We Need Clear Objective guidelines On Editing Blogs

Let the writer decide...

I vote that the authority be given to the writer to moderate their own pieces. while this sounds like we might be putting the f-- in charge of the h--house, it is actually healthier for a writer to read something critical, process it and either acknowledge the comment, or fine-tune their pieces as a result, or go after the commenter with a counter comment. I agree that this should always be civil and even lighthearted, but the use of profanity as long as it is not directed as an insult to a person specifically (Ahmadinejad excepted) should absofu--inglutely be allowed.

JJ..

What if the joke you are making is some sort of sarcasm that counter's the argument and undermines what is propsed by the author? Why not make joke of a serious subject? Look at Bill Maher, or other comedian making use of laughter to drive a point. A clear policy is needed, I tend to agree with taragheh.

JJ, so every one can learn

Please tell us why you deleted the comment below. All I did was comment on her response to Farhad and used her own rethoric against her. I also watered it down after you deleted it once. I was having a dialog with Mammad- you deleted Mammad's response about Soraya not being a lefty as well. I am not trying to be a wise ass here. Why did you delete this so I don't  make the same "mistakes"?  I have seen much worse responses by both people on the right and left on this site and you know exactly who I am talking about. So please tell me which sections below made you push the delete button. I and others want to know and understand. I agree that deleting based on personal attacks can be silly. Lett people defend themselves.  

Ms. Sepahpour states "Without a doubt, the cruelest of all jailors is hatred".

Soraya Joon, you must be in the same condition as you accuse Farhad of
being in. In one of your postings, you stated the following:

"I hate Zionists (not Jews) and I abhor U.S. foreign policy, not the
people." See Bankrupt Ideology-by Soraya Sepahpour (not verified) on
Wed Jul 02, 2008 11:28 AM CDT

Soraya. you "hate" but I guess  you don't see the hate that you have.

You also say that you are not a lefty. Hmm. Let see. In the same posting on Jul 02, 2008 you stated:

"I love and admire Chomsky (Jewish)"

Who is Chomsky? Is he a centerist? I guess admiring an Anarchist is not to the left of things.

Moreover, all your articles contain the classic buzzwords used by
leftists.  Such buawords include "Imperialists" "Zionists" "neo cons"
"AIPAC" "Colonial tool" 

Additionally, you hold the following views:

1) Iran is negotiating the nuclear issue in good faith

2) Blaming the 8 year Iran/Iraq war on Iraq only when it is well
documented theat Khomeini and Islamists agitated saddam and Khomeini
prolonged the war by 6 additional years

3) Believing that the IRI is not "a gender aparthied country"

4) Telling Obama the following "prior to the 1979 revolution Iranians
were effectively living in a caste system; hidden from the world, and
denied many opportunities they have today" As if this Cast system has
changed today!

5)  Calling other Iranians "traitors"because of their opposition to the current occupiers of the Iranian nation.

6) Telling Obama that Iranian Americans who do no support the IRI are " not loyal to their adopted country"

7)  "iran is a law abiding country"

OK. Mammad,  You are not a leftist.

Also- Please don't show off that you have been to occupied Iran lately.
Of course the IRI would welcome you. You have posted noumerous articles
defending the IRI occupation regime and not once, NOT ONCE, have you
criticized them in good faith on their economic record, foriegn policy
(because you are proud that this IRI policy is independent and not
subject to "imperialist" influence- which is also a load of crap),
Human rights record, lack of political freedoms, mistreatment of
minorities, lack of religious freedom and lack of basic fundamental
rights which are offered to you here in America. (The fundamental
rights include: Equal protection, Freedom of speech, freedom of
religion, freedom to own property, right to Jury trial instead of
Akhoond trial...... )

So the IRI is going welcome you with open arms any time of the day since you support their occupation.

Look, However, at what happened to Mammad by his own admission! He
admits that he was mistreated the last time he was in occupied Iran.
Why? He has openly called these thugs for what they are. He ended up in
Hospital because of them. Although Mammad is an Islamist, he is the
wrong kind of Islamist for these IRI thugs.  You go to occupied Iran,
wear your Chador and refrain from making any political statements about
all these abuses and they will not harm you.

Also, do you go to Iran with your Non Muslim Husband? Have they ever
requested that he convert to Islam yet because you are not allowed to
marry a non Muslim?

Do you think the IRI would treat Farhad the same for speaking his mind in the US? 

Shab Bekheir Ms. Dasteh Chap.

Asghar Taraghe, you are part of the problem

to begin, it's obvious to many of us that you use multiple names which is dishonest and manipulative. In the Soraya article you accused JJ of erasing a comment and then you repeated it changing it to be a milder version! I don't think you are fooling anybody by pretending to be so many people. JJ surely knows this too.

