vt.Buzz ~ a political blog

Political notes from Free Press staff writers Terri Hallenbeck, Sam Hemingway and Nancy Remsen

11.14.2008

Cast your vote for blogging

Cast your votes. Should we continue to allow anonymous comments on our blog, or switch to a format where you have to sign up to comment?

Here's the dilemma we have faced. It's lovely to have the potential for a free and easy discussion. Whether one is a state worker or a private person with too much as stake to affix a name, they can still ask a question, offer a comment, propel the debate forward. I never wanted to cut that off.

Trouble is, it also allows people to propel the debate into the gutter, which is where a determined few seem to enjoy living. I've never enjoyed giving them that opportunity.

So, what you think? Anonymous or not?

- Terri Hallenbeck

posted by vt.Buzz | 3:44 PM |

Comments:

Terri,
Some of the worst gutter talk comes from people who are not anonymous.

Forcing people to use a name is not going to change anything. Most people will use an alias anyhow.

If you do force people to register, I hope that you ban the people who repeatedly drag the conversation into the gutter.

Thanks for the forum.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:02 PM, November 14, 2008

I enjoy the gutter talk; It's sometimes funny and it lets you know what the whackos on both ends of the spectrum are really thinking. Let it continue.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:17 PM, November 14, 2008

This is my first comment in a long time on this site. The issue isn't anonymity. It's the name calling and bullying of JW Coop. It's not fun to read. It's not intellectually stimulating, regardless of one's politics. So I scan the posts, but never look at the comments.

This blog has a terrible reputation in the VT blogosphere. When someone goes a little too far on another blog, people will say, "Why don't you go over to the Freeps blog?" The blog I'm associated with allows anonymous comments and pseudonyms, but the comments are moderated. Name calling is just not allowed. We have banned only one visitor, but we didn't hesitate to do it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:33 PM, November 14, 2008

I agree, the gutter-talk is mostly due to people with names (JWCoop, Bubba, etc.)

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:36 PM, November 14, 2008

I agree that you should ban the worst offenders from the blog. In addition, if you're going to make people register, they should have to register an actual name, address, etc., and not just a pseudonym that allows them to continue spewing lies and hate-filled rhetoric with no repurcussions.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:01 PM, November 14, 2008

Jeff Cooper has been banned under several names over at the Time Argus.

He takes great pleasure in causing trouble.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:56 PM, November 14, 2008

my vote is to switch to a sign in format

# Posted by:

Morgan W. Brown | 9:07 PM, November 14, 2008

Simply moderate the comments and throw out the crazy ones and the sleazy ones. A little censorship is not a bad thing. Just don't censor out articulate and polite dissenting views.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:12 PM, November 14, 2008

I agree with "anon #3" above...I like the posts, but do not read the comments because they are vapid and repetitive. A couple of people in particular make the whole thread into a minefield.

If you don't have time to moderate the comments, then you're just going to get trolls.

# Posted by:

Tom | 9:58 PM, November 14, 2008

As someone who got banned over at Green Mountain Daily for nothing more than disagreeing too much with Odum -- politely and respectfully -- I'm leery of giving someone the power to arbitrarily ban someone with unpopular views.

If you have clear, easily enforceable terms of service, and I think you do, you can ban posters for repeated violations or delete posts that don't conform.

More effort, agreed. But squelching open and sometimes contentious discussions by banning people/pseudonyms who are unpopular isn't exactly what I thought blogs were about.

# Posted by:

Independent Vermonter | 10:26 PM, November 14, 2008

Terri, you have allowed jwcoop to ruin this forum for over a year, and now you're wondering if you should do something?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:14 PM, November 14, 2008

I would totally agree with everyone on here. The posters who post non anon are generally the ones who scare people away (jwcoop, bubba, et al). I do find it funny this is the first post they have not posted on.

I also enjoy the animosity to help keep things balanced and in check and liven up the blog. (aka GOP staffers fighting with Dem staffers is always a good time).

