![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I have noticed that there is a remote possibility that someone, or a group of people, may come and start commenting about zir/their disagreement with my last post. I welcome comments (it's good to know that someone is listening) and even disagreement, within reasonable limits.
However I once had a responder (on this same issue, oddly enough, or perhaps not so oddly) whose comments were both irritating and a significant percentage of the total replies. This indefatigable typist posed something of a dilemma. On the one hand I don't intend to stifle dissent; never letting anyone tell you why you are mistaken makes it much harder to learn. On the other hand this responder was beginning to piss me, and my other commenters, off. I'm fine with conversations starting in the comments, but when everyone who is commenting is getting sucked into the flamewar, something is wrong with my livejournal. So I fixed it. Other people would doubtless have different solutions to this quandary, for my part, I invented the Jordan Limitations.
The Jordan Limitations are triggered when someone, in my opinion, is rude or mean, fails repeatedly to provide evidence or reasoning to back up their assertions, or otherwise annoys me. It's a soft definition, I know, but if it makes you feel better, so far only one poster has triggered them, so it's not that easy to do.
If you trigger the Jordan Limitations, I will tell you so, in my response to that comment. I will apply the Limitations to every comment of yours after that (I may either go by position on the page or by post time, depending on which seems easier and more logical to me at the time).
The Jordan Limitations are:
1) You may have up to three (3) comments on any one post of mine, whether in answer to the post itself, or to comments on the post. The fourth (4th) and all subsequent comments will be deleted.
2) If your comments annoy me too much, they will be deleted whether or not you have reached your maximum. For example, implying that people you disagree with are stupid, or malicious, or crazy, will annoy me.
3) Deleted comments will still count toward your maximum.
4) If you don't have an LJ or OpenID, you can post anonymously. I am okay with this as long as the posts are polite. If "Anonymous" triggers the Jordan Limitations, I will turn off anonymous commenting--I will not be bothered with playing "who's the troll?"
And that's it. Most of the people who comment here have absolutely nothing to worry about. The ones that do will still get a chance to say their piece, supposing they do it politely. They can even do it impolitely, by writing it in *their* journal or blog and posting a link to it as one of their three polite comments. I don't promise to follow those links, of course, but other commenters may choose to do so.
However I once had a responder (on this same issue, oddly enough, or perhaps not so oddly) whose comments were both irritating and a significant percentage of the total replies. This indefatigable typist posed something of a dilemma. On the one hand I don't intend to stifle dissent; never letting anyone tell you why you are mistaken makes it much harder to learn. On the other hand this responder was beginning to piss me, and my other commenters, off. I'm fine with conversations starting in the comments, but when everyone who is commenting is getting sucked into the flamewar, something is wrong with my livejournal. So I fixed it. Other people would doubtless have different solutions to this quandary, for my part, I invented the Jordan Limitations.
The Jordan Limitations are triggered when someone, in my opinion, is rude or mean, fails repeatedly to provide evidence or reasoning to back up their assertions, or otherwise annoys me. It's a soft definition, I know, but if it makes you feel better, so far only one poster has triggered them, so it's not that easy to do.
If you trigger the Jordan Limitations, I will tell you so, in my response to that comment. I will apply the Limitations to every comment of yours after that (I may either go by position on the page or by post time, depending on which seems easier and more logical to me at the time).
The Jordan Limitations are:
1) You may have up to three (3) comments on any one post of mine, whether in answer to the post itself, or to comments on the post. The fourth (4th) and all subsequent comments will be deleted.
2) If your comments annoy me too much, they will be deleted whether or not you have reached your maximum. For example, implying that people you disagree with are stupid, or malicious, or crazy, will annoy me.
3) Deleted comments will still count toward your maximum.
4) If you don't have an LJ or OpenID, you can post anonymously. I am okay with this as long as the posts are polite. If "Anonymous" triggers the Jordan Limitations, I will turn off anonymous commenting--I will not be bothered with playing "who's the troll?"
And that's it. Most of the people who comment here have absolutely nothing to worry about. The ones that do will still get a chance to say their piece, supposing they do it politely. They can even do it impolitely, by writing it in *their* journal or blog and posting a link to it as one of their three polite comments. I don't promise to follow those links, of course, but other commenters may choose to do so.