You clearly and consistently attacked Soraya as you have done many other people. There was no need for that and everyone knows it did not add anything to the discussion.

I hope JJ does not stoop to the horrible standards of "TV" or talk shows.

The fact remains

that no matter what, in the absence of a clear policy in this matter, we will continue to witness instances where what is appropriate today becomes taboo tomorrow and vice versa.

This very attitude clearly underscores this dilemma in greater Iranian society. Exhibiting multiple standards in matters of behavior and conduct is such a blatantly Iranian trait, and it's hardly anything to be proud of.

Take the issue of profanity. If it is to be avoided, then it should be throughout the site, or not at all. Words that are arguably deemed profane are used to convey passion and emotion in the subject text of the original post. Well, the same right to express literary passion and emotion should be deemed acceptable by readers who take the time to post a comment, so long as it is not used in a malicious manner against anyone personally.

Personal attacks? There are entirely too many layers of this particular onion to peel, but suffice it to say, too many people around here take themselves way too seriously.

I agree with sticking to a subject but it is natural human behavior for a reader to go "off on a tangent" once in a while because the subject matter of a particular thread reminded a commenter of something else that they felt was worthwhile in mentioning.

Making jokes. After reading about nonstop executions, oppression, anger and hate of non-Shia religions, and other negative garbage, it's either crack wise or just crack. Our country is a mess, our hamvatan are in distress, and our adopted country, which was culturally, socially and morally bankrupt to begin with is falling further down the proverbial drain. Every one of us needs to look in a mirror and say "lighten up".

As for me, I have lost count of the number of times my posts were deleted, and I have had many people post here and via e-mail that it wasn't personal.

Trust me, every bit of it was, is and always will be personal.

Policy molicy

JJ ever heard of a six sigma project? You can start with your comment here, blog about it and say this is your "draft" editorial policy and ask people to help you modify and complete it.

Once complete with all the scrutiny put it up somewhere as an FAQ link to your homepage and let people see it all the time.

Put up a god damn editorial policy and be done with it. ANY published editorial policy is better than NO policy that you have.

JJ, Thank you for you reply.

Please understand, I am not trying to make trouble here and you can ignore what I say and it would not upset me at all. I think you do a great job on most of the editing.  I agree with all that you say except the "Personal Attack" law. It is way to subjective and kills legitimate and yes sometime illegitimate comments. People who post here are mainly adults and they should be able to take these attacks and defend themselves. For example, Mammad, gets attacked all the time. I have personally attacked him. But it always stayed civilized and Mammad 99.9% of the times responds like a gentelman to personal attacks (even though he has attacked people as well). 

Some of the subjects discussed here are to emotional and we get the full spectrum of people on the extreme side of political views. Personal attacks should be allowed as long as there is no profanity and bigotry. Did you watch the Republican & Democratic conventions. Half the night was about personal attacks. Half the adds on tv are personal attacks. 

I saw nothing wrong with rednecks comment that she should stay in the IRI next time she goes there when Soraya is allowed to call certain Iranians as traitors. It was first published then deleted.

I hope you understand what I'm trying to say and I hope that I did not upset you.

Asghar Taragheh jan, it's

Asghar Taragheh jan, it's never ever going to be "clear and objective". Moderators, including myself, are always going to make subjective decisions about comments. To put it simply,

* Do not use profanity (in comments especially).
* Do not to make personal attacks.
* Stick to the subject.
* TRY not make a joke out of a serious topic.
* Post news and articles in the News section, not blogs.

There will always be exceptions. Be critical as much as you want but be respectful and civilized towards your opponent as much as is humanly possible.

We all want to have a dialogue here about a lot of issues that we are passionate about one way or the other. Try to make a point, instead of picking a fight.

the irony of "nothing is sacred"

While I may or may not re-register, I do still occasionally post "unverified". There is a CLEAR inconsistency in moderation. Perhaps it's simply different personalities monitoring at various times resulting in different levels of response to "abuse". If not, then it's an abuse of moderation/editing. There have been so many extreme blogs allowed on some occasions and yet the mildest attack is deemed offensive elsewhere. Irregardless of your own personal opinion of registered versus unregistered, why wouldn't I have the same rights as anyone else. I understand I might not have the same posting privileges but why should my comments be more examined then anyone elses? I have noticed that several unverified comments have not made it through this inconsistent moderation process. And quite honestly, it's obvious that the reason is purely personal.

The fact remains that JJ IS the master of his domain and people, don't think for a minute that this site is yours. You're visitors at best... restricted and controlled.

Hmmm... sounds familiar.