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 2:42 AM, November 15, 2008

Agree. I am sick of jw and you other leftist hurting my feelings. We need some kind of liberal oath of allegiance to Obama, Pat, and Bernie before being allowed to post.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:35 AM, November 15, 2008

Gutter talk started to rise in Nov '07... oops wasn't that about when JWCOOP joined the party?

I agree with IndependentVTer and have made this point before. There are terms of service. Why would you have them and not enforce them?

Anon or not, you can identify the offenders. My suggestion...deal with them first. My guess is eliminating one chronic poster solves most of the gutter talk problem. The rise in gutter talk I think is in direct response to the frustration in the nature of one person's posting.

A little edginess isn't so bad. Nothing of value, just cut and paste insults are.

I suspect at the end of the day you know what you have to do to clean up the board.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 6:50 AM, November 15, 2008

Terri - thanks for giving us all the opportunity to weigh in on this matter. Clearly something needs to be done - but I will agree with the majority here that you have one bad apple that seems to be stinking up the whole barrel! So here are the options I see, with my own personal take:

Option #1: enforce BFP's terms of use! Seems to me the one individual that has brought you to this point has violated those terms repeatedly.

Option #2: moderate comments, but still allow anonymous postings. I like this option, cause you have some intelligent folks who have something to contribute to the discussion, but often have valid reasons for not wanting to use their name. Your example of state employees not wanting to use their names is spot on.

Option #3: require folks to register to post comments. WILL NOT WORK. Again I agree with others that have already pointed out that the ONE individual that has brought BFP to this decision point is indeed a registered user . . . and even though we know his name, he insults other users constantly in the most spiteful terms imaginable. Registering those making comments will NOT stop those hateful comments . . . only enforcing BFP's terms of use will.

Gotta say I like option #2. I know that moderating comments is a pain, and will lead to a delay in getting comments up, and will take a back seat if you have other things you are working on . . . but I also think that drawing a line on the nasty, hateful dialogue that has been happening here will be very beneficial. You will receive a much more thoughtful, respectful give-and-take on these issues if those making comments know that they will not be called "stupid", "ignorant", etc.

Again, I will add that it is a real shame that the BFP got to this point because of the behavior of a single individual. He should have been dealt with long ago, as they did over at the BFP's main competitor.

But thanks for letting us weigh in on the decision!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:05 AM, November 15, 2008

Also unacceptable to post someone's name address, phone number and directions to his house online as a form of intimidation; to make reference to an individual's family and the alleged abuse suffered by them; to call people alcoholics,useless etc. ad infinitum. These are all things that the person mentioned above has been subjected to in the name of free speech. Is this behavior defensible?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:44 AM, November 15, 2008

Note that the person mentioned in the post immediately above uses a significant portion of his real name, evidently. That's how his personal information (name, address, phone number, and house directions) evidently were obtained. Does anyone else want to be subjected to this for expressing the "wrong" opinion?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 10:57 AM, November 15, 2008

I gave up reading the comments a long time ago. I visit regularly to read what Terri, Nancy & Sam are blogging. The comments (sorry, commenters) are a waste of time at their best.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:01 AM, November 15, 2008

Then why are you reading now? That's a self-contradiction. Trying to distract from legitimate comment on the abuse of the blog?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 12:01 PM, November 15, 2008

A blast from the past with both Jeff and JWCoop10 posting.

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/blog/politics/2007/11/pollina-tosses-his-hat.html

You'll also note "Bubba" is there.

Not much has changed in a year has it?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:50 PM, November 15, 2008

PoliticsVT employed a similar format (sign in) and it actually worked out well. The amount of people who contributed to the conversation went down but they still had a healthy conversation over there.

I would say have people create accounts so you can more easily ban them for profanity and obscene name calling.

Thanks for putting this out there, Terri. Democracy does work.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 4:51 PM, November 15, 2008

According to your own count, Terri, I'm the 23rd poster.

Even if you don't count bubba, indy, tom and morgan w brown, eighteen of them are anonymous.

