Comments | 18

  • Submitted by ADavis on April 28, 2015 at 1:21 pm

    what happened?

    What happened to my comment on this thread? I am just curious about the process because this is the first time I’ve had a comment removed by iBrattleboro.

    Andy

    • Submitted by Vidda on April 28, 2015 at 2:13 pm

      A tad overwrought?

      That’s because cgrotke and Lise exercise restraint and good judgement when it is necessary to yank a story. In removing the original MT piece and allowing the above link in it’s place today they realized that the previous piece earlier today was a tad overwrought. Thus, the story and any comments combined were removed by iBrattleboro.

      I’ve not seen them do that often, but when they have I have felt it is justified.

      • Submitted by ADavis on April 28, 2015 at 2:32 pm

        Chris? Lise?

        Could Chris or Lise comment on the removal of the posts in this thread. The thread that preceded the “Golden Rule” thread was as least as “overwrought” – and full of bile to boot. Just curious if Brattleboro has a clearly stated policy about such things as overwroughtness?

      • Submitted by ADavis on April 28, 2015 at 2:32 pm

        Chris? Lise?

        Could Chris or Lise comment on the removal of the posts in this thread. The thread that preceded the “Golden Rule” thread was as least as “overwrought” – and full of bile to boot. Just curious if Brattleboro has a clearly stated policy about such things as overwroughtness?

  • Submitted by Vidda on April 28, 2015 at 4:46 pm

    If you can’t pin them down on such things

    Personally, I trust Chris and Lise, even though they yanked it earlier just when I finished and was just about to save my comment under yours. I’m not sure they were indulging themselves of policy so much as more of a judgment call?

    So if you can’t pin them down on such things, there is for our writers and readers the iBrattleboro stated policy here where they can read policy for themselves.: http://ibrattleboro.com/ibrattleboro-site-policies

    • Submitted by KAlden on April 28, 2015 at 4:49 pm

      I asked Chris to delete my

      I asked Chris to delete my reply to MT- which he did and, then, I guess decided to delete the entire thread. A wise decision, I believe.

    • Submitted by barry on April 28, 2015 at 5:38 pm

      what's going on?

      Some of us did not see the original post, and now that we follow this ensuing conversation, it makes us quite curious about what’s going on. Can anyone give us an idea of what was in it to make it “overwrought”?
      I understand, you can’t just repeat it since that’s what got pulled, but maybe give us a little something about what’s behind this conversation. As it stands now, all we’ve got is the link to a detailed Wikipedia piece – not quite boring but certainly not pointing to anything spurious – plus the cryptic comments.

      • Submitted by KAlden on April 28, 2015 at 5:59 pm

        I can't speak for the other

        I can’t speak for the other people that were involved in this unfortunate exchange but It’s really better to just let it lie. It began as opinion piece by a long standing member of this site and with the addition of a new poster turned into something quite ugly and hateful. Better left alone, trust me.

        • Submitted by barry on April 28, 2015 at 6:07 pm

          ok

          That sounds very reasonable to me; can easily let it go.

          b.

          • Submitted by fishboy on April 29, 2015 at 6:18 am

            actually

            I am surprised a similar poster like “Mark Twain” hasn’t appeared before to comment on Vidda’s theory of “Jukrislims” and rebut his views, in a vein as strenuous as Vidda makes his points. Suffice to say, Vidda doesn’t suffer fools gladly whether it is a discussion of sexual orientation, religion, legalization of marijuana or the evil of second hand cigarette smoke. He is going to opine or respond with his brain fully engaged and both barrels of rhetoric firing. I don’t have a problem with that, that’s the way Vidda rolls and he is entitled to his viewpoint.

            I have never seen a post and comments like this pulled from this site, ever. Even the posts in the past about the 12 Tribes were not censored. But then again, from what I read, the post by MT was an attack piece on Vidda and my first thought was, “why don’t they send Vidda a personal email instead of getting into this online?” Based on one of the comments in a previous post, this appears to be an ongoing and personal beef between MT and Vidda regarding religion.

