I routinely edit blog comments for typos and minor grammatical mistakes, both to assist with clarity and reading and also as a Golden Rule exercise—I have typo issues myself, as regular readers well know.
This comment just turned up on Edward Carney’s Comment of the Day (from September of 2011) about flying the Confederate flag:
“I know what the confederate flag means. I am not racist. I wanted to show that I am not for whats going on in this country. Their is a lot of people like me.You cannot change history.You can make new history with it.”
I was tempted not to fix it (there are four errors) but I decided that would be unfair.
Should I have left it as it was?
Ethics Alarms 
I think you did the right thing by fixing it because you had the time to notice the errors, the impulse to fix the errors, and additional time to consider not fixing the errors. If you were truly busy, those things would not have occurred, but since they did, it was the kind thing to do.
Great, now you’ve told my COO that I’m not “truly busy”…
Hmm….unintended consequence. My apologies. I meant that you weren’t “hurried” (as in, rushing to get out the door for an airport run to your latest seminar.) 😉
I guess it would depend on your motivation to leave the comment as is; if your intention was to contrast the commenter’s level of education or highlight it as a way to dismiss its legitimacy, you were probably wrong. It is your playground however, so I can’t judge too harshly.
1) Sure you can. That ;s what you’re here for. I don’t do this for my personal amusement.
2) I would have done it because the ignorance of the form matches the ignorance of the content, I would have done it because especially stupid and offensive messages don’t necessarily deserve any special effort on my part to make them seem less stupid.
3) There’s no probably about it—it would have been wrong. The policy isn’t that I’ll only edit opinions I like–or hasn’t been, Don’t be wishy-washy. There’s no “probably” about it.
I was hedging my bet since I was only looking at an isolated comment. I really didn’t want go back and look at the context and compare versions of it as some other respondents did, I was basing my opinion strictly on what was before me.
Does Ed habitually make spelling errors of that nature? Sometimes, in the heat of emotion or when under a personal timeline, we can make such mistakes where we wouldn’t otherwise. But then again, so people are just plain illiterate.
SMP-
I was a little bit confused too. This is actually a comment from someone else about Edward Carney’s comment. Carney’s comment, like all his comments, was well written. The guy can write. And has no spelling errors. 🙂
This is all soooo strange…!
“This comment just turned up on Edward Carney’s Comment of the Day (from September of 2011)” Now, Steven, Sharon, given the word “just” in contrast to “September 2011,” and the fact that it clearly says THIS comment turned up ON Ed’s comment of the day FROM September, there is only one way, and one way only, anyone could read what I wrote to impugn Edward’s writing: if they didn’t read it properly.
Boy, now I’m REALLY glad I edit for clarity….
Now I’m REALLY confused!! BTW: I typoed myself in my previous remark. “But then again, SOME people are just plain illiterate.”! It must be happening because I joined the Texas Nationalists. Yew thaynk?
As long as you don’t go nucular…
Is that something like “atomic”?! Say, I forgot that we make NUCLEAR (hint) warheads in Texas. Beware!
It’s something like fissile, for sure. But, ONLY the warheads?! That makes the secessionists’ arsenal “all manure, and no truck!” At least the “Texists” can partly disarm “the enemy”…until the TASA experts (formerly of NASA) build the necessary rockets. (j/k)
“I routinely edit blog comments for typos and minor grammatical mistakes,…”
Honestly, I did not know that you did that for commenters, unless asked.
Given that you allowed the comment to remain posted, and assuming that you have the power to allow (or disallow) posting altogether, I think you should have left the comment as the commenter typed it. That is what I would have done (or not allowed the comment at all), if it was my blog and I had that power. Funny: How two persons can decide on either of two opposite ways, each going the way they go in honor of the Golden Rule.
I am OK with any of my comments in your blog to remain with typos as I typed, even if embarrassing to me. But, I don’t mind if you edit typos in my comments; I just wouldn’t do that in my blog (which I don’t have, and probably never will have), unless asked by the commenter. In a “worst case,” I’d disallow posting.
Which I do—if I have to re-write the damn thing to make it coherent, or if its obvious that the poster didn’t take the time or have the courtesy to even try to be clear, I ding the comment. It doesn’t happen often.
Another spelling error!! It’s a plague!
Nowhere near as fun as tgt’s “There are legitimate reasons to distrust the wisdom of the country as a hole…”.
I am a spelling bee champ and a fairly obsessive proofreader, so I am especially embarrassed by my own typos. I have enough difficulty being clear, even when I use short sentences and spell every word correctly.
I agree with Tiggy’s statement in every detail. Especially the part about the country being in a hole!
Yep – I needed Jack’s reply for my Chuckle of the Day. Danm Egnlish!
Hey. Spel et ryt!
While all ethics issues are important, some are more important than others.
I don’t correct or edit comments on my site. I do try to censor those that are defamatory to third parties. I think I’ve deleted – and re-posted the non-defamatory parts verbatim as a quote, making it clear that I have censored the post – three comments over 10 years.
Comments defaming me just get rebutted.
I don’t make corrections to grammar or spelling. For one thing, spelling in Australia of axe, recognise, etc differs from US practice. For another, I’ve seen sites where whole comments were re-written by the owner, with clearly malicious intent.
Here’s an example of such an unethical re-write: NSFW.
http://aroomofourown.wordpress.com/2011/09/05/what-has-arooo-done-for-the-internet/#comment-11980
Just, This, On, From: These are all very slippery words depending on what your definition of IS is. Besides, I used to break thermometers and play with the mercury as a small child…so give me a break. I’m sure that this fact alone (while there are many others) would qualify me as a person with a some sort of cognitive disability.
Now I get it.
I had to go back to the comments for the Sept ’11 “comment of the day” and read the comment-in-question. You obviously “clarified” the comment for the Sept post, but gave us, today, the original document.
I never had a problem understanding that all started with your post of 4Sep11 that stimulated Ed’s award winning comment that you put up on 5Sep11. We fast-forward a year when someone adds a comment to that earlier posting. Today’s post is not about Ed.
I think the poster’s meaning came through equally, in the original as well as the refined version. Wrong is wrong, regardless of grammar. I would have left it as is, allowing those who read it to get a picture of the source, and the author to “stew in her own juices” as my mother used to say. And the phrase “….make new history…” What’s that about?
Long before the current political schism became as acute as it is, that flag was the symbol of opposition to any kind of racial harmony or equality, be it equal opportunity, integration, or even affirmative action. It became “anti-government” only because the federal government was the moving force of law to bring the changes about.
I think the rule has to be: leave comments as they are. If people are hurried and make typos, so be it. If they’re morons and write that way, let it stand. You can correct your own typos if you like, but let your readers’ comments fall where they may. A typo can be recognized and excused, and understood by your readers. An idiot can also be recognized and seen for what he/she is.