Is that the Burlington Bubba or the Winooski Bubba? Junior or Senior?

Is this the independent vermonter from Burlington or Richmond?

What else do you need to know?

Lose the anonymous posters. Let people come up with screen names if they don't have the guts to stand by what they're posting.

Even before this nameless nitwit started trashing my wife and kids and posting my name address and phone and offering google map directions to our house in every one of his posts this past August, you had anonymous posters looking up profiles trying to intimidate and run me or others off by posting their names and addresses because they don't know what the hell they're talking about and don't like me or others pointing it out.

Your own archives show that bubba and an assortment of anonymous nitwits were pulling this same number on Doug Hoffer before I even got here and it wasn't because he wasn't providing them with facts and evidence. He just called them on their nonsense and didn't tell them what they wanted to hear.

These sites are invariably overrun with an assortment of anonymous posters or none nones spewing racist rubbish, Anti-Semitic slop or wingnut nonsense with no basis in fact. They're anonymous echo chambers spewing wingnut nonsense and shouting down anyone who calls them on their crap.

You've got the IP Addresses. You know who's who. All you've got to do is look.

If you're going to allow anonymous callers, if somebody pulls something, the chances of them just blaming it on another anonymous poster are just too great.

I've been telling you this since day one and you know it.

Make everyone have a distinct identity. It doesn't matter whether it's their name or not.

As long as you get rid of this anonymous nonsense and call it both ways, that's fine with me.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 5:12 PM, November 15, 2008

Wow Jeff does that include banning people whho post stuff like this?

"Nice try, nitwit. No sale."

"Nice try. Get yourself a case, a clue, a handle and we'll talk, schmuck."

"s it really your ignorant anonymous ass's clueless-cretin contention that he couldn't have won it without Howard Dean pullin' the strings in DC, little fella?"

"Look it up. Learn something, little lunatic-fringe fella."

"That makes four times he's been reelected on his own which leaves your ignorant anonymous ass still dumb, still scum, and still bearing bounties of bupkis."

"Ya mean like you and your clueless cretin comrades are doin' now, bubbakis?"

"You're dumb, you're scum and ya got bupkis, bubbakis. Ya always do."

"Gee, I hate to keep confusin' your ignorant anonymous ass with the facts, little fella, but they're not talkin' about kickin' him outta the Senate."

"As is your cluleless-cretin custom, the only thing your ignorant anonymous ass has been able to establish is that ya can't spell Independent or figure out how to use spellcheck.

I never doubted ya on that score for a second, little fella."

"The Dems don't owe that meshuggah schmuck a damned thing.

He dug his own grave. Let him go fall in it."

"Fine. Let him caucus with the sig heil set and see what kinda deal they give him.

You schmucks want him. Fine. He's all yours."

"And if your ignorant anonymous ass would take the trouble to inform yourself, you'd know that - even if that is Obama's opinion on the matter - ultimately, that's a matter for the Democratic Majority of the US Senate to determine, douche bag."

"Is that right, timmy. Is it your clueless-cretin contention that Vermont is in better shape now than it was before the doogie/dubie debacle started runnin' it into the ground.

Feel free to produce any and all evidence in support of that psychotic slop.

Gee, I'm shocked.

What's more, given the fact that he held office for less than 12 full years from 8/91 - 1/03, if it's your ignorant ass's assertion that Vermont was "a state that had a part-time for Governor for about a decade" because Dean was running for President or otherwise engaged during most, if not all of that 11-year period, the only thing you've managed to prove is that you don't think at all, little fella."

"If not, you're not only ignorant trash who can't distinguish your ass from your elbow, you're utterly psychotic, to boot.

My money's on door number two.

On the other hand, you're definitely the most entertaining clueless cretins to stumble into this joint in a month or two. I'll give ya that much.

You may be dim, demented and delusional, but at least you ain't dull. That's a helluva lot more than I can say for your coalition of the clueless cretin comrades, little fella."

