I apologize to readers that I have at least two known stalkers operating on the Comments boards of the blog. These two individuals call themselves Razavipour and E. Bilpe (sometimes also known as “Other”). Raza distinguishes himself by lengthy rants frequently posted in all bold.
I have tried to ban their IPs since they have contravened the blog’s clearly posted guidelines for commenters. But they slide around into different IPs and continue to try to clog up the JWN comments boards with their lengthy, frequently hate-filled, seemingly demented, or ad-feminam/ad-hominem rantings.
I apologize for the nuisance they constitute. My tech advisor, legal advisor, and I will work together to see what our further options are. Any suggestions from bona-fide readers will be welcome.
I shall continue trying to delete these people’s unwanted incursions onto my bandwidth whenever I can. Meantime, please just ignore them.
23 thoughts on “Apologies for stalkers here”
Comments are closed.
Helena, you need to show where the posts you have slashed fits any of the charges and labels you have listed. One censored post was strictly quoting the Financial Times.
Show the readers the ad-feminam and ad-hominem that you claim. Quote the material. Of course you cannot, because it is not there.
And the bold is one sentence in a dozen paragraphs, and therefore the post is far from “posted in all bold”. Stop the falsehoods and instead substantiate your charge of “hate-filled”.
This is a forum open to the public and your selective discrimination against certain posters based on a hidden agenda is abusive and akin to racial discrimination by private employers, and constitutes a violation of our rights to post in a public forum. In a public forum you cannot discriminate against a poster, anymore than a public conference organizer can discriminiate based on race, ethnicity, identity, gender, religion, ideology, or opinion. There are laws against such practices which violate our fundamental rights. Where I live, there is a government Human Rights Tribunal that investigate such matters.
So stop stalking and violating certain of this public message board posters.
If you wish to run a club, then stop advertising this as a public forum, and set up an invitation-only club for heaven’s sake.
And that “bandwidth” that you mention costs only $ 0.00021 per post. I am certain ‘haloscan’, the public forum service, is free.
This post is to show support to our hostess Helena Cobban.
Helena continues to give to us valuable work for nothing. That is what draws us here.
Helena is not the only blogger who keeps an open Comments section under each post. Nor is she the only one who enters into dialogue with her posters, but such bloggers are very few.
By doing all this, Helena becomes vulnerable to people who want her to go away, cease, or even die. That kind of expression is very difficult to bear up against, and that is why open sites like this, even though so much needed and loved, are rare.
The way forward is for us others to take the burden off Helena’s back. We must not simply wait for the aggressors to go away. We must not expect that the problem can be entirely solved by technical means, as is already clear. We must not give back the same to the aggressors. That has been my mistake at tiems. We must rather turn the tables.
I think we must take these ugly ducklings and talk to them as if they were swans. We commenters must try to transcend the trolls, with firmness, charity, and wisdom, changing tactics as necessary, but staying in and persevering.
Let’s have a few more expressions of appreciation here. How about it, folks?
Helena, while from a political perspective, I generally tend to disagree with the posters I think you are addressing, I don’t see what is so terrible, or socially ‘incorrect’about what they are writing. And as a lawyer, I don’t see that what they are doing amounts to a legal issue. However, it is getting close. Not what they write…but the technical means by which they are delivering it. Helena, let them post. Posters….stop bypassing the Helana’s terms of service for her site. Its her site and while I think she is being way too sensitive, and a bit too controlling for my taste, she has a right to run her site the way she wants.
Helena
I think their comments speak for themselves. Their type of anger and hatred is so obvious that it is almost amusing at times. I wouldn’t get too worried that the sane among us mistake their positions for yours, or for fact, in most cases. When their anger is so over the top, it is foolish to feed into it. Ignoring them may be effective since their pleas for attention are so obvious.(Think 2 year old wanting a cookie) Thank you for sharing your wealth of experience with us. Most of us are grateful.
Jon Stanley, perhaps if you were a Muslim, or a female – or both – you would see things from a rather different point of view.
