans as figures who should inspire this country?

DUKAKIS: Well, I think when I think of heroes, I think back, not presently, Ann.

Which I paraphrase in my memory.

Comments

[bunky]

and that a-hole was up like 19 points in August '88. Frightening.

[Captain Hate]

No wonder Kitty drank so much.

[peter]

My hero will be the JOMer who teaches me how to narcisolate

[Janet]

Peter,
Here are the 2 links I have bookmarked.

The Narcisolator

Killfile

I have not installed them, so I'm no help other than the links.

[peter]

new Jack Cashin piece at lun

[narciso]

In many ways Obama is really the second coming of Dukakis, right down to the craving
for Arugula. I remember how the first President Bush answered Anthony Fauci, the head of the CDC, and Armando Valladares as
persons worthy of note.

[Pagar]

I have installed the Narcisolator, but it was long ago. There was a tricky party as I recall, where one had to use the symbols [ ]
instead of ( )
But Janet's link has bgates name as the poster so we can be sure the expert is here
somewhere.

Peter, Thanks for that LUN

[Thomas Collins]

For a modern departed hero, I'll pick Norman Borlaug, who did more to improve the lives of folks all over the world than every do gooder who has ever existed in the 20th and 21st Centuries.

For a collective hero, which includes individuals who have departed and those who are still here, I'll pick the US Military, which should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize every year if the prize were really awarded to those most responsible for keeping the peace.

[Cecil Turner]

I'm curious as to the title reference. Is it the sappy one by Dar Williams, the depressing one by Nikki Sixx (my bet), the rather good one by Shinedown or one of the several others (some of which are truly execrable)?

[bgates]

If you have Greasemonkey and the Narcisolator installed, you can edit the latter by right-clicking the Greasemonkey icon and selecting "Manage User Scripts". About 20 lines into the script you should see the line

var knownTrolls = new Array();

and you just add the names you don't want to see after that, like so:

knownTrolls[0] = 'bunkerbuster';

knownTrolls[1] = 'Al Asad';

When you're done, save the file and reload the page. Let me know if you have any problems.

[Extraneus]

Installing the narcisolator

(This works in Firefox. Dave (in MA) said it also works in Chrome, but I'm not sure if the installation is the same. Below is for Firefox.)

First, install GreaseMonkey. This will allow the running of various "scripts," which enhance the browswer in some way.

Next, install the famous bgates narcisolator script.

Once GreaseMonkey is running and the narcisolator script is installed, go to Tools...GreaseMonkey...Manage User Scripts. Here you should see the narcisolator listed in the box on the left. Highlight that and click the Edit button.

Right after the line

var knownTrolls = new Array();

you can enter any posters you want to filter out by adding lines like the following:

knownTrolls.push("Pest123");

knownTrolls.push("Idiot9");

knownTrolls.push("Moron32");

etc. That's it.

By default, the narcisolator script also hides the avatars, allowing more room per post. If you want the avatars, there's a section at the end of the script with directions for how to get them back.

[centralcal]

Congrats, Jane, you got a nice link from TM!!!

Guess I need more coffee this morning as I posted the following on the wrong thread, apparently:

With all due respect, the narcisolator script only solves HALF the problem.

So, sick puppies and trolls become invisible? Okay. But then there is the comment stream from the few who remain on the thread, responding to the sick puppy and the trolls. Now, by that, I don't mean a "get lost idiot" comment, but rather an engagement in "debate."

Sick puppy is actually worse than the trolls we get from time to time. Sick puppy parks here, waiting for his bowl to be filled - all day, every day, every thread. Narcisolator can't overcome the bowl fillers.

[sbw]

CC, I couldn't have said it better. I love being part of a community where people add to the conversation instead of subtract.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

Now if people will follow it and add their predictions. I've got a lot more to make once my brain clears.

[Old Lurker]

I have reported here several times about my very unpleasant sister (whom I tried to pawn off on Iggy's brother) who can enter a room, pick a target, then start a fight that empties the room within five minutes. Without fail. Every time.

Sick Puppy is the blog equivalent of my sister.

