I just got this email from a regular reader:
Jeff,
I was disturbed by the name calling on the local blogs, e.g.:
“Junior League crank such as Judy Bowles…People like Judy Bowles and various Doublegate fruitcakes and Junior League anorexics…
…the pistol packing dwarf Tilson”
I am not a prude, but I don’t want to implicitly condone name-calling like that. Judy Bowles, the Junior League, and Tilson have done a lot for this community. I may not agree with every single step they take, but I respect them. I don’t feel comfortable making anymore posts with this kind of stuff on there. I know it’s not you, but I feel like there has to be some minimal level of policing, or I will just be supporting childish banter.
I really want to write serious stuff, and get feedback from people who are willing to articulate their concerns or positions without name-calling. I think you do that with your posts. I think you can create a safe place for that to happen for the rest of us. I think if you do, it could improve policymaking.
This reader has a point.
I’m a Libertarian. I don’t like censoring of any form, and I do my best to stay out of any Albany/DoCo discussions unless I’m doing something administrative such as correcting a factual error or clarifying the name of a commenter.
However, name calling only lowers the level of the debate. I’ve seen it happen in other places such as the various AJC.com political blogs where I was once heavily active, and the more local the blog the more heated things tend to get because we’re not talking about abstract concepts like the national debt or war in Afghanistan, but our own properties and friends and neighbors.
So here’s what I’m going to do. I’m going to leave up the comments that are already up there. But Tom or myself approves every single comment before y’all see it, and we’re going to start filtering out name calling of any form that is not backed up by the facts. We’ll try to edit the comment and note that we edited it. If the name calling is too extensive within it, we’ll delete the comment. If the same people keep calling other people names, we’ll ask them not to come back.
Seriously y’all, there’s enough name calling in the Sqawkbox, Soapbox, and Whatcha Say Albany. Please feel free to submit any name calling to any of those three.
But if you submit name calling here, know that you’re just typing it to get it out of your system, and only yourself and Tom or I will ever see it.
Jeff,
Sometimes truth is not a pretty thing, but it is nonetheless the truth. I note that our anonymous emailer seems unhappy that I have singled out certain persons harming the local economy for very harsh and direct personal criticism. The timing of this complaint is particularly ironic
given the last part of Tom’s most recent post which I will quote below:
“We, the citizens of Albany, have to make our local government answerable to us. Failure to do so is how we got a sign ordinance like this. Failure to do so is how we end up with $6 million in bonds being tried for the downtown.”
I wholeheartedly agree with this sentiment. The only criticism I would make is that it doesn’t go far enough in singling out the parties directly responsible for our community’s present state and holding them personally responsible. If it makes someone uncomfortable, great. If there is no accountablity, then we need to roll up the sidewalk and move to Lee County.
When Judy Bowles’ approval of the present appearance of half-vacant Slappey Drive is pointed to by a code inspector as a sign of a good job done, then I think any reasonable taxpayer has not merely a right, but an obligation to ask how and why Judy Bowles was appointed to a task force to create this ordinance and what business qualifications (as opposed to social status) she has for this unelected position that has harmed so many others.
Likewise, setting up other unelected bodies such as ATI and ADICA, but giving them taxpayer’s money is a recipe for a government that is precisely unanswerable to us. Who will be held accountable for this?
When we have a city commissioner post to this board who expresses confusion about that same sign ordinance then, again, any reasonable person is obligated to ask why he voted for it if he did not understand the impact it would have on local businesses. This is an especially signifcant question as that same commissioner is an attorney and, presumably, read the ordinance.
When the head of code enforcement wanders around town with a pistol on his hip, harrassing small business-people, while one of his subordinates is arrested for soliciting other men for sex while on the job, one must reasonably ask whether this department head is competent to run his department and supervise his employees. Likewise, anyone taking a casual drive through downtown would see numerous hazardous, collapsing structures ignored by this same department in their frenzy to remove posters from shop windows. Is it wrong to refer to these persons as incompetent and having misguided priorities?
When a District Attorney pursues phony charges against an innocent man on behalf of a third party organization (which employs his wife) and then, subsequently, himself gains employment with that same third party organization, I do not recognize that conduct as anything short of the DA’s office being prostituted. The fact that the perpetrator has gotten away with this behavior doesn’t make it right or ethical.
Calling such behavior unethical or incompetent or describing these people as unfit for their jobs might make some people unhappy, but it doesn’t make the descriptions any less apt.
I appreciate the creation of this blog and I am extremely thankful for the opportunity you have to bring to light issues that are harmful to our community. If, however, you fall into the trap of confusing incompetent, wasteful or dishonest policies and behavior with “honest differences of opinion,” then I am afraid your efforts to make a positive contribution to the local community may be in vain. Unless a harsh spotlight is put on our local miscreants, our opportunity to help our city may be lost.
Jack,
I have ZERO problems letting y’all discuss any of the issues you’ve mentioned. Just saying I’m not going to tolerate name calling. Feel free to ask about anyone’s qualifications or why they made a decision the way they did. That’s one of the things we’re here for. All I’m saying is keep it to a discussion of the facts and stop the name calling.
It IS possible to be civil in politics, even local politics, after all…
Jack:
A “harsh spotlight” can, indeed, be handled in a civil manner. Saying you think someone is incompetent is acceptable. Calling them an oxygen thief (just a hypothetical), isn’t. It’s just the actual name calling that’s a problem, not the sentiment itself.
In fact, name calling ultimately hurts us when it comes to getting things working correctly here in town. People get defensive when names are called and automatically tune everything else out. This doesn’t help anyone.
Tom, I agree with the sentiment you voiced below.
“People get defensive when names are called and automatically tune everything else out.”
My problem, though, is the city has ALREADY tuned us out. The public response to issues like the sign ordinance, the ADICA waste, etc. has been uniformly negative, yet the powers that be
have an attitude that they know better than we do and have gone so far as to appoint unelected bodies (ATI, ADICA, Judy Bowles’ commission, etc) to effectively formulate laws and spend money in a manner that allows the commission to deny responsibility. The taxpayers are being robbed. I don’t know what else to call it but robbery.
It doesn’t matter if the city has tuned us out, but when it’s when others get tuned out that we have a problem. The city government can be changed, but only if people can be rallied to the cause, so to speak. When those are turned off because of the attitudes of people they would normally agree with, then there is irreversable harm done not just to the cause of fixing this town, but to the town itself since it makes it difficult to rally people who would stand beside us to make the improvements.
The powers that be may have tuned us out. That’s fine. Honestly, it is. We can take that uniformly negative reaction and turn it into votes to change the culture of Albany’s government. On that, I believe you, Jeff, and I have common cause. We will not argue against that at all.
Remember, we have no problem with people taking the city to task. In fact, that’s what I do on a regular basis on this blog, and I love doing it. The issue is only the name calling. If someone says “Tilson sucks at his job” is fine. Saying what was quoted about Mr. Tilson above is a whole different level and will no longer be tolerated. It will be edited out, though it will be in such a way that there is no change in what was said. In regards to the Tilson quote listed above, my edits will be “[Edited out by Tom] Tilson”.
We are not going to quiet anyone’s opposition to what the city does, and we have no intention of ever doing so. We are simply going to not allow name calling. It’s that simple.