Moderation Policy

I want to share with you my moderating policy for this blog. I did in fact choose to approve comments before they are posted in response to my posts. I did this for three reasons:
1. I don't want this to become overidden by Viagra ads, as some open forums do
2. I want to maintain civil discourse, which does not contain vulgarity
3. I want the dialogue to be focused on ideas and the topics at hand, not on personal attacks

In the history of this blog, I have rejected exactly one (1) comment. It was in a case where the thread had veered far off track and the comment had nothing to do with the original post, but was instead directed at me personally. In all other cases, even those where I disagree with the poster, I gladly approve the post because it contributed to the idea exchange.

As long as comments are not spam, are not vulgar, and are directed at ideas and not at individuals, they WILL be posted as they have been to date.

Sample acceptable comment: "I disagree with your moderation policy. It stifles freedom of speech. If this is a public dialogue, nothing should be moderated."

Sample comment that will be deleted: "Who do you think you are, deciding what gets published -- Lou Grant? You are not going to get any comments if you pull crap like that"

Subtle difference, but it exists. One attacks the idea (fine) and the other focuses on an individual (not fine).