"Cowardice asks the question...is it safe? Expediency asks the question...is it politic? Vanity asks the question...is it popular? But conscience asks the question...is it right? And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular but one must take it because it is right." ~Dr. Martin Luther King

Saturday, 23 August 2014

There's Room For Difference

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "ASK and Ye shall not receive":

Cllr Buck, I'd like to respond to Mr Watts' comments:

"What I find "rather curious" 12:51 is your insinuation that a standard requirement of a login to comment on a wordpress site has "suppressed engagement" opposed to merely establishing the types of engagement that are allowed."

No, Mr Watts, no "insinuation" here - I plainly pointed out the incongruity of saying one thing and doing another. (BTW, apparently, certain WordPress settings allow 'Guest' comments as well as anonymous ones)

"If you expect all websites to adhere to the same comment policy you're setting yourself up for 

serious disappointment."

Oh, so there isn't a "standard requirement" for log-in, after all? Right, some do and some don't. No need to worry about the risk of "serious disappointment," though. I reserve serious reactions for serious matters; perusing the Internet doesn't count.

"I hear you, you don't want to login to comment on my site."

Yes, and I hear you - you don't want any feedback unless you can vet the commenter before any approval to publish. For someone always banging on about 'engagement,' you certainly don't encourage it. Don't you want anyone countering your criticisms or parrying your pronouncements? Judging from past episodes, that's understandable, I suppose. 

"You're the only one that seems to have a problem with that."

Well, since you can't prove that particular negative - you have no way of knowing how many people, wishing to leave a comment, may have balked at the log-in. There have, in fact, been mention made here on this blog about the log-in requirement of yours. If memory serves, the same unfavourable 

observation was expressed on the Aurora Citizen blog.

"The fact that Clr. Buck approved your comment here illustrates that engagement on your own terms was in no way suppressed proving that "engagement" doesn't suddenly ground (sic) to a halt because you choose to take your ball and go somewhere else."

Since we're discussing *your* blog, what does Cllr Buck's have to do with anything? Yes, she does 

'suppress engagement' in that she doesn't publish every comment, but this is an open forum, for the 
most part (and I thank her for that). Yours, however, is little more than a monologue. (Frankly, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with the ball analogy)

"What is even more curious is how you consider 296 comments "A dearth of comments"."

As most of your posts go uncommented upon, should I dispute that number? How many blog posts, over how many years, resulted in that total? Is that including your previous blog on Posterous? Are you somehow factoring in Twitter responses? What is the ratio of posts to comments, I wonder?

That being said, 296 is a paltry sum - yes, "a dearth." Just consider this blog (with a similar focus, so probably a similar potential audience); Cllr Buck published well over 200 comments in the last week 

alone. She doesn't approve all comments, and it is supposedly the 'summer doldrums,' with an 
assumed less attentive following, but that is a healthy number - that is "engagement"!

"By all means point us to your website that allows for anonymous commenting so we can judge your vastly superior level of engagement."

Again, we're discussing yours - well, one of yours; how's the AHA! one coming along? No, I don't have a blog, which means we're pretty well at the same level of engagement, doesn't it? It also means that when it comes to actually doing something versus just criticizing, parallels could be drawn.

Posted by Anonymous to Our Town and Its Business at 21 August 2014 11:53


 I did not have access yesterday.. I ironed instead.

The above comment  refers to  difference between my Blog and Christopher's and differences there are.

 CW writes like a teacher  complete with  reading assignments. 

I'm a politician with the intention of sharing  my. experience . There's a lot to share and never enough time. Is don't have computer skills and I don't polish my writing. There's so much to tell and never enough time. 

I  do repeat....mostly by intent. Moderating comments  takes time . Engagement  is what it's about  and  we seem to be  getting better at it. 

Other than visits and views I don't check numbers. I am impressed by the figure given in the post
And it doesn't include the comments I don't publish for various reasons. None because of  disagreement with the comment.

The election is pending.  The blog will not be used by candidates or their supporters.

My observations will be judged . And that's a given.

My blog and Chris's are not the same because we are nit the same. There's room for both.

Blunt and emphatic references undoubtedly offend some people. No apology needs to be made. I know my rights.

I pay the going rate.

Always have .....always  will.


Anonymous said...

It does sound as though one individual has a great deal of stored up anger that just happened to land on Mr Watts. Why ? I have no idea - maybe they had a run-in years ago. Maybe they disagreed at a meeting. Who cares ? Every time his name comes up, which is not very often, there is an explosion from that character totally out of proportion with the situation.
Bottom line: How he runs his blog is his business.
Please Mr/Ms Troll, I do not care about your injured feelings. It obviously has not affected your capacity to vent.

Anonymous said...

