I like to mix it up in the comments sometimes, especially when I think a comment is unfair or dishonest, or focuses too much on motives rather than on the strength of an argument.
After all, it’s the internet. And many of us have seen that cartoon of the man hunched over a computer in his living room while his wife beckons him into the bedroom… “Just a minute, dear, someone is wrong on the internet!”
But back in May I pledged to try to do better. I haven’t always lived up to my pledge, but I’m still inspired by a post a friend left on Facebook six months ago:
How to compose a successful critical commentary:
(1) You should attempt to re-express your target’s position so clearly, vividly, and fairly that your target says, “Thanks, I wish I’d thought of putting it that way.”
(2) You should list any points of agreement (especially if they are not matters of general or widespread agreement).
(3) You should mention anything you have learned from your target.
(4) Only then are you permitted to say so much as a word of rebuttal or criticism.
I know I want to do better. Do you?
Yesterday I asked you to do me a favor and spend about 5 seconds casting a quick vote for me in Christoper Elliott‘s ‘best blog’ poll.
As of now I appear to be winning.
(Please consider voting and heloing me keep it that way!)
Those results are even after votes were removed from my total because a commenter said he had voted for me multiple times. Let’s not give any reason to have me disqualified, please don’t do that.. 🙂
Here’s the thing. Elliott and I have our disagreements about a lot of things. Reminded by the Facebook post above, I’ve tried hard lately to keep those disagreements completely substantive. I think that rudeness and snark gets in the way of understanding.
And I’d love it if y’all treated the comments the same way. I don’t delete comments unless they’re extremely graphic or reveal non-public information about others, and I’ve only ever banned two people from commenting here. I don’t intend to change that. But I also didn’t love some of the comments on the post about United’s new elite status spending requirements yesterday.
It’s your forum to share what you think, but it comes across much better when we elevate the discourse. For instance, when I’m asking you to vote in Elliott’s poll it’s fine to say it would be great if my blog won (or didn’t win) because of the differences we have. But I’m not sure it’s the right place to trash him.
At the same time I am reticent to edit or delete comments, or ban commenters, except in the most extreme cases. That’s because it’s an easy move from banning abusive and rude comments to considering strong disagreement with me to be abusive. I think it’s important to have a space to vigorously disagree with me, to offer contrary ideas, and to hash those out. And I don’t have sufficient confidence in my Solomonic abilities to always draw a clear distinction.
Maybe I’m wrong about all this, but it’s my tentative thinking, to try to do better myself and to ask the same for the comments. This remains a request of course, not any sort of change to how things are administered, let’s see how we do.
That’s my feeling, although I’d love to know what you think: What do you think the right way to handle comments is? Should they be moderated or not?
- You can join the 40,000+ people who see these deals and analysis every day — sign up to receive posts by email (just one e-mail per day) or subscribe to the RSS feed. It’s free. You can also follow me on Twitter for the latest deals. Don’t miss out!
OK, Gary, I’ll bite!
You really need a moderation team to review your comments and flag the ones that make your readers — and you — look unprofessional.
Speaking as someone who is often the target of very personal attacks from your site, I can tell you that they do nothing to facilitate a productive debate.
Quite the contrary. After years and years of snarky, belittling and insulting posts and reader comments from View From The Wing, I’ve simply blocked you on all my social media accounts and ignore traffic coming from your site.
And yet my readers like you. They nominated you for the best travel blog award. I respected their wishes and put it up to a vote. You are currently in the lead. Well done.
I was taken aback by the response from your readers. Instead of congratulating you on being nominated, most of them took more shots at me. The comments section is filled with predictable playground insults. Yawn.
Here’s the question you have to ask yourself: Are you giving these angry, petulant commenters a platform, or are you encouraging them with your posts? A quick review of your recent stories suggests it’s a little of both.
You often mischaracterize my well-reasoned arguments for shock value and your readers, who often don’t bother to read the actual story, reflexively rain invective and insults on me. You don’t seem to just tolerate it; you frequently appear to encourage it.
Oddly, I know many of the commenters on your site personally. Some of them have come to me for help and advice in the past, and have received it. Then they go to your site and trash me. Come on.
I would much prefer if you criticized ideas you don’t like, but not make this personal. I do hold you accountable for what your commenters say. You frame the debate and you influence your readers with your rhetoric. If they attack me, it’s because someone gave the order.
Is this the kind of discourse you really want?
Nice post, Gary, it’s clear you put some thought into this (you should give Boettke credit for that argument advice!). Then again, “cunt” doesn’t require much thought — you can draw the line at slurs and profanity.
@John Snow – I was a little bit unsure of the etiquette of quoting someone on Facebook without seeking their permission first. They’re truly great thoughts.