[Mark Folkestad]

I refuse to dabble in Firefox and Chrome. Further, Centralcal has put her finger on the problem with the Narcisolator. I hate hearing one side of a conversation, even if that conversation is a continual monomaniacal rant and the frustrated response to it. I have a cousin who is similar to the "sick puppy". We can be discussing the merits of different brands of corn flakes and he will find a way to twist it into a rant against Israel and or Jews. Like Wauck, he will pause from time to time and admit that he hates Muslims as much as Jews. Not surprisingly, this cousin feels increasingly isolated from his philosemitic family, and he desperately craves attention and affection.

[Extraneus]

True, it's not a perfect solution -- for the reasons cc points out as well as a certain pest's insistence on changing names to defeat it -- but once you get used to the narcisolator and then disable it for a single minute, all you can feel is sympathy for those who have to wade through here without it.

[centralcal]

...all you can feel is sympathy for those who have to wade through here without it.

But, why, Extraneus, should the great MAJORITY of us have to wade through here at all? Is sick puppy so powerful, or are some of us so weak that the only recourses are to block half of the conversations or leave? More and more of us have been leaving for extended periods. What a damned shame!

We cannot modify the behavior of one who is "sick," but the rest of us are not sick, so shouldn't we instead modify our behavior and stop enabling the one who is?

I know, I am ranting, but I have held back too long and watched this exceptional and informative blog community become nearly unbearable all due to one person.

[clarice]

Kim Jong Il
Yes, CC. I hesitated for a long time before posting here because every other blog quickly became infested and I thought this one was different. It used to be. And it doesn't matter if a board is moderated or not unless the moderation involves the laborious process of reading every single post before allowing it. That wouldn't work either.

[Captain Hate]

Dar Williams, what a boring POS she is. Speaking of musicians, anybody heard of Elizabeth Cook? One of my longtime buds is very good at giving me discs for Christmas of alt-country dollbabes that I've never heard of (last year was Kathleen Edwards, who may not be a babe but I was previously a bit familiar with some of her songs due to a Lucinda Williams Pandora "station" and prior to that was Miranda Lambert) but this one is very good and extremely hawt (I've been dwelling on one picture in the liners almost exclusively since first seeing it).

[Mark Folkestad]

Well, Maguire needs to "grow a pair" and accept that the current situation is untenable. We need registration of participants and banning of violators. Wauck isn't the only one. Getting rid of Cleo and Bubu is needed.

[Old Lurker]

The only way to deal with the likes of Sick Puppy is to always, every time, without fail deny him the attention he seeks. If everybody here resisted every temptation to respond, eventually he would go away.

He thrives on the fight and if that is what he gets, fine with him. When one of us tries to actually engage on topic with him, he takes that as vindication. Either way the beast has been fed and it will return.

[Extraneus]

Ignoring rude, disruptive, obnoxious posters would probably be best, and the narcisolator makes that a breeze, especially for people who otherwise can't control themselves. [Hint, hint. :-)]

[Mark Folkestad]

Sick Puppy is sick, not just rude and boorish. Such an individual does not always simply go away.

[old maltese]

Back to topic, how about that 'presently'?

[boris]

"resisted every temptation to respond"

Honestly that does not seem to work with drool, bubu, or cleo.

[narciso]

So apparently, Tom wasn't the old one who noticed something amiss about the Karzai/Obama relationship, in the LUN

[Tom Maguire]

Well, Maguire needs to "grow a pair" and accept that the current situation is untenable. We need registration of participants and banning of violators.

Registration didn't seem so popular the last time we tried it but it should be easy enough to try again.

What do people think?

[Rick Ballard]

Comments are more a commons than private property. The expense to the proprietor for fencing and vermin control are generally too high (wrt the value of the 'crop') to be worthwhile. A couple of trolls at Protein Wisdom managed to pretty much destroy the value of the comments (aided and abetted by the same lack of self control which one might expect from dedicated libertarians, unable to distinguish liberty from license).

I'm grateful to TM for the content which he provides and would never expect him to attempt to control those unable or unwilling to control themselves.

Peter,

Extraneous and Bgates provide the essentials necessary to attempt installation of the Narcisolator but others here are ready to assist anyone with a 'What the hell are they talking about?' problem. If you get hung up, describe the screen that you're looking at and the problem and we'll get you through it.

[Rick Ballard]

How quickly my expectations are exceeded.

Please do try registration. PW hasn't been restored but that is also a function of lack of content.

[Melinda Romanoff]

OL-

There are verbal, and non-verbal, weapons for that type of person. The deeper you can lure them in, so as to confuse them, the quicker the mouth gets shut.