"Well, I hate to confuse ya with the facts, timmy, but your factually-challenged, delusional-dreck assertions ain't evidence, little fella. They're merely your factually-challenged, delusional-dreck assertions."

"Boy voyage, schmuck."

"Well, crazy lady, since we just voted out most of the ineffective tools, you're gonna have to wait at least a couple of years, set out for redder pastures where the climate suits your sheet or both.

Just climb that roof, face south, spread those wings and fly, auntie amerika.

Godspeed, crazy lady. Godspeed."

"He just united the majority of American Voters to rid the White House of the foul stench of ignorant, illegitimate, incompetent trash, crazy lady.

In fact, Vermont went for him 2-1, auntie amerika. The scum vote is just dyin' off here in droves, crazy lady.

Bummer.

Fly away, little lunatic-fringe lady. Fly away.

I like this new Timbol alter ego of yours, auntie amerika. She seems nice in a pretentious, ignorant anonymous trash sorta way."

All of this content and more is from one thread and was posted within the last 24 hours.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:33 PM, November 15, 2008

As a matter of fact, one of the first reasons I posted here over a year ago was because of the blatent falsehoods in the dim-controlled legislature's "study" of Vermont's tax policies, rigged to make Vermont look like some kind of tax haven. Obviously much of the input came from Doug Hoffer, a known hired gun for leftist causes. I posted true statistics regarding taxations, etc. in various states from Chambers of Commerce, Government statistics, etc, and wondered why the "study" only used states with high taxes and excluded property taxes. This brought on the wrath of jw, with all of the previously mentioned cut-and-paste paragraphs he is known for, because he realized he couldn't refute my facts. You all know the rest of the story. My stats are accurate, as they were then, as they came directly from Wikopedia, Chamber of Commerce, US Labor states, etc. and all can be looked up on Google and verified. It is encouraging to see a handful of common-sense conservatives on this blog, although obviously out-numbered by the far-left. Perhaps the BFP would like to reserve the blog for the type of leftist partisans on the Green Mt. Daily with their made-up comments about Sarah Palin calling Obama "Sambo" and Hillary "the bitch"! In his worse day, jw and the rest of us can't compare to the dispicable, vile garbage in the GMD.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:27 PM, November 15, 2008

bubba..

"As a matter of fact, one of the first reasons I posted here over a year ago was because of the blatent falsehoods in the dim-controlled legislature's "study" of Vermont's tax policies, rigged to make Vermont look like some kind of tax haven."

Nice try, bubbakis. The archives clearly demonstrate that you were a clueless cretin well before that, but ya did just manage to prove that ya can't spell blatant, which, all in all, is rather ironic given what a blatantly brain-dead bigot with bupkis ya are, little fella.

"Obviously much of the input came from Doug Hoffer, a known hired gun for leftist causes. I posted true statistics regarding taxations, etc. in various states from Chambers of Commerce, Government statistics, etc, and wondered why the "study" only used states with high taxes and excluded property taxes."

Well, it's a fact that they did come from wikipedia, bubbles. I'll give ya that much.

Of course, as anyone with any credibility knows, they're only as reliable as the last wingnut to edit the entry in question, so, it's no surprise that that comes as news to you.

The Chamber of Commerce is a reliable source for stats, eh, bubbakis? That's a good one, little fraudulent fella.

"This brought on the wrath of jw, with all of the previously mentioned cut-and-paste paragraphs he is known for, because he realized he couldn't refute my facts."

Clearly, you majored in revisionist history, bubbakis.

Ya gonna tell me how the Indians gave the Whites gifts of blankets with small pox on 'em now, too.

If you ever come up with any, bubbakis, I'll be more than happy to refute them.

It's been a year and I'm still waitin'. Ya spent the first six months claimin' I was Doug Hoffer and you're still claimin' that saddam was a bigger threat to the US than Japan and Hitler and FDR tricked Japan into bombing Pearl Harbor and Hitler to declare war on us four days later just so he could get us out of the Depression he'd had us mired in since 1931 just so WWII could end the Depression by the calendar magically turning into 1943.