By the way I have added one paragraph to the post, my htinking on why I have the lightest tough in moderating only extremely graphic comments and those that are repeatedly super-disruptive or reveal non-public information about others:
At the same time I am reticent to edit or delete comments, or ban commenters, except in the most extreme cases. That’s because it’s an easy move from banning abusive and rude comments to considering strong disagreement with me to be abusive. I think it’s important to have a space to vigorously disagree with me, to offer contrary ideas, and to hash those out. And I don’t have sufficient confidence in my Solomonic abilities to always draw a clear distinction.
There’s a great legal blog, volokh.com, run by some (mostly libertarian-leaning) law professors. They got picked up by the Washington Post but prior to that had a very long run with very high quality comments. Here was their comment policy:
http://volokh.com/2013/07/11/comment-policy/
It worked well but was a ton of work for the people running the site. But well worth it. And to be honest I’ve never seen this site get out of hand like, say, a discussion on the legality of Obamacare!
Honestly yesterdays post’s comments were on topic. Its clear that people feel they are getting reamed by the company and the language reflects that. There is a large portion of the population that uses bad words regularly and the comments reflect that.
That being said you have full right to have guidelines of what is appropriate in your comments and block those that are not. If you go that route just grab a word press plugin to do it for you https://wordpress.org/plugins/wp-content-filter/ (versus manual moderation).
Regarding personal attacks, I don’t know if that is possible to moderate those. You are critical of Chris’ advice at times (for good reason), and your commenters probably support those views of specific bad advice. Maybe if you limit profanity it will make those comments cleaner? As long as he continues to give advice that doesn’t make sense to this sites readers he is going to be offended by the group’s feedback.
so you’ll start deleting comments that call you out on your financial ties to certain unethical car service businesses, yes?
I wouldn’t object to moderated comments. It’s your blog, with your viewpoint.
Many comments (like the one above mine) don’t add to the conversation or discussion. You’re not the government and freedom of speech rights don’t apply to your commenters.
Your call, Gary.
“I don’t delete comments unless they’re extremely graphic or reveal non-public information about others,”
Gary, using the words “cunt” and “motherfuckers” is (even if referring to a company and not a specific individual) far more graphic than the word “idiot,” isn’t it?
I think this blog is just fine and a moderator is not required. Only big babies are affected by them, concentrated by a clash of egos, and then an attempt to try and detract readers from returning
I remember the comments against Gary when he was eating in Hong Kong, those were quite hilarious.
The best way to fight the children is just keep writing great articles, super reviews with pictures, and not articles (like this one) crying about a few words as if it were a disturbance from the economy class using the first class restroom.
Thanks.
Gary,
Just keep doing what you are doing. I read the C.Elliott post and was amazed at how much emotion there was in that post. I read Elliott, and for the average traveling person he does a good job. He is not in the league of veteran flyertalkers, and hence the problem on both sides of the issue. To call out your followers like he did is very sad. I do not post a lot but I read quite a few travel blogs and I do think you do the best job and I voted accordingly.
@Mike, here we go again. I’m “not in the league of veteran flyertalkers” — insult much?
You can do much better than that.
@Lantean you can continue to post inaccurate stuff about me all you’d like, as for financial ties I have long been one of the folks that goes to the greatest lengths to disclose those 🙂
@bode Volokh Conspiracy is one of my favorite blogs, I know most of the contributors. I met Sasha Volokh my very first week as an undergrad!
I know I’m in the minority here, but I think comments sections generally detract from blogs in 2014. I see the future of the news web that is increasingly without user participation. Sites like Volokh Conspiracy are exceptions. SCOTUSBLOG actually began WITH moderated comments, but they realized pretty quickly that the usefulness of the site as a SCOTUS blog was greatly increased by one-way communication.
Also (since we can’t edit), I read this blog every day, Gary. I don’t find anything useful in the comments sections, which is mostly dominated by the kind of vitriol Mr. Elliott described in his first reply. I don’t see how the comments section helps this blog, and I’m a big Gary fan.
Who is Elliott?
Thanks, @Nick. That’s the kind of comment I’ve come to expect from this site. Snarky with a dash of obtuse. Keep it up!
Is that really Christopher Elliott commenting or some troll posting as him?
If it is him it seems like he need to do what he claims he did in that first comment (but obviously didn’t if its really him based on the volume of comments here) and stop following the blog especially the comments.
@Iolaire my stories are vetted by editors and when I give bad advice — which I do from time to time — I own up to it. I’m not offended by it.
What I find offensive are the repeated personal attacks in the comments by people who have obviously not read my stories. They think reading Gary’s interpretation of my story is enough.
@Iolaire yep, it’s me. I unblocked Gary after he was nominated.
