Democrats & Liberals: Archives

I say that this comment is distasteful and not they type of content I want to see on WatchBlog. I want to see more thoughtful comments here, not juvenile posts designed to get a rise out of people. There are important issues and real differences between both the parties and the Democratic candidates. Instead of writing a pointless post like this, please use your time for intelligent discussion.

Your fellow editor,
Grant

While Grover’s post may be better placed as a comment to 9thwave’s, I disagree with Grant about it being “pointless.” In fact, I just got done reading a slew of fresh links over at Cursor.org that point to the issues Grover lampooned.

Of course, there is one solution Grant: write posts the way you think they should be and let the few loyal readers make the call.

Robbie D

I agree with Grant. I didn’t create WatchBlog to be a a place for flame-bait. While the posts are mildly clever, I think there are more professional ways to present the debate.

Note to all editors: I would like to see more posts with solid research and facts and not just speculation and rumor. Google is your friend. Links are good.

Note to readers: If something an editor has written is wrong or needs to be debated, then it’s your prerogative to call them on it by posting in the comments section, however I will hold you to the same standards as the editors. Solid research and facts should be included in your replies. Google is your friend. And links supporting your argument are good.

I agree that Grover’s post would have flowed better as a comment. But that’s about all I agree with. I have a saying: if you haven’t got a sense of humor, you haven’t got anything.

The original point of my post was three-fold: 1) to demonstrate that the president is an employee of the American public; 2) that 18 months before election day against a popular incumbent our time would be well spent making a case for “firing” rather than focusing so much on money RIGHT NOW; and 3) that maybe with a little humor, the reading public might start to realize that some thing’s do matter.

If the message here is that there is no room for satire or humor on Watchblog, it’s good we get that cleared up now. I thought the point of a multi-editor blog was to have a variety of voices. My take so far is that I feel like I keep seeing the same thing repeated over and over. But maybe that’s just me.

Sincerely,
Ellen

I have no problems with there being humor in a post, but it must clearly be labeled as such. Writing satirical posts are a double-edged sword. On the one hand they can be very funny for those who grasp right away that it’s satire, but on the other hand those who don’t see it as satire immediately take it seriously and all kinds of confusion and misuderstanding can take place.

But then WatchBlog doesn’t have a comics page or an entertainment section. A category for political cartoons would be pretty awesome, though.

Last thought: It is indeed possible to be both professioanl and humorous at the same time. People like Molly Ivins and Jon Stewart come to mind.

Wow, Editor. It’s not very “professioanl” to rip your volunteers like that on a public forum.

Robbie D: you must not read the NYTimes. :)

Good satire is fine, IMHO, but this post wasn’t funny at all. I would be perfectly happy with a comic section for WatchBlog, a la Salon. But whichever editors try to humorous posts must realize that it is far harder to write good satire than to write other types commentary. Had this post been funny and if it had a point, which I think got lost in the ‘humor’, I would not have had a problem with it. But it sacrificed the message for the laugh, and I don’t think that is acceptable on this blog.

Comments are now closed on this post. Thank you all for your input.

The editors may continue this thread on the watchblog-discuss internal mailing list.