Open Post

I think I’m done for today, but you guys are more than welcome to engage in a little debate in the comments, so consider this your open post for the day.

A reminder: comments are still being moderated, and I’m releasing them as I get time. They’re coming in faster than I can read them (most of it is that charming Viagra spam that I’ve come to know and love on my own blog), but I promise, I’ll get to ’em.

Have fun, and I’ll see you in the morning!

Oh, also: ST told me to tell you guys “hi”.

5 Responses to "Open Post"

Dana says:

November 4, 2006 at 7:01 pm

Brian and Sis: After using a captcha feature and having a very extensive moderation and kill queue, I finally installed the Akismet spam plug-in for WordPress on my site — and it has worked very well.

So far, in just three weeks, it has caught over 3,100 spams (or is the plural of spam, spam?), and only a couple of them have been real comments. Akismet allows you to review the caught spam before deleting everything; the one problem I’ve had is that when it goes onto a second page (each page shows forty spam), whenever I try to access a page beyond the first, I get a page not found error. Thus, I may have deleted a proper reader comment, but, out of 3,100, the vast majority of which I reviewed, only a couple were legit.
Brian says:

November 4, 2006 at 7:24 pm

Hi, Dana.

Yeah, we both have that. She has it set so that she can moderate the comments. Which is a good idea, because I’ve found on my own site that Askimet sometimes blocks legit comments and trackbacks. I think that identified spam still gets blocked, but the questionable stuff comes through and gets placed in the moderation mode. Some are actual comments.

I like how she’s got it set up, so I’ve done the same thing on my site. Time will tell if it works properly, and whether or not it stays. =D
Baklava says:

November 5, 2006 at 10:45 am

U.S. 4.4% France 9.9% I see France broke the double digit barrier. What does U.S. Unemployment look like? It looks very good.
Sister Toldjah says:

November 6, 2006 at 10:32 am

Moved from another thread. –ST

The two faces of Newsweek from Tammy Bruce:

In Tammy’s post is this:

The Department of Defense took issue with Newsweek’s bias, and requested a column to “rebut some of the more sensational charges.” And how did Newsweek respond?

Newsweek dismissed the rebuttal as the “government position” as well as the request for a stand-alone column. The Pentagon’s response to that letter read in part: “First, a â€˜concise’ letter to the editor, of say, 200 words, cannot adequately address a 2200-word article containing a series of false assertions. Second, the issue is not Newsweek’s position versus the â€˜government position.’ The issue is that your readers were given a one-sided, opinion-laced article on Afghanistan based on falsehoods—which is something that journalists and editors are usually concerned about. Your dismissive reply is disappointing, to say the least.”

Comment by Baklava @ 11/6/2006 – 10:26 am
Great White Rat says:

November 7, 2006 at 12:28 am

To continue with Baklava’s theme, the November 6 issue of City Journal has a good essay: What ever happened to patriotic reporters?

It gives some number to support Baklava:

When the Center for Media and Public Affairs made a nonpartisan evaluation of network news broadcasts, it found that during the active war against Saddam Hussein, 51% of the reports about the conflict were negative. Six months after the land battle ended, 77% were negative; in the 2004 general election, 89% were negative; by the spring of 2006, 94% were negative. This decline in media support was much faster than during Korea or Vietnam.

I’d put the link here, but for some reason it isn’t showing up in the preview…I notice that happens sometimes here.

Comments are closed.