By way of disclosure, I also asked him to post this story, in the hopes that it might lead to a little detente between our constituencies.
Sadly, it doesn’t seem to be working. Many of you want to keep hating. Just read the comments.
Gary, though on occasion a comment will make one blush, it is not worth censoring your blog. You accept criticism as well as praise, but to stoop to the level of someone like Elliott or the infamous “Delta Points” is ridiculous. They make a mockery of the freedom of the internet. If you need to add a disclaimer at the top of the comment section then so be it, but a blogger who doesn’t allow freedom of ideas and thoughts to flow is terrible.
@ gary It makes no sense to go through a prolonged restatement of the other guy’s side before you feel free to leave your own comment. Some of us are too long-winded as it is. So I don’t see, never did see, the purpose of the 4 step process you suggest. Ain’t nobody got time for that.
However it’s my opinion that you should indeed moderate comments that contribute nothing to the discussion at hand. Including personal attacks. Including comments you just don’t like. Whatever. It’s your site. Remove the cruft!
@David Huberman I think you may be right. Back in the day, there was useful information shared in forums. The trolls have now systematically attacked every site that allows anonymous or unmoderated comment. It almost seems like there’s a segment of society that is angry about the freedoms we once enjoyed on the internet, and they’ve made it their goal in life to destroy it. I definitely see value in experimenting with removing comments, at least on some posts, altogether.
In that case I support this decision and don’t see how continuing to make comments on this thread will decrease the offense you experience.
“After years and years of snarky, belittling and insulting posts and reader comments from View From The Wing, I’ve simply blocked you on all my social media accounts and ignore traffic coming from your site.”
I don’t remember revisiting the comments on post from View From The Wing, but commonly I check back on comments on One Mile At a Time to learn follow-up information on the post.
For example Lucky posted about new routes on Aer Lingus routes to IAD, someone claimed they are phantom availability, so I keep checking back to see if someone confirmed that.
FYI: I voted for Lucky because I like his write-ups a bit better, but Gary gets the credit for producing a huge volume of articles and criticism which generally I agree with.
@Iolaire If I understand you correctly, you are suggesting that the comments section here is nothing more than an echo chamber for readers who can’t be bothered to think for themselves. I think you might be right.
Too bad. I think this site’s readers could do real good by helping others. But I guess that’s my department.
@Christopher Elliott wrote, “when I give bad advice — which I do from time to time…”
LOL. That’s why I read Gary’s blog. EXPs read an EXP’s blog. Thanks.
@robert – You do not have an absolute right to say whatever you please online. Delta Points and I agree on this issue. Criticize ideas, not people. Keep the discourse civil. What’s so bad about that?
Hey @ED, where did I claim to be an “EXP.” I’m a consumer advocate. If you don’t want help, by all means, stay in the echo chamber.
This discussion is fascinating. I have to say, Mr. Elliott, that some of your comments above don’t show the “balance and fairness” that you chastise Gary lacking. If someone says you are “not in the same league” as a flyertalker, that isn’t an attack, it is a comparison that gives information. It’s like saying that someone who plays for the Springfield Cardinals (AA minor league) isn’t in the same league at a player for the St. Louis Cardinals. And hence the term “not in the same league”. I’ve read your articles, I’ve read Gary’s, and yep, I’m a Gary follower because he has a much better reasoned and informative blog. And since we are all adults, I don’t need to qualify that statement with a dozen disclaimers about what a great guy you actually are.
I should add that I have had a blog and website in the past, so I know what rough and tumble place the Internet is. So, don’t take the above quite so personally. You’ll live longer and be much happier.
And Gary, for the love of God, don’t moderate beyond the absolutely horrid. An Aussie using “cunt” or a Brit saying “fuck” are the least of our worries on any given day!
@Iolaire McFadden – totally fair to vote for Lucky, his is probably my favorite blog
If you disagree with someone say why, but do it respectfully. It’s interesting how this has devolved in a post specifically asking that comments not devolve in this way. Interesting social science, I guess! If you think someone is a troll, the best thing you can ever do is to ignore them. Responding in kind isn’t helpful.
Regardless, I’m learning a lot about comments here as I’m about to transition to a redesigned site and redesigned comments section.
Thanks to everyone here that is attempting to keep things civil. I love that I’m actually getting visited by someone I’ve taken to task so often, and disagree with so much, I’d love it actually if Mr. Elliott were welcomed here. Wouldn’t it be great if we could have a dialogue on the things we disagree with instead of chasing off folks like that?
Anyway, those are my thoughts.
Best,
Gary
@Tom I find the discussion fascinating too. But I find your verbal acrobatics to be unconvincing. Try substituting your name for mine in the “not in a same league” comment, and tell me how you feel.
