Friday, 10 June 2011

Commenting Guidelines

I'll be honest, I don't expect epic debates of philosophy here. However my belief on healthcare is prevention > cure, so perhaps I should apply that to online blogs as well. (As opposed, of course, to offline web-logs.)

1. While English is a vast and varied creature with an astounding number of dialects, each as valid as the next, one should aspire to be understood. One should also aspire not 2 typ lyk dis - a little bit as part of internet-based English dialects is fine (see: point 4), but doing it because you're too lazy for full words is annoying.

2. Astoundingly, I have examined in detail common arguments that run contrary to my beliefs. Want to explain to me why it's okay to hate minorities? Want to tell me my gender doesn't exist? Want to play devil's advocate for people who done bad? Do it somewhere else. I have heard it before and it didn't change my mind last time either.

3. Don't be a creeper. "Creeper" will be defined by me and is subject to change without notice.

4. Emotions are not bad. If you think someone is being emotional and wish to accuse them of such as thinly veiled code for "your argument is invalid because you have feelings", be advised that no1curr.

5. Academic essays with footnotes and a well-padded bibliography are not a requirement. On the other hand, if you tell us that a minimum wage of 39c/hour will increase wages by 500% and decrease unemployment or that restricting food intake to 400 calories a day causes a 5 year weight loss success rate of 95%, you should probably expect to be told [citation needed].

6. Personal attacks are very rarely necessary, especially if you think a personal attack can legitimately draw on a person's weight, looks, gender, sexuality, libido, medical status, etc. Protip: they can't, because none of those things have moral weight. Bigotry does, though.

7. I do not owe you anything. Full stop. (Unless I borrowed money.)

No comments:

Post a Comment