Comments on: Hello Again & Harriet & Comments

By: Terreson

Terreson — Thu, 07 May 2009 03:43:56 +0000

Mr. Nichols says: “Of course commentary legitimately critical of poets, POETRY, and poetryfoundation.org will be allowed. That’s part of the fun!”

And who exactly determines what is legitimate? What exactly is the divide between legitimate and illegitimate? It is a fair question, especially since, a new protocol is now in order.

Terreson

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 06 May 2009 16:42:07 +0000

Well, Michael, I read a number of those comments Kent made, back in the day, and as much as I find myself searching for more accurate descriptions than “relentless” and “idiotic,” nothing quite seems to fit as snugly.

That Blazevox thing is almost as sad as your pointing to it.

By: michael robbins

michael robbins — Wed, 06 May 2009 16:22:50 +0000

Ouch, whoever you are, what part of “norms of civility” & “insults” don’t you understand? I don’t think Kent’s posts were “idiotic,” but I’d never suggest that comments be deleted simply for idiocy. A number of sarcastic remarks occur to me on this subject.

Go read Kent’s posts for yourself – oh, wait, you can’t, since Kasey deleted them (& all posts in Kent’s defense).

Here’s Kent’s account of it: http://www.blazevox.org/072-kj.htm. It’s bracing reading.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 06 May 2009 13:51:48 +0000

Michael Robbins wrote:

“When someone deletes some idiotic comment that insults people on a poetry blog, that’s just an insistence on certain norms of civility that remain untouched by questions of government interference in free expression.”

Ouch, Michael, that’s a 180 from your earlier (rather embarrassing) attack on Kasey Mohammad for deleting Kent Johnson’s relentlessly idiotic comments from Lime Tree, isn’t it?

By: Travis Nichols

Travis Nichols — Tue, 05 May 2009 14:23:29 +0000

Of course commentary legitimately critical of poets, POETRY, and poetryfoundation.org will be allowed. That’s part of the fun!

By: antipoetry.gov

antipoetry.gov — Tue, 05 May 2009 06:54:53 +0000

I sincerely hope that commentary that is legitimately critical of the work of poets that are featured in or affiliated with POETRY will be allowed (and perhaps that POETRY itself doesn’t place itself above criticism of its loyal patrons).

Because I have serious issues with the past few issues: *snores* (except the manifestos were really good… except for AE Stallings’ one which read like something in an elementary school poem contest… regardless of one’s opinion on rhyme. i realize she is POETRY’s token formalist, but is there no shame?).

anyway,

thanks.

By: thomas brady

thomas brady — Fri, 01 May 2009 16:17:18 +0000

Thank you, Catherine!

Thomas

By: Gary B. Fitzgerald

Gary B. Fitzgerald — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:37:14 +0000

What we really need here is a ‘day after’ delete button. I would call it the ’sober now’ button for when you review your posts and think “Jeez! Did I really say that? How snockered was I, anyway?”

Besides, who could complain about self-censorship?

By: Catherine Halley

Catherine Halley — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:35:29 +0000

The “reply” button is in place now. Different threads of conversation are separated by dark green lines. We’re working on the design of this to make it clearer, but for now, you can either:

1. hit reply and respond directly to the person whose name appears on the dark green line to the left of the word “reply” (your post will then appear directly below theirs), or

2. just add a comment in the box at the end of the conversation, and your post will appear at the bottom of the comments as it always has.

By: Gary B. Fitzgerald

Gary B. Fitzgerald — Fri, 01 May 2009 15:06:42 +0000

I think you’ll get a kick out of my most recent comment on Silliman made last night. I kind of like that term…the ‘CoI’. It was inspired, of course, by Silliman’s SoQ.