Don't let them infect your Blog, Evelyn. There is a lot of nasty going around out there between a new candidate & perceived enemies.

Anonymous said...

If its not Watts its Heard or Evelyn.People just hate because they speak up and out.FACT

Anonymous said...

I wouldn't lump Councillor Buck in with the other two. She's an elected official so she's earned her soapbox. Those guys are just a couple of self-promoters.

Anonymous said...

That seems like an awful lot of trouble to take to in order to force one's views on another. There are plenty of other " welcoming " venues......

Anonymous said...

Mr. Watts' posts provide the opportunity at the end of each to comment. You can click onto any one of the following:

Reddit and

If you click onto some of these, as I have, you are asked to sign in by providing your email address and a user name.

As far as I'm concerned this destroys your anonymity.

With Evelyn's blog, as was the case with the Aurora Citizen, you had three options: Provide your real name, use a pseudonym or provide your comment as "anonymous."

For those who wish to remain anonymous Mr. Watts' blog is one onto which you will never submit a comment and it is all poorer for that.

Mr. Watts' topics are usually very interesting, often informative and he is able to permit you to connect with all sorts of sources. He is obviously a master at what he can do via the internet.

But all this notwithstanding, a substantial weakness lies in the fact that his readers never comment on what he writes.

Anonymous said...

" Some " of his readers never comment. I doubt if he misses them.

Anonymous said...


It's not a matter of whether or not he misses us.

It's the fact that we are deprived of reading comments from his readers to what he writes.

It's basically a one-way street.

Anonymous said...

This is a useless exercise. We are fortunate to have both sites. Enjoy them.

Evelyn Buck said...

It's evelyn thine host?Just a reminder we are talking about
an idea not a person or persons.
I accept anonymous comments. Because I want people to say what they're thinking about political issues.,It doesn't carry the same weight but if that's what it takes
that's what I will provide.
At the same time people say things anonymously they would never want to be associated saying. That's them stuff I don't publish. We're getting better at saying what we think about an issue without abusing people with a different opinion.
Chris insists people identify tune,selves and forfeits
a free-wheeling exchange. And people feel deprived.
Maybe the time will come when the host knows the
Identity but it isn't published. Ron Wallace would sometimes publish letter anonymously under special circumstances. But it had to be special and he made the judgement.

Anonymous said...

Welcome to the under-side.
There is some forgetting going on here. On the Citizen plenty of comments were rejected. There was also the luxury there of just letting things settle for a few days. Or letting someone else handle the freight.
Neither the hostess here or Mr Watts have staff.

Anonymous said...

"Just a reminder we are talking about an idea not a person or persons."

I don't agree, Cllr Buck. Mr Watts has put himself out there in the public, which makes him open to scrutiny and possible criticism. In my mind, he's fair game.

Besides, he relentlessly rips people, including Town staff, non-elected Aurorans, and volunteer-run, community organizations. If he's gonna dish it out, he ought be prepared to take it.

Anonymous said...

But who are you to tell him how to live his life ?
If you object on behalf of some entity, get up front with it instead of just taking pot shots whenever anything is said about anything.

Anonymous said...

No, 17:17. You are not talking about an idea. You are proposing some weird Code of Conduct of your own for blogs. Specifically Auroran blogs. You do realize that you sound a lot like Cllr Gaertner with her desire to restrict the internet ?

Anonymous said...

No one has been casting aspersions at any town staff. If there are any criticisms, they are kept extremely general.

Evelyn Buck said...

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "There's Room For Difference":

17:17- I'm sure he's prepared to "take it". He's put himself out there name and all...If he's going to have to "take it" then he should be able to do so with a name.

Mark as spam

Moderate comments for this blog.

Posted by Anonymous to Our Town and Its Business at 23 August 2014 20:26

Anonymous said...

20:07- You're right. No one has...Even though one or two aspersions may have been extremely warranted. Ooops did I say that? :)

Anonymous said...

What are you on about, 19:07? I'm proposing nothing of the sort, and am not advocating any restrictions.

The opposite is true; Cllr Buck suggested parameters restricting discussion to ideas and not personalities. I pointed out that when an individual inserts themself into the public eye and proceeds to criticize all and sundry, then they'll garner attention (probably the aim) and should expect to be the subject of criticism in return.

Anonymous said...

I am sorry to have missed yesterday.
For years, Cllr Buck & Christopher Watts have been working on their respective blogs, doing the research & putting in long hours.
Suddenly a person who has spent that same time period lurking and pointing out flaws is demanding equality of billing and attention.
Hopefully it is all blown over by today.

Anonymous said...

"...is demanding equality of billing and attention."

Hardly, 08:28. As an anonymous commenter, it would be a rather futile pursuit, don't you think?

Anonymous said...

Is it not odd that the peculiar gambit was made just prior to the election ?