It starts with poetry (like none you'll ever hear) and moves on to word games. Tons of fun for the inflictor, and keeps children mesmerized for hours.

I'll show YL and spouse next month at dinner, it will drive my spouse nuts, BTW.

Thinks it's "stupid".

Heh.

[DrJ]

Personally I'd rather try banning before registration. My understanding is that it is pretty easy to do this in typepad based on IP address. Yes, IP addresses can be spoofed (ask me how I know!) but I'd prefer to keep the place open and ban those who have earned it.

I'd even volunteer to do the banning. Well, at least the mechanical parts, if I were to get the appropriate permissions.

[Cecil Turner]

The noise-signal ratio in the comments has become much worse, so more drastic measures are more palatable. Dunno if registration is the answer, but I'm willing to try it.

[Porchlight]

I wouldn't be thrilled about registration, because I love it when TM gets linked and we get a rush of new people (even when they're coming from lefty sites).

In this case I hope TM might consider banning the truly egregious one in our midst (even though in general I don't like banning) simply because of the destructive nature of his behavior. It's a shame to see the best comment section on the web reduced to playing defense against someone with zero respect for the host and other commenters.

[clarice]

I'd welcome registration if you are willing to do it, And Dr J's offer is worth considering.

[Melinda Romanoff]

TM-

Just my one vote, but, due to sock-puppetry needs, registration drops me out.

I won't do "it" and will go back to "just browsing".

[jimmyk]

Why don't we just agree to shun. I know I lapsed the other day and responded to him, more in defense of Clarice than anything else, but I've generally ignored him and others unless they've made short on-topic posts. Anyone who succumbs to temptation should just be hit with a "DNFTT" reminder.

[anduril]

Required reading for today: We Hold These Truths Because They Are True, a discussion of the thought of a great American political philosopher. Excerpts:

We should not let the year end without noting the fiftieth anniversary of the publication of an American classic of political philosophy, one that combines both an appreciation of the unique nature of the American project with a profound understanding of the eternal verities of natural law reasoning, a mode of thought and discourse embedded in the nation's founding documents but otherwise banished from the halls of our great secular universities.

In 1960 the venerable publishing house of Sheed and Ward released We Hold These Truths: Catholic Reflections on the American Proposition by John Courtney Murray, S.J. It was a series of essays exploring "the American Proposition" which Abraham Lincoln cited in the opening lines of his Gettysburg Address.

Father Murray understood that, even in the 1950s, "the serene, and often naïve, certainties of the eighteenth century have crumbled." Thus, the "self-evident" truths of the Declaration of Independence "may be legitimately questioned."

"What ought not to be questioned, however, is that the American Proposition rests on the forthright assertion of a realist epistemology," asserts Murray. "The sense of the famous phrase is simply this: 'There are truths, and we hold them, and we here lay them down as the basis and inspiration of the American project, this constitutional commonwealth.'" Over and against positivists, Marxists and pragmatists, the Founding Fathers thought that "the life of man in society under government is founded on truths, on a certain body of objective truth, universal in its import, accessible to the reason of man, definable, defensible."

"If this assertion is denied, the American Proposition is, I think, eviscerated at one stroke," argues Murray. "For the pragmatists there are, properly speaking, no truths; there are only results. But the American Proposition rests on the more traditional conviction that there are truths; that they can be known; that they must be held; for, if they are not held, assented to, consented to, worked into the texture of institutions, there can be no hope of founding a true City, in which men may dwell in dignity, peace, unity, justice, well-being, freedom."

Murray says "we hold these truths because they are true. They have been found in the structure of reality by that dialectic of observation and reflection which is called philosophy."

...

We Hold These Truths is not merely a book about limited "Catholic" interests in the American political system but a sustained defense of reason and rationale discourse in a civil society. In it Murray argues for the necessity and universality of natural law reasoning which provides a cogent basis for governing the commonwealth.

"The doctrine of natural law has no Roman Catholic presuppositions," says Murray. "Its only presupposition is threefold: that man is intelligent; that reality is intelligible; and that reality, as grasped by intelligence, imposes on the will the obligation that it be obeyed in its demands for action or abstention."

