?

Log in

No account? Create an account

October 8th, 2005

Policy concerning anonymous comments

Lately this journal has started receiving anonymous postings, which is desirable. If more people read and contribute, the better.

However, I quickly had to set up screening of anonymous postings, on account of my responsibilities as a blogger, because postings included both spam and the use of language to disrupt. My policy is no spam, no trolling, no freeping, etc. Most likely I will err on the cautious side, rejecting what actually are good comments but which I suspect—likely incorrectly— are meant to disrupt. I have so far held back both negative and positive comments about my own opinions, to be very cautious.

Comments made from LJ accounts are not being screened.

This policy basically is a blog version of 'No shirt, no shoes, no service' in stores and restaurants—a health measure.

Latest Month

June 2016
S M T W T F S
   1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
2627282930  

Comments

  • 25 Mar 2014, 01:22
    In case it matters, the most recent confirmed lahar is about 500 years ago, but there were mixed reports of eruptions in the late 1800s.
  • 25 Mar 2014, 01:20
    Pretty low until you jinxed them.
  • 25 Mar 2014, 01:01
    What would you estimate the odds to be of it happening in the next 200 years?
  • 27 Jan 2014, 06:22
    Thinking about it further, I think I now understand. You're saying the WSJ is being antisemitic, not the people they're quoting.

    I don't think they'd listen to it coming from us, but a…
  • 27 Jan 2014, 06:09
    I'm not noticing it either. Seems to me they *are* being assholes to Jews, but only moreso than anybody else if we happen to be in the way. I think that's gneral-purpose assholery, not…
Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by yoksel