You're ignorant anonymous ass is too modest, bubbakis. Billo and Inshannity and the rest of that talk radio trash have got nothing on you.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 8:39 PM, November 15, 2008

Terri?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:15 PM, November 15, 2008

Once in a while, Terri, I'll check out the comments. However, I just read what you, Sam and Nancy have to say and move on. I really don't read the comments that often and when I do, it's just a reminder on why I write at GMD. Not because of what I read here from you three (you all do work), but rather not put up with some of the crap that people write as comments. Some blogs, in the past, have deleted comments that are obscene (like Coops above me). However, it's a free country and it's a real tough call.

My thoughts, as I said before, are employ the same strategy that PoliticsVT and other blogs employed: Make people register and it will reduce the number of abusers on the site. It will also allow you greater freedom to delete comments and ban people from the site.

All in all, I enjoy reading this blog. It's a good way to start the day after I read the Freeps.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:34 PM, November 15, 2008

This is a blogger blog. If I've commented on here (rarely), I do so under my blogger handle. I don't mind anonymous posts, but on my blog, I encourage people to use their name (or some sort of name consistently). And I encourage people to try to remain on topic. A friend has been banned from Common Dreams because he dared to post a comment that was unfavourable to Obama's centrist politics. He was polite and logical in his arguments (unlike some of the commenters on this blog and the BFP articles), but still was booted. It's a tough call and can be disheartening when people are just mendacious. I'm in favour of open-ness. But it's no sweat for me to do the word verification thing, either.

# Posted by:

JayV | 4:47 AM, November 16, 2008

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this. I'm new to this blog in the last week and was amazed at how I was ragged on by JWCoop. His words don't hurt me, but he is the racist biggoted one. He will attempt to pick any little piece of information he "THINKS" is wrong, (remember JW..facts get in your way sometime) and attempts to trash the poster around it. I don't believe the forum is "open minded" when you get certain individuals like this riding rough shod over the whole thing. Some obviously love to think themselves bigger than they are, while the rest of us can accept who we are and have our own beliefs and faith. By the way, look up the word schmuck sometime, or better yet, walk into a synagogue and ask what it means. Your true colors show through very clearly behind the hate speek. Oh, and I would happily use a name, I don't hide behind anonymous. Wake up JW, you're not welcome here and everyone knows it.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 5:40 AM, November 16, 2008

"Wake up JW, you're not welcome here and everyone knows it."

JW has been bragging on this blog lately that he had been here about a year.

Do a Google Search of JWCoop10 then expand the results for this blog. From the begining he has been posting the same sort of abusive content.

It appears JW is very welcome here. At least welcomed by the Free Press.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:51 AM, November 16, 2008

Terri, JW's comments above are all the proof you need that even when someone is a registered user, they may still cross the line and violates BFP's terms of service.

I feel you have no option but no moderate comments, whether they come from registered or anonymous users, and refuse to post comments that violate those terms of service.

Hopefully within a few weeks folks will realize they have to keep it civil and respectful if they want their comments to be seen online!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:58 AM, November 16, 2008

The notion by JW that his voice was needed here to "defend" Hoffer is a joke. He's been using that as an excuse to post his obscene, demented, and irrational personal attacks for a year, almost indiscriminately against anyone else who posts on this blog.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:51 AM, November 16, 2008

By the way JW, there just may be some intelligent women out here who don't appreciate being referred to as "little fela"... maybe it is you who has the little fela complex.

Lacey

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 3:19 PM, November 16, 2008

Anonymous...

"By the way JW, there just may be some intelligent women out here who don't appreciate being referred to as "little fela"..."

Well, Lacey, if what you say is true, then there's certainly at least one anonymous nitwit-ette who can't spell fella.

Let's review. So far, you've managed to establish that you're another is a series of nameless nitwits who can't spell.

That's not a good look for you.

Get yourself a case, a clue and an identity and I'll give a damn.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 3:28 PM, November 16, 2008

Anonymous said...