Rejecting John Locke's abstract, isolated individualism, Murray believes that natural law "regards the community as a 'given' equally with the person." Moreover, "Man is regarded as a member of an order instituted by God, and subject to the laws that make the order an order-laws that derive from the nature of man, which is essentially social as it is individual."

"Law is not simply the protection of rights but their source, because it is the foundation of duties," says Murray.

Murray had a keen intellect, steeped in the classical and Western traditions once common among Jesuits of his stature. He was comfortable arguing politics, theology, national defense policy and history. He challenged assumptions of both the Left and Right. He offered precise and subtle arguments have been used and, sometimes, misused by both sides in debates over different issues over the years. But his faith in the inherent reasonableness of God and man is a welcome tonic to the corrosive anti-intellectualism, power politics and relativism of the present age.

[Lord Whorfin]

I generally lurk around here, but am not bothered by the trolls. After all, we should remain aware of our enemies' tactics and talking points, If a troll is seriously misbehaving, we can ignore, or ask TM to ban that troll.

Or, place the name first, before the comment, so we can decide right away to skip it.

[Pofarmer]

Speak of the devil.

[narciso]

You're right about Elizabeth Cook, btw, Captn

[anduril]

Well, here's my two cents.

TM owns the site, so he should feel free to do anything he thinks is best. As I said on the other thread, in response to his query:

check out some of the other chatter on these threads. At least I offer serious discussion on serious current issues...

If TM prefers to turn the comments section of his site into a social networking forum (and just take a glance through the threads if you don't accept that characterization) in which no dissent from the social orthodoxy is allowed, that's his decision to make.

For my part, I'll regard that as acquiescence to mob rule.

[PD]

We've now been given a change to practice our shunning chops.

[centralcal]

I vote for banning. Sick puppy has a blog of his own where he can hold forth to his heart's desire. Take the log from your own eye, sick puppy!

[sbw]

Registration didn't seem so popular the last time we tried it but it should be easy enough to try again.

What do people think?

Shun is my preference insofar as I recognize the evil -- and I do not choose the word lightly -- of those who use the system to destroy the system--Think of these repeat trolls as Alinskyites.

If -- when -- that fails, I think the net step is to ask the Volokh Conspiracy lawyers under what conditions a cease and desist order might be sought on a case by case basis. Then I'd ask the Electronic Frontier Foundation to consider what grounds should a blog pursue persistent attempted disruption.

A troll who craps on Boston Commons will be prosecuted. A troll who, when advised to cease and desist, craps on TM's front yard, deserves to face prosecution for continued misbehavior.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

Ya know we wouldn't need registration if people like Anduril just stopped being so damn rude. I don't mind the trolls as long as they are limited to posting a paragraph or 2. And I wouldn't mind Anduril if posted links rather than novels.

It's the long and endless BS that drives me nuts.

[centralcal]

Sadly, OL, you and I seem to be the only one who understands what sustains sick puppy and keeps him returning, ever more frequently.

[Jack is Back!]

Keep it open and we all use our consumer/user right to ignore or engage. Nothing to fear from any of these unwanted or trolloped posters. Remember the cardinal benefit of "free speech" it allows you to spot the idiots more easily.

[Henry]

bgates, thanks for the narcisolator... does anything like it work on an iphone?

[MarkO]

I despise the trolls, that is those whose postings here are only to fill space and to make it more difficult for others to inform or snark or trade recipes. But, I have a “page down” button and the ancient ability to discriminate on my own. I, too, would worry that at some point I would not be up to par and be electronically summoned and summarily dismissed from forcing you to at least look out for my name.

I like the lively and free exchange of ideas, harassment, invective, defamation, kindness and silliness that I can find here every day. It reminds me of the freedom of an ancient schoolyard recess. I can handle myself in the free for all. Can’t we all?

[boris]

I'd say give Clarice's pistolas a one day ban power based on IP.

[Cecil Turner]

Shunning doesn't work. It requires near-perfect group discipline, which is impossible to sustain.

[Captain Hate]

narc, you continue to amaze me with the breadth of your knowledge.

[PD]

Shunning does require practice, yes. Particiularly because it means no replies, ever, even when you have a point you just must make. This is a temptation hard to resist, but adversity builds character. :-)

[anduril]

I like the lively and free exchange of ideas...

heh. it appears you've come to the wrong place. there are those who want TM to turn his site into a sort of cocoon for them in which they can shield themselves from troubling dissenting voices.

