31 March 2011

Censorship

In the past, I have - on, I think three occasions - deleted comments which I considered offensive. Today I have deleted a comment which simply invited readers to transfer to the writer's own blog in order to get the Real McCoy on something. If the writer concerned wishes to give his substantive reasons for disagreeing with me and is prepared to write it on the thread of my blog, I assure him that (unless he writes in a gratuitously offensive way) I will not delete his views. But, if I choose not to let him use my blog to advertise his own, that's my business.

7 comments:

IanW said...

Your criteria for removal are reasonable and transparent. Other places do it differently (one ostensibly liberal blog in particular comes to mind), but yours appears to be a balanced approach, and conducive to conversation.

lxoa said...

Always glad to hear of more censorship. Damian Thompson's blog has gone down the drain since last Summer because of persistent trolling. Few of the commenters who used to post there still do.

Pachomius said...

lxoa: And those who do are usually engaging in punch-and-judy with the trolls.

motuproprio said...

Your blog, your rules. Simple.

Cherub said...

Father, you are right. You are not engaging in censorship. You are just refusing to be a vehicle for other people's (unpaid) advertising. Letr the contributor contribute (as you say). But an advertisement is just that - an advertisement - and not a contribution to the blog. In any case, as motuproprio has remarked: "Your blog, your rules. Simple."

Joshua said...

Dear Fr H,

Could you email me (friar.erstwhile@gmail.com) your postal address?

Kent Community Activist said...

I concur with motuproprio