Skip to main content

Nemski mans up

Here.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
It was Nemski that deleted the Burris trackback, as revealed in the comments. Is that man-ing up?
February 13, 2009 at 8:59 AM
Anonymous said…
With eight contributers, I'd say it was man-ing up.
He didn't have to admit anything, but he did. He also added the link to DP.

Changing the tone in the DE blogosphere won't be easy, especially since there are those - on both sides - that love to fan the flames.

Imagine if there was a 30 minute waiting period between writing a comment and posting? (Not advocating that, btw!) Most flame wars are caused by spontaneous responses and a quick submit finger.

From my own experience I can honestly say that the posts I regret the most are the ones I've fired off in the heat of the moment. Sometimes posts, and comments, need time to mature.

Credit where credit is due, Anonymous.
February 13, 2009 at 9:26 AM
Hube said…
Call me cynical, but I think this is all just a game. The DLers prob got into a cyber chat room and said "Hey! Let's pretend we're fighting (again -- remember donviti's complaints about "restrictions" on language? THAT sure lasted long). We'll make it seem as if we're trying to make nice, and at the same time we'll get a lot more hits!"

I guess having all your commenters being your fellow bloggers got tiresome.
February 13, 2009 at 11:58 AM
Nancy Willing said…
Nemski only manned up when the pressure was upped.
A little mea culpa from Cassandra would be nice. As.If.
February 13, 2009 at 10:02 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...
22 comments
Read more

Soda tax debate reveals fundamental progressive assertions about your lack of individual rights and the "responsiblities" of the State

I thought it would be at least amusing to use the Delawareliberal comments as sub-headings regarding each category of what is wrong with the proposed tax on sodas and juice drinks. But there are so many different little strands of each comment that it would be impossible to pull them all out. So, instead, I'm going to let you read them in more or less the order they appeared, and note the assumptions. pandora: I’m perfectly okay with taxing sodas and juice drinks. Mainly because they’re total crap, and one of the main reasons our country’s children are overweight. They are also dirt cheap. Assumptions here: (1) Because "I" am perfectly okay with a new tax it should be imposed on everybody; (2) it is the government's responsibility to keep children from being obese; (3) the cheapness of the product to be taxed justifies charging people more for it. John Manifold: Soda fattens your kids [and you and your husband], shortens their lives, costs more than water [a...
31 comments
Read more