I suspect also that if they spoke of Jews and Judaism in the same manner as they are speak about Muslims and Islam you would have no problem at all finding them very objectionable.
I haven’t read most of the offensive comments, but as long as she is bearing the cost, she can run this site any way she wants. Though the distribution is public, these types of moderated forums actually function more like private clubs rather than public forums. If Razi doesn’t like the rules here, he can click over to LGF or Freerepublic.com and post to his hearts content. He will find the environment very supportive. If I was to journey into those parts, on the other hand, I would be made to feel very unwelcome, with comments either flamed or deleted. If he really wants total control, then he should start his own blog, and say whatever he likes, whenever he likes.
I wonder if Dominic’s constant charge of “fascist” or other posters’ accusations of “colonialism” or racism etc etc etc count as ad hominems in Helena’s world. Dominic at least seems aware of the problem himself, good on ya for that D. Well done, I mean it.
Helena, if you want to save yourself some money, quit pretending this is an open forum and set up registration. You’ll save a lot of money and energy that way. Or adopt Dominic’s [novel, sensible] attitude. Haydar’s comment is telling; s/he comes here for a “supportive environment” not anything resembling lively debate. I would rather have more of the former than the latter, but maybe that’s not the site you want to run. In which case registration is an easy fix..
Errr – “more of the latter than the former…”
Arbois,
I don’t think Haydar has any objection to “lively debate”, nor do I. There is a big difference between “lively debate” and the kind of usually gratuitous and vitriolic bigotry, racism, and personal attacks that are the stock in trade of the individuals in question. there is even a different between occasionally lapsing into ad hominem remarks and arguments and gratuitous nastiness and hate speech.
Those things contribute nothing to the discussion/debate, and more importantly serves to discourage people on all sides of the issues who are looking for frank, open, informed conversation/argument.
Well thank you too, Arbois, but I am not issuing a generalised apology. I apologised for making up silly names for people in a moment of foolishness.
“Fascist” was never one of those names. I make a strict point of not using that word unless the meaning is very clear and specific, namely capitalist rule by coercion as opposed to bourgeois democracy, i.e. as a description, not a “charge”.
Registration has a chilling effect in my experience, and does not deter the kind of boring, importunate behaviour we are looking at here.
This is a new medium. The maintenance of its quality depends on the participants, plural. The good must eventually be good enough to drive out the bad in a natural way, as it would in any good community. That is not the same as a milk-toast “supportive environment” as you suggest. Nor is your “liveliness” enough. What will give pause to foolishness is dialogue that commands attention through its excellence and its wit. Hasn’t that always been so?
There is a big difference between “lively debate” and the kind of usually gratuitous and vitriolic bigotry, racism, and personal attacks that are the stock in trade…
Bigotry and racism will color many lively political debates Shirin in ways I’m sure you wouldn’t expect (gratuitous, vitriolic and personal being a bit more subjective and maybe forgivable.) The brittle and defensive notion that authors of ugly ideas should be cast away rather than engaged and countered engenders nothing but mistrust & greater hostility. Ugly ideas can be no one’s ‘stock in trade’ if more enlightened voices choose to counter them forcefully, cogently and without prejudice.
“What will give pause to foolishness is dialogue that commands attention through its excellence and its wit.” — correct again.
I speak as one whose comments have been peremptorily blocked without warning for no behaviour approaching bigotry or racism by the way (and the recipent of considerable personal abuse), so I am also wary of Helena’s standards here. She seems naive both of the many methods of circumventing her ban, and the feelings her policework was likely to promote.
“Fascist” was never one of those names.
“There is evidence of this grey-blue plague right here on Helena’s site, I fear. The self-righteous braying tone of the neo-colonist, the vicarious militarist, and the closet fascist, are all here.”
directionless perhaps, but with clear implications.
Those who want an example of what lively debate without moderation turns into should check out some of the choice samples on The Angry Arab. Razavipour and others may be perplexed, as Helen’s standards are high, compared to what normally passes as “civil” discoure on comment boards. But I’m not going to fault her for that. That’s here prerogative. It’s up to us to step up to it.