[clarice]

cc, I tried for ages to persuade posters to shun (remember pistolas?) and it only got worse. I would be astonished if that would resolve this any more now that so many stepped in in the misguided belief that engagement would tame the beast.

What we will get is ever more persistent posting of vituperation and threats and ever more lengthy posts on whatever topic is of interest to sick puppy. Once that happens the site will belong to TM and him.
IMO YMMV

[jimmyk]

We've had successful shunning for extended periods. Then when things are going well we let down our guard. It doesn't have to be 100% successful--95% would make a difference. I'd be ok with banning at TM's discretion, though a determined troll will get around that. I'd rather not go to registration. Even better if TM could just delete offensive posts, but that doesn't seem to be feasible.

[boris]

Bubu, cleo, and drool consistantly express disrespect for others here based on some perceived lockstep doctrine or worldview that provokes their hostility. Yet somehow it is we who are the intolerant ones.

[anduril]

I tried for ages to persuade posters to shun

As I said, there are those who want TM to turn his site into a sort of cocoon for them in which they can shield themselves from troubling dissenting voices.

Let's be honest--for a change. The problem JOMers have with me is strictly content based--they don't like my very reasonable views but find themselves unable to defend their prejudices. How to respond? Try shouting first...louder, ever more profane! Shunning...hope those troubling voices will just go away. Finally, banning. Well, reality won't go away.

[anduril]

Even better if TM could just delete offensive posts,

Offensive to whom? Sounds like JOMers want to make TM a captive to their prejudices on his own site!

[narciso]

Getting back to the point of the thread, this is part of what irks many of us, about the Obama administration; it's failure to acknowledge great things large and small, the effort of out troops, the valor of the Iranian
dissidents, there isn't even one big public works project that came out of the stimulus. At every turn, it's about picayune grievances,
or Alinskyite attacks on institutions of one of a kind.

[glasater]

I am mystified that "kim" claims she/he was banned from TM's blog. I mean it's obvious TM doesn't ban people does he?

[centralcal]

It seems banning is the only solution.

I repeat - sick puppy has a blog. Sick puppy can invite those who find his opinions worthy over to his place.

Clarice has hit on the most important point - day by day sick puppy has completely taken over this blog and driven many away. Every thread where he is absent shows many more commenters - sometimes new folks enter in and introduce themselves.

[anduril]

Hmmmm. I knew the title of this thread reminded me of a song: My heros have always been Cowboys.

[Pofarmer]

"I am mystified that "kim" claims she/he was banned from TM's blog. I mean it's obvious TM doesn't ban people does he?"

I don't know about banned, but typepad makes in nearly impossible to post, sometimes.

[NK]

Trolls and cyberbullies don't exercise speech, they try to supress speech by those with whom they disagree. Shunning and ignoring is a decent, but ineffective way of dealing with them. This site is TM's property. We are his guests. TM is free to make the rules-- or not, and enforce them as he sees fit. TM has proven to be an honest and tolerant (too tolerant?)man. Personally, I am fine with whatever he decides. Over to you TM.

[anduril]

"typepad makes in nearly impossible to post, sometimes."

Really?

[Specter]

Having just returned to JOM, I would rather see banning or ignoring rather than registration. Thank goodness for the scroll wheel on the mouse...LOL

[Rob Crawford]

It seems banning is the only solution.

Strictly speaking, not true.

Practically speaking, maybe.

[anne]

@captain hate Elizabeth Cook is one of the DJs on Sirius XM's Outlaw Country station. Mornings. Saw her open for Asleep at the Wheel not that long ago. She's talented but not at their level by any means. Of course, they don't meet your "dollbabe" requirement.

[Specter]

And then when things seem to be getting out-of-hand it's a simple thing to enable the narcisolator...

[Rick Ballard]

NK,

I would note that TM did not suggest banning in complementing your point. Banning and comment deletion both involve a level of moderation which require the proprietor to expend time as a constant school yard monitor. Registration also requires a bit of effort on the part of the proprietor but it does not require constant attention.

Perhaps some New Year resolutions concerning self restraint regarding stepping over the dog piles rather than kicking them combined with the Narcisolator will be sufficient here but it wasn't at Protein Wisdom. I believe Clarice to be correct in her observation concerning the intent of those leaving their piles in the comment section.

