Having a comment policy is a good idea. But then it can be fun to test the limits of other people's (cite, in case the limits turn out to be as hard as announced).
Errm, pinch-and-a-punch, first of the month, no returns :-)
You can use this thread to discuss comment policy if you like.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
PAYING FOR IT by ELIZABETH KOLBERT in the shouty New Yorker suggests that carbon taxes may be back on the (US) agenda. It would be good if they were, but I'm dubious (am I ever anything else?). There are many reasons to be dubious. One is in the article: a carbon tax makes so much sense—…
I'm ploughing my way through the Mad Bish's Speech. As Paul notes, its turgid stuff. At least you have to give him credit for getting religion back in the headlines.
Round about the end of page 2 I read this implies in turn that the Muslim, even in a predominantly Muslim state, has something of a…
Its hardly an original question. And the answer (we don't know) isn't original either. In case you were wondering, this is Overland and Wang, GRL 2013, doi: 10.1002/grl.50316 (PDF courtesy of V). Different but not entirely different to A sea ice free summer Arctic within 30 years?, also in GRL; or…
There's a fair section of the - errm - normally-sane-side-of-the-climate-wars blogosphere that regards RP Jr as the spawn of the devil. Eli weighs in complaining about Nate Silver of 538 getting RP to write for him (Eli has form, dontchaknow). Now I'd be the first to agree that RP has said some…
Any policy you want as long as it is applied honestly.
I am comfortable with "deep six any comments which use curse words to describe others" but when "sciencebloggers" regularly resort to obscenity as a substitue for debate it is only honest if yjose of a sceptical disposition are allowed to point out that those of an obscene disposition are unfit to be part of any decent movement, but, as experince shows, entirely fit for the pseudo-environmentalist one.
Even censorship is OK so long as the censor has enough honesty to admit that this is what they are doing 7 that it is what Fascists do.
Can we say 'crank'?
;-)
Well your comment over at Rabbet Run got a belly laugh from me.
Thanks.
Even censorship is OK so long as the censor has enough honesty to admit that this is what they are doing
You [incivility redacted - W]; you don't know what 'censorship' means. U R 'merican? Then it is no surprise.
A fine example of obscenity being the favoured (note spelling Were) alternative to rational debate. Remarkable how common this is among alarmists pretending to scientific principles.
Crank!