          • Submitted by Vidda on April 29, 2015 at 7:21 am

            No such relationship exists on here

            I don’t have an ‘ongoing and personal beef’ with MT either on iBrattleboro or elsewhere. Even if I think I know who she is, she would be a seldom acquaintance only, not a personal friend.

            I might have a “personal beef” with my friends and them with me, because we know each other and from time to time argue but more akin to ‘family’ which is fine.

            No such relationship exists on here.

            I definitely admire a number of post authors and commenter’s to this site, some are acquaintances, some are not.

            To our readers and me, at this time, MT is a screen name only.
            Fishboy is also a screen name only.
            Except for their steadfast opposition to me, both Fishboy and MT are strangers to me, and I don’t expect that to change.

            Vidda is not a screen name. I am a longtime published writer of letters and commentaries in a half dozen online news and opinion websites and in the VT newspapers from the Free Press down to the Bennington Banner (including The Commons) and identified as such.

            In VT my longest contributions to a newspaper are with the Brattleboro Reformer. I am grateful that like many others who submitted opinion pieces we have a political and social landscape that allows that.

            I also respect and never challenge an editor should they not wish to publish my piece, including iBrattleboro.com.

          • Submitted by KAlden on April 29, 2015 at 7:52 am

            I would not assume that there

            I would not assume that there is an “ongoing beef” between Vidda and this Mark twain person. MT is relatively new to posters on this site and the vitriol that was directed at Vidda went far beyond a “strenuous ” rebuttal .
            It was a personal attack and a very nasty one at that. There seemed to be no point to be made other than to attempt to discredit and humiliate Vidda.
            An ugly situation. The above post was a continuation of the original -when -for all intents and purposes it had ended. In fact MT said they were out of it – leaving the ‘last word’ to Vidda. There have been some heated discussions on this site ; I have engaged in several of them myself. But. generally -despite differences of opinion or philosophies a level of civility has been maintained. Not so in this case.

          • Submitted by fishboy on April 29, 2015 at 10:03 am

            you are right

            I shouldn’t have assumed an ongoing beef. I mischaracterized Vidda’s statement “I think I know who you are.”

            And you are also right, it was an attack on Vidda, as I also said. And that is what this thread is about.

  • Submitted by cgrotke on April 29, 2015 at 7:52 am

    Explained

    Hi all,

    Here’s what happened, quite quickly.

    We posted MarkTwain’s first version of the Golden Rule story, to which two people, KAlden and ADavis had immediate negative reactions upon a close read.

    KAlden got in touch to delete the comment; at the same time MarkTwain had read the comments and wanted to supply a different story- what you see here. This all came about in some confusion,

    To accommodate this, we lost Andy’s comment about his dislike of the story and the site.

    That’s it.

    The mysterious deletions were:

    – MarkTwain – supplied a different version
    – KAlden – asked to delete her comment,
    – ADavis – had a comment deleted that replied to a comment and story no longer there.

    The reason the original story was making people uncomfortable, to paraphrase, was that it seemed like a personal attack on vidda.

    Thanks for your interest!

  • Submitted by JohnWilmerding on April 29, 2015 at 8:35 am

    The Bronze Rule

    The linked-to Wikipedia article stated the Golden Rule and the Silver Rule, but omitted the Bronze Rule, which dates back to the Bronze Age.

    3. ‘Do unto others what you would not want them to do unto you, in order to prevent them from doing it unto you before you do it unto them.’

    Sound familiar? The Bronze Rule is the predominant theme in the USA’s foreign policy today!

    • Submitted by Vidda on April 29, 2015 at 9:28 am

      John, this deserves

      John, aside from the light humor here :), this deserves an article by itself, and one I’d be interested in reading, should it come to that.

      • Submitted by Will Stomp on April 29, 2015 at 4:47 pm

        The Platinum Rule

        Do unto others as they would have you do unto them.

        Based on one (wo)man’s meat being another (wo)man’s poison.

Leave a Reply