[jimmyk]

Skimming that Dukakis-Bush debate is a bit depressing--it's like groundhog day, the same things over and over: The attacks on Quayle like the attacks on Palin (aided and abetted by the media), Dukakis mewling about tax cuts for the rich, the issue of Social Security reform... the more things change....

[Ignatz]

--Registration didn't seem so popular the last time we tried it but it should be easy enough to try again.

What do people think?--

I don't comment or read here nearly as often as previously because of the trollery so from my perspective something ought to be done; either registration or what DocJ mentioned.
Shunning doesn't work and will never work because trolls are master manipulators and know which buttons to push.

[Specter]

When I was more active here in '06 and '07, I seem to remember that Cleo(?) had gotten pretty verbose and was posting continually...but it calmed down after a bit of time. Are we seeing a tsunami which will settle after a while? If so, then no changes are necessary....

[DrJ]

Rick, I don't think banning takes that much work, if typepad is set up right (one can always hope!). I would not have volunteered otherwise.

[centralcal]

So, if every single commenter (except sick puppy and trolls) installs narcisolator, then no one will ever know they commented? There will be no need to shun or register?

Pheh - each of us "ban" or TM "bans."

Personally, I don't think trolls should be banned. There are exceptional times when their comments should be deleted (what say you, MayBee - lol!) Sick puppy is NOT a troll.

[anduril]

Hard hitting commentary, originally published in Hebrew on Ynet: Michael Sfard on the Gaza war and Jewish morality. Sfard's point is simple:

Operation Cast Lead was our second war of independence. In the first, we freed ourselves of 2,000 years of living under and being oppressed by foreign regimes. In the second, we broke the shackles of Jewish morality and heritage that were shoved down our throats for years.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

YOu are dead wrong anduril. I don't have a clue what your views are and could care less. I hate that you think it is perfectly fine to copy and paste entire novels because you think it is cool. It's simply rude and not the least bit cool. If you actually wanted someone to see the views you copy, you would post links.

You would be the first person I would ban for complete and unmitigated rudeness.

[Walter]

I was one who disliked the registration. IIRC, the volume of comments dropped precipitously. Having tried it, I would prefer people adopt the Narcisolator solution. It really works.

I've been tempted to contact a copyright holder and offer my services, but I am concerned that TM/typepad would get caught in the middle.

[Cecil Turner]

Okay, I'm testing out the Firefox/narcisolator combo. On the plus side, I definitely like the auto-spellcheck feature (though why it doesn't like the word "spellcheck" is a bit of a mystery).

But hey, half the posts are gone!

[centralcal]

Shunning doesn't work and will never work because trolls are master manipulators and know which buttons to push.

Iggy, I almost always agree with you, but not on that point. Bubu? Cleo? Hilarious. They are masters at nothing - except vulgarity and stupidity.

Sick puppy is the one who is destroying this blog - purposefully, day by day.

[anduril]

"Cool." So '60's.

[Captain Hate]

Thanks for the info anne although comparing her to a group that's been around since the early 70s doesn't seem like a fair basis.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

I've developed my top ten list for tomorrow's show. Anything I have missed?

10. SCott Brown's election
9. Repeal of DADT
8.Afghanistan
7.AZ border wars
6. Debt
5. Unemployment
4. 63 pick up in midterms
3. BP oil spill
2.Obamacare
1. Tea parties.

'I have a bunch of honorable mentions including wikileaks which I wish I could have fit in.

[Jim Miller]

If Tom thinks that some commenters consistently detract from the site, he should explain what kinds of comments are inappropriate and ask all of us not to make them.

I've had to go through something similar at Sound Politics. By now, I have persuaded almost all of our regular commenters to keep their comments suitable for sprogs, and persuaded most of them to keep their comments on topic. (In general, I don't mind if there is topic drift, after the first 20 or 30 comments. But I do object to commenters who never address the topic, and who introduce their own pet subjects early in the discussion.)

Tom is more tolerant than I am, and, I would guess, has much less free time, so he can't be expected to baby sit as much as I do. But he can explain what comments are inappropriate at this site.

Joanne Jacobs, who runs a great site, has had to delete insulting comments recently, so the problem is found almost everywhere. But setting clear standards does help, in my experience.

[Danube of Thought]

I would be strongly in favor of either registration or banning.

In the meantime I will take CC's sound advice to heart.