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this. I'm new to this blog in the last week and was amazed at how I was ragged on by JWCoop. His words don't hurt me, but he is the racist biggoted one."

Ah, the ol' he's a racist because he won't abide nazis and klansmen" routine, eh? How refreshing.

For the record, captain, Jews are considered Caucasian. Feel free to check.

So, so far you've managed to establish the fact that you're a "bigotted" nameless-nitwit who's "new to the blog in the last week" who can't spell bigot or hate "speek".

Gee, just what the doctor ordered.

How could I not believe or take your seriously, oh captain, my captain.

"He will attempt to pick any little piece of information he "THINKS" is wrong,.."

Such as? That's what I thought.

"..(remember JW..facts get in your way sometime) and attempts to trash the poster around it."

Such as? That's what I thought.

"I don't believe the forum is "open minded" when you get certain individuals like this riding rough shod over the whole thing."

Some obviously love to think themselves bigger than they are, while the rest of us can accept who we are and have our own beliefs and faith."

Yeah, just like the nazis and the klan. Nice try, auntie amerika.

"By the way, look up the word schmuck sometime, or better yet, walk into a synagogue and ask what it means. Your true colors show through very clearly behind the hate speek."

You wanna talk Yiddish, Anti-Semitism, "Biggotry" and racism with a Jew, boychick?

Knock yourself out.

"Oh, and I would happily use a name, I don't hide behind anonymous."

Sure, ya would. The fact that you're posting here as "anonymous" while personally calling me out is sheer coincidence, little fella.

"Wake up JW, you're not welcome here and everyone knows it."

Always with the sweet talk, little fella.

Let's review. You're new to this blog in the last week, but you're an anonymous authority on "biggoted" behavior who'd happily use a name to post because you're not afraid to identify yourself and stand behind what you post as your posting here anonymously clearly demonstrates and you've taken it upon yourself to speak for the board as to just who's welcome here and everyone knows despite the fact that "you're new to the blog within the past week".

Always a pleasure, auntie amerika. Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:35 PM, November 16, 2008

Anonymous said...

"The notion by JW that his voice was needed here to "defend" Hoffer is a joke."

Feel free to point out just where and when I said I was here to defend Doug Hoffer, little factually-challenged, nameless-nitwit fella.

I merely mention Hoffer to demonstrate the fact that the lunatic-fringe likes of you were trashin' him long before I got here as the the Freeps Archives clearly demonstrate.

You just don't like it when somebody smacks you back.

If I've got the wrong anonymous, take it up with the nameless-nitwit who's postin' under your name, sport.

If you're gonna put occupant on your mailbox, don't come cryin' to me when you get someone else's GMP disconnection notice.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 4:45 PM, November 16, 2008

Anonymous said...

"Yep, that about sums it up. But you forgot to note one important point: the opportunists and left-wingers you rightly speak of are all transplants: Bernie, Welchie, Gaye, Anthony, Zuckerman, and the list goes on and on. They didn't move here because they care about Vermont or the people who were born and raised here and who work on farms and in gas stations and the few factories that are left. They moved here to create their own little trust-funded, "pro-environment" theme park, and damn anyone who gets in their way, including the natives."

In other words, you're still dumb, you're still scum, you've still got bupkis and you've got nothing to say on the nominal topic of this thread so you're gonna invent some bogus strawman trash with no basis in fact that's got nothing to do with anything and go on another anonymous nitwit rant about "flatlanders" and real Vermonters because ya got bupkis as far as the eye can see.

Nice try. No sale.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 6:16 PM, November 16, 2008

Anonymous said...

"This is my first comment in a long time on this site. The issue isn't anonymity. It's the name calling and bullying of JW Coop. It's not fun to read. It's not intellectually stimulating, regardless of one's politics. So I scan the posts, but never look at the comments."

Then how would you know that the "bullying" you allege is confined to me little factually-challenged/fraudulent/nameless-nitwit fella?

Furthermore, feel free to list any and all instances of me posting the name, address and phone of other posters while trashing them and their family members, little fella.

