Those who participated in the epic, star-studded battle in February here, led by the departed Bruce Bartup, over what are acceptable levels of intensity and personal attack on Ethics Alarms, will experience some nostalgia reading this debate on Slate about the website’s policies. My favorite line: “…if someone is a dick, and we’ve explained that he’s a dick, why shouldn’t we also call him a dick? He’s earned it!”
If you missed Bruce’s Lament and the terrific donnybrook it generated (sadly, Bruce took his bruised feelings and went home to the British Isles, though I urged him to persevere) can read his Comment of the Day and the responses to it here.
Graphic: kiss my wonder woman
9 thoughts on “Noted: A Familiar Debate Over At Slate”
Slate link is broken.
Fixed. Can’t figure out what was the matter. OK, “star-studded” is hyperbole. I was influenced by the drawing.
It is amusing (and illuminating) that where we use “idiot”, they use “dick”.
I think they use “dick” the way I use “jerk.”
Indeed. I merely say that because in general practice, I think idiot is thrown around most here.
I think they use “dick” like I use “worthless fuckstain”…
That’s because you’re more expressive and ingenious than they, Scott!
Yeah. Sure. We’ll go with that.
Gee, I’m really sorry I missed this one. Oh well, trolls come in many flavors.