[centralcal]

So far, the tally for conditional banning seems to be in the lead.

Cecil, if half posts are gone, they are all anduril. Just one indicator of the size of the problem on this and every thread.

[Old Lurker]

"I can handle myself in the free for all. Can’t we all?"

Sure we can, Mark. And I probably could defend my wife in a bar fight too. But I wouldn't go back to a bar if fights are an every night event, or if a regular drunk is allowed to abuse the bar maid (sorry Clarice but the image of you in a Hooters outfit is just too tempting) night after night.

Like most, I'm not for being carded at the door, and I'm not even wild about a bouncer being hired to throw the bums out. But when a few do rise to the taunts, it spoils the place for us all as the glasses are thrown around the room.

The best solution is to deny them the oxygen they require.

[Tom Maguire]

Personally I'd rather try banning before registration. My understanding is that it is pretty easy to do this in typepad based on IP address.

Easy but ineffective - I have lost track of the number of times I banned the Semanticlown based on IP address.

I can also ban based on name, which is even less effective, since we then get posts by "The Commenter Formerly Known As..." under a new name. A secondary effect is that the Narcoisolators need to update their banned list.

As to the Anduril situation, it's too bad he (She? Who cares?) is not clever enough to set up his own blog and post endless extracts of whatever he wants. For current purposes I find the scroll down key useful, and my normal experience is that he can post junk faster than I can delete it

[boris]

I'd favor something like the GayPatriot Diva poll vote per day per IP technology along the lines of ... n posters on a thread can vote a troll's IP off the island for the rest of the day.

[anduril]

Jim Miller, I agree with a lot of what you're saying. Let me add a few thoughts:

1. I'm particularly troubled by the amount of obscenity that's appearing here. No big deal from my personal point of view, I can shrug that off, but troubling to think of the people behind such posts.

2. Directly above your post is a clear example of way OT and abusive posting, and one which is repeated regularly: Jane advertising her site--actually pasting in her entire schedule and soliciting ideas for her show. Please--she dares criticize me? But that's my point. Some wish to turn this forum into mere social networking for their particular group of friends. I deal in ideas.

3. The point re TM's free time, or lack thereof, is well taken. That's why I've never addressed complaints to TM, preferring to handle issues that arise in my own way rather than imposing on him. By the same token, I've never presumed that TM has or should have either 1) the time to research just what led JOMers to go on their peculiar warpath against my views or 2) the interest in such personal matters. Suffice it to say, there is a history.

[Porchlight]

For current purposes I find the scroll down key useful

Yeah, that's pretty much how it is for me too. I suppose the narcisolator is in my future.

It's a shame to see what one dedicated idiot can do to a nice place, but I don't think TM should be wasting his time on this guy.

Shunning it is. I'm in.

[NK]

We live in TM's cyberworld and he makes the rules. We now have the rules, use the scroll down key if you see obnoxious attempts to sabotage discussion. Again, Tom has proven himself to be an honest and tolerant (too tolerant?) adherant to free speech. I respect that; I don't respect spiteful/obnoxious attempts to suppress speech. You know who you are.

[Sus]

I've lurked for about two years here. This is one of the best sites for commentary on the web. I normally do not post comments on the internet (and probably won't again after this) but I wanted you to know that early on, I easily learned to skip past the trolls that you've been mentioning, simply because they are incredibly boring and childish. You should know that it can get pretty entertaining sometimes to read the repartee that some of you have with them.

[DrJ]

Easy but ineffective - I have lost track of the number of times I banned the Semanticlown based on IP address.

That's too bad. And I had no idea that you have tried this in the past with *anyone* let alone 'Cleo.

[Danube of Thought]

Think how fortunate we are to have a host who refreshes himself on the Bush-Dukakis transcript so we don't have to.

[boris]

"I have lost track of the number of times I banned the Semanticlown based on IP address."

Interesting ... clearly cleo has a hate jones going for us wingers.

[Old Lurker]

Thanks TM. I think the fix is in our own hands because of the reasons you state.

BTW he does have his own blog, LUNed under his name. Guess what...nobody goes there which is why he comes to better hoods seeking out his prey.

[Jane (sit on the couch or save your country)]

TM,

I think just about everyone would say - do what you want. We are forever grateful that you let us sit in your livingroom day after day while you supply the food and entertainment.