Go on. Knock yourself out, little nameless-nitwit fella. Have yourself a regular factually-challenged, fraudulent field day for yourself, yutz.

Gee, bupkis. I'm shocked.

"This blog has a terrible reputation in the VT blogosphere. When someone goes a little too far on another blog, people will say, "Why don't you go over to the Freeps blog?"

Is that right, little fella.

Your ignorant anonymous ass's clueless-cretin contentions with no supporting evidence aren't proof of anything but the fact that, outside of your ignorant anonymous ass's clueless-cretin contentions with no supporting evidence, you've got bupkis.

I never doubted you for a second, sport.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 6:29 PM, November 16, 2008

The comment immediately preceding this one is a classic example of the reason a lot of people think twice before trying to slog through comments on this blog. All this idiot says is "I disagree" and "I don't like you," but he takes a couple of hundred words to do it, and it's roughly the same couple of hundred words he's posted hundreds of times here before. In fact, Google tells us that this guy has commented on 418 posts this year alone. That's not someone looking for meaningful discourse.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:05 PM, November 16, 2008

Anonymous...

Is that right. And are you the official spokesperson for "a lot of people", little fella, or are you just speaking on behalf of your anonymous self?

Nice try. No sale.

The comment immediately preceding this one is a classic example of the reason a lot of people think twice before trying to slog through comments on this blog."

"All this idiot says is "I disagree" and "I don't like you," but he takes a couple of hundred words to do it, and it's roughly the same couple of hundred words he's posted hundreds of times here before."

As opposed to, oh, say, this anonymous nonsense, for example.

Nice try. No sale.

"In fact, Google tells us that this guy has commented on 418 posts this year alone. That's not someone looking for meaningful discourse."

Gee, ya don't say. How many posts does Google tell us anonymous has made this year, little fella?

I suspect there's a couple of different people posting as "anonymous", little fella, but that's just a hunch.

Truth be told, if ya asked me to raise my right hand and swear on the proverbial stack under pain of perjury that they weren't all the same "anonymous" poster, I'd be forced to admit that I couldn't be sure because I had no way of knowing one way or the other now wouldn't I, little fella?

Nice try. No sale.

Always a pleasure.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 7:34 PM, November 16, 2008

Folks, I think we have gotten under his skin. Keep it up !!!

You think you are so coy. Grow up

Lacey

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:51 PM, November 16, 2008

Terri, need more evidence that the gutter talk isn't coming from "anonymous" but from the sociopath named jwcoop?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:08 PM, November 16, 2008

"Folks, I think we have gotten under his skin. Keep it up !!!"

Please don't. That's what he wants. He will then claim to be a victim.

My guess is that the Free Press will do nothing about JWCoop10 even though he has given them plenty of reason to ban him just in this thread.

Were they going to deal with him they would have done so in November 2007.

http://virtualimpax.com/2008/07/03/increasing-blog-traffic-and-drive-by-readers-2/

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:10 PM, November 16, 2008

You're so right, some people need the attention to exist. Maybe we should just continue without reference to him and ignore his posts, that is what most children despise most...being ignored. Oh and by the way, pardon the terminology below, but this is the definition I think that was referred to in as he says "Auntie Amerika's" Post

Schmuck entered English as a borrowed word from Yiddish, where it is an obscene term literally meaning a foreskin or head of a penis, and an insult.

That should be enough reason alone to ban the poor fella...

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 9:15 PM, November 16, 2008

So much anonymous nonsense, so little time.

-------------------------

Anonymous said...

Terri, need more evidence that the gutter talk isn't coming from "anonymous" but from the sociopath named jwcoop?

9:08 PM, November 16, 2008

Anonymous said...
Self centered slime Coopy bringing shame on his wife and sons to prove he is the Queen Bitch again.

Nice to know there are things you can count on. Coop being a moron is right up there with the sun coming up in the east every morning.

Next up coop trying in vain to turn this around to make himself look smart.