Arbois, I’m enormously flattered.
Still, I insist I am not guilty as accused (“constant charges of fascism”). Not in letter nor in spirit.
Arbois, you could have done me for inverted plagiarism, but I got there first:
“Gresham
I’m fully supporting Helena on this topic. Holding lively debates and exchanging arguments about precise topics is one thing. Global condemnations and provocations are another. Helena saw where that was leading and she tried to cut it early. The level of discussion is particularly high on her blog with many thoughtful and well informed persons. I hope that she can keep it so.
Helena,
I have never done any such evasive IP based manoeuvers. Most ISP’s dole out dynamic IP addresses to their users, so every day you get a different address. This is pretty basic stuff, and you should understand it before you spend money in lawyers.
One learns the most from people that disagree with you, not from your own clones, but if you prefer me not to visit your site, try asking. You’d be surprised.
E. Bilpe
“Ugly ideas can be no one’s ‘stock in trade’ if more enlightened voices choose to counter them forcefully, cogently and without prejudice.”
That’s a lovely bit of fantasy indeed. Unfortunately it has little connection with reality. It is usually possible to tell after a few exchanges who is going to be listen to an “enlightened voice” and who is not. Sometimes it is possible to tell immediately. I am not interested in wasting more hours than I have already on those who are too in love with their hatred, racism, bigotry and misgynism to be amenable to reason.
I too have not read most of the offending comments. But I too run what I consider a “progressive” blog dealing with Israeli Palestinian peace and the amt. of bile & vitriol is tremendous at times so I sympathize with your plight. I’ve also had my share of “stalkers.”
I apologize if I repeat any other folks’ suggestions here but you have several options regarding your comments feature:
1. go to moderated comments by which you approve ea. comment before it displays (a hassle)
2. go to a registration format whereby every poster must register at the site
3. go to a system that requires commenters to leave a name, e mail AND URL.
4. if you have Typepad or a blog service which allows blocking you should be able to block comments by specific criteria (for example, by word, name, url, ip, etc.) If your unwanted commenters use unique identifying characteristics you can use these to block their posts.
None of these methods is ironclad or foolproof, but they do give you a bit more control.
Arbois,
Let me be more direct and succinct. Some people have closed minds. Their prejudices and hatred – racism, bigotry, misogyny, etc. – are set in stone, and they guard their ignorance as if it were their greatest treasure. Once it is clear that one is dealing with such a person it is time to stop wasting one’s time and energy, and move on.
He (or they) is probably in a city somewhere with lots of internet cafes. You could file an abuse complaint with the isp(s) the abuse is emanating from. They would trace the ip(s) from their logs and send him (them) TOS warning. Since most i-net cafes don’t have huge walk-through traffic, but rather regular customers (90% playing online games), from their own logs they would likely be able to figure out who it is, and give him the b@-hammer! I-net cafes don’t want to be drawing any heat from their isp’s, so they will tell the guy to take a hike next time he walks in. Or, alternatively, they could put a lock on your isp so that when he tries to access this site, would just get a 404 page not found.
Hope this helps! I am all for intelligent debate, but most trolls only make the eyes bleed.
Shirin,
Perhaps we have hit upon a basic difference between us: I find LOTS of things people say and write
Hi. This is an interesting discussion of boundaries, sensitivities, etc. (Though along the way I did cut a lengthy exchange between Raza and Dominic off this board since Raza has no legitimate presence here, except when I choose to let his comments stay for illustrative purposes… Deal with it, friend Raza, eh?)
Thanks to everyone who made suggestions here, too. I’ve been thinking of checking out a simple registration system, though wary because it probably does have a bit of a “braking” effect?
I really appreciate the solidarity from you, Richard. People who don’t (like us) work on Israeli-Palestinian peace-related issues possibly have little idea how much really nasty vitriol gets flung our way. I keep reminding myself that “people only behave this way because they are either deeply wounded or thoughtless”, but still, the over-all effect can easily become very hostile-feeling.