The latest example of “How Not To Be Approved As An Ethics Alarms Commenter” comes from the pseudonymous “Joe Mama,” who wrote in response to the July 29, 2015 post about Sylva Stoet, an indignant ex-Penny’s employee (above) who took umbrage on Twitter at being asked to go home and change when she showed up dressed as shown to work in the “Career Department.”
“Note to the writer. Is it possible for you to write a blog without your opinion. That is how people would prefer it. You old sack of shit. You would think knee shorts are inappropriate. I agree with the ex employee. If that was in the career section, it should be changed.”
Notes:
1. I wondered if it was necessary to specify in the commenting guidelines that calling the proprietor “You old sack of shit” in the commenting audition was not a recommended strategy. That question has been answered.
2. No, it’s not possible for an essay on a blog about ethics not to contain my opinion. That’s the purpose of the blog. The better question is whether it is possible for alleged news reports by reporters on supposedly objective news sources to be free of the writer’s opinion. My opinion is, based on the current evidence, is that it’s possible, but increasingly unlikely.
3. Those “people” Joe alludes to who would prefer that a blog not contain opinion are also known as “people who don’t know what a blog is.” His suggestion is like recommending that I hold a dog show for people who think they are cats.
4. Of course knee shorts would be inappropriate; shorts are inappropriate for most workplaces, especially in retail, unless the items on sale are shorts.
5. But it doesn’t matter what I think is inappropriate, but rather what then-17-year-old Sylva Stoel ‘s employer thought was appropriate, since Penny’s had as much authority to decide that short-shorts weren’t appropriate attire as I have deciding “You old sack of shit” is inappropriate comment discourse, especially from someone defending inappropriate workplace attire. Sylva’s response to that completely responsible exercise of the supervisor-subordinate relationship was a middle finger.
6. If Joe agrees with the ex-employee, I fervently wish him Sylva’s likely career path until she figures out that he’s an idiot.
7. Anyone who can decipher Joe’s last sentence, let me know. “If that was in the career section, it should be changed.” What’s “that”? What’s “it”? Is he saying that she should change her garb, since it was in the career section? That can’t be it: that’s the opinion he didn’t want to read. Is he saying that since she showed up dressed like that, the name of the section should be changed, like to “The Inappropriate Workplace Dress Section”? Or is he saying that when an employee shows up dressed inappropriately for one section of the store, she should be moved to another section to accommodate her fashion choices?
Joe’s not getting another comment published on Ethics Alarms on a prayer, and my opinion is that he should look elsewhere for an opinion-free blog…. the Moon, perhaps.
Ethics Alarms 
I believe what he’s saying is that, if she bought the outfit in the career section of the store and her own employer is saying that it’s inappropriate for her to wear to work, then the outfit should be changed from the career section to another more appropriate section.
At least…I think that’s what he means.
Now, if he does, I do agree that it should be moved because that’s clearly not what I think of when I consider what a career outfit should be.
But, in the end, it’s not what I think, but what Penny’s thinks. And, if they think their own merchandise is not appropriate to wear in the workplace,that is their prerogative. Even if they choose to keep it in the career section.
If that’s what he meant, he’s even more of an idiot than I thought. Who made the rule that any clothing or apparel sold by a store is thus to be assumed as appropriate professional garb for employees IN the store? Who would assume such a rule? Sears sold bee-keeper outfits, so that means that a clerk in the formal wear section could be dressed like a beekeeper and complain if asked to change???
Ah, the joys of blogging. If only this were the worst invective I had ever seen during my former career. Alas, and I expect it won’t be the worst directed at you, either, Jack.
Also, I want to take a few pedantic, gratuitous shots at his/her comment, since yours were in the vein of reason:
Is it possible you have never heard of a question mark?
Is it further possible that you have never heard of a semicolon, or an em-dash? Excessively brief sentences are something you usually find only on protest posters. Even Twitter twits don’t write in such a staccato fashion.
It also seems you have never discovered, in your travels of the written word, the existence of the hyphen, appropriately placed after “ex.”
Why is it okay for a person offering a comment to express an opinion, but not the author? The answer to this question, at least from the author above, will forever remain a mystery — as will the meaning of that last “sentence.”
Oh, heck! I had hope until the very end that you would explain the last sentence! It will haunt my dreams!
“Note to the writer. Is it possible for you to write a blog without your opinion. That is how people would prefer it. You old sack of shit.”
I’ll admit, I’m a little disappointed in your response. I’ve come to appreciate your witty comebacks to the halfwits.
“I agree with the ex employee. If that was in the career section, it should be changed.”
I went back and read the original article you posted. It said that she bought the pants from the store (though it is unclear about the section). My guess is he is saying it seems hypocritical for Pennys to chastise her for wearing something as career path when she could not wear it herself.
Given Penny’s response to the situation, I am guessing that was not the case.
My response amused me, and that’s the main objective.
I think Joe’s a regular reader who made a bet with somebody that he could get published as “Comment of the Day.”