Maybe the fat booze hound thinks the sun will rise in the west too.

8:45 PM, November 12, 2008
Anonymous said...
It's time to vote. Who is the most dysfunctional family?
(A) The Osbourne's
(B) The Coop's

7:27 AM, November 13, 2008
Anonymous said...
At least Ozzy brings money into the house by acting like an idiot.

Coop could at least go down to town and panhandle but he'd miss his stories.

8:35 AM, November 13, 2008
Anonymous said...
It sounds like the first vote goes to Coopy!

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 9:30 PM, November 16, 2008

Nice try, nitwit.

Saying someones a schmuck is like saying they're a nitwit or that Larry the Cable Guy's movie sucks.

Get yourself a case and a clue.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:04 PM, November 16, 2008

"Gee, ya don't say."

I don't say, Google does. Google also says that in 2008 alone, you had the following to say in response to posts on this blog. Remember, this is the number of distinct posts commented on, not the total number of comments, which would be much higher:

"you're dumb" - 134 posts
"you're scum" - 140 posts
"ya got bupkis" - 145 posts
"little fella" - 349 posts
"ignorant anonymous ass" - 296 posts
...and the list goes on.

Dragging down the discourse, never "propelling the debate forward."

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:08 PM, November 16, 2008

Gee, it's funny how ya forgot to post the anonymous count, little fella. I'm sure it was just a coincidence.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 11:19 PM, November 16, 2008

Awwww, after posting a gazillion obscene, insulting posts, wittuw Jeffy is aww upset because a few people fired back at him. Awwww.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:27 PM, November 16, 2008

Update: "little fella" - 350 posts

Even if "anonymous" were just one person, that one person would not have slung nearly as many insults at other posters as you have.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:33 PM, November 16, 2008

Terri, might I suggest another approach: can your IT folks come up with a way that we can easily "hide" comments from users that we (individual readers) find offensive? That is, can your IT folks give me the option of reading everyone's comments, but with a simple click allow me to collapse and hide all the comments from this self-absorbed, self-righteous individual who has gleefully taken this blog hostage?

If they could figure out how to do that, you would not have to undertake the time-consuming task of moderating comments, people would still be able to post comments without giving their name (and there are many reasons that some like or need to do that) . . . and at the same time people would not have to endure the petty name calling and insults that has become the hallmark of the Buzz comment section!

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 7:07 AM, November 17, 2008

"Furthermore, feel free to list any and all instances of me posting the name, address and phone of other posters while trashing them and their family members, little fella."

That no doubt happened because JW incited it. Others have posted comments that aren't real appropriate. But mostly out of frustration at JW. He is the root cause of this blog really sucking. I'll be able to prove that when he's kicked off and the blog improves. I'm outta here. I'll check in after a week or so. If he's gone, I'll be back. If not, I'll never be back. Others should feel free to do the same.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:38 AM, November 17, 2008

Here's an idea. With all due respect, simply enforce your terms of use.

Your lawyers went to great lengths to write them for legitimate reasons. The BFP caretaker of this blog should enforce the policy the Company has set forth for them to follow.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:40 AM, November 17, 2008

How difficult can it be to skip over blogs you think might be offensive? Y'all must be liberals, because the most offensive posts on this blog pale in comparison to what has been posted about President George W. Bush the past 7 years. Get a life.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:43 AM, November 17, 2008

Hey Terry, would I be correct in guessing that Bubba and JWCoop10 both use the same ISP?

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 8:58 AM, November 17, 2008

bubba said...

"How difficult can it be to skip over blogs you think might be offensive?...."

Ah, so bubba is shrub is bubba.

That explains a great deal. No wonder we're teetering on the edge of a Global Depression.

# Posted by:

JWCoop10 | 10:05 AM, November 17, 2008

Terri:

I see your Mr. Cooper is still being abusive.

Perhaps you'd care to enighten those of us he has identified as dumb and scum with bupkis why that is not a problem.

# Posted by:

Anonymous | 11:31 PM, November 17, 2008