Yeah, thought so.
So you’re just here to tell me that I’m not a “veteran Flyertalker” and that I shouldn’t take it personally? Oh, thanks.
Maybe you can show me where I claimed to be 1) A Flyertalker; 2) An airline expert; 3) A mileage expert; 4) Remotely interested in travel.
I’m a consumer advocate. I help people. Need help? Visit my site. Don’t need help? Hey, it’s a free country.
So you like Gary a lot. That’s great. Keep reading his blog. But don’t tell me how I should feel. I know an insult when I see one.
This is an odd post and set of comments for your site Gary. I’ve read your site for years and have learned and benefited greatly from it. I enjoy your posts, your insights, your trip reports and your photography. And I think I have expressed that in your comments before.
For the most part your comments are fine too. I think you have the right on a blog to delete what you don’t like, agree with, or even just don’t feel like providing a platform for. A blog is not a forum. Don’t let some lame brain take advantage of all your efforts and generosity to be a putz at your expense. If someone came to the door of your house or up to your car and started spouting off how would you react? A blog is just as private and even more personal as it grows into your legacy body of work. Don’t let some eightballs sidetrack or hijack it.
I’ve never heard of elliot, don’t want to hear from him, and judging by his comments here, just wish he’d go away. I don’t know him and have never read him and have no interest in doing so. Don’t let him manipulate and use your site, and your work to draw attention to himself and his weblog or whatever it is. You are way better off not having anything to do with this. Just hit delete and hopefully he and his ilk of commenters will go away. thanks again for your website and your work.
@Gary, sadly, I do not feel welcome here. Your readers have gone out of the way to make me feel as if I’m an idiot who has no business writing about travel or advocating for consumers.
I feel like they don’t just disagree with some of the ideas that I put forth, but resent everything I stand for — fair treatment of all customers, compassion for the least fortunate, honesty in business.
On a personal note, I feel awful. It is as if your readers are delighted by my futile efforts to bridge the misunderstandings between us.
@Walter, thank you! You’ve so eloquently proven my point about the level of discourse on this site. Keep on keepin’ on!
I honestly don’t hate Elliott, despite being a FTer/VTFW commenter. I enjoy his work (even if I think “Well, I don’t quite agree with THAT thing he said” every so often).
I think they serve very, very different purposes and audiences, though. Ordinary consumers who are having problems during travel simply aren’t the same as people trying to milk a frequent flyer/credit card program for cheap ways to drink expensive champagne and eat caviar at 35,000 feet (or even to have a minimally decent free first class upgrade on that flight home from Omaha after a week spent road warrioring).
Incidentally- I think he’s right when he says that elite status and the existence of first/business class is part of what makes coach as bad as it is. You have to give someone something to aspire to to have an aspirational loyalty program, right? And part of that is “we’ll give you coach seats that aren’t rammed in, if there’s a problem you get through to a human being who can fix things faster” and so on.
The thing is FlyerTalk is all about trying to work the airline/travel system as it exists to your benefit, Elliott’s about getting results when you’re dumped on by a travel company treating a customer poorly. So somewhat different orientations, and, naturally some conflict. If you think the system is rigged (Elliott), and if you think you’re getting some benefit from the system as is (FlyerTalkers)… that sort of implies conflicting motives, no?
Of course, even “elites” get treated badly sometimes…
I really don’t know much about either of you but Christopher Elliott, you have a seemingly masochistic sensibility to the comments of others. Have you considered simply not responding (rather histrionically) to every single mention of your name?
*sensitivity… typing too fast!
@Pavel, actually, I promised that for one day only, I would answer all my critics on this site. That includes you, compadre.
I know, histrionics. Hyperbole much, Pavel?
@christopher Elliott – I founded one of the most successful online travel sites and ran it for over13 years, so I’ve had to deal with a fair number of trolls and haters over the years, plus plenty of people who just plain didn’t agree with me or thought I was wrong about things. You know what is not effective in dealing with such folks? Whining about how mean they are, and complaining that your feelings are hurt. What is effective is calmly evaluating the criticism, accepting (and ideally, changing) any areas of weakness, and ignoring everything else.
The truth is, you have been completely, totally wrong and ill-informed on many travel topics you’ve addressed in your column. You are ignorant in some areas and really need to learn more or stop writing about things you don’t understand. I’m not hating on you, I’m telling you the truth and suggesting you can improve if you want.
Unfortunately, based on your earlier comments, I suspect my truth-telling will be dismissed out of hand and you’ll add me to your mental list of “Gary’s acolytes” instead of taking a hard look at your own shortcomings. I hope I’m wrong.
Not hyperbolic at all, I should say. I think you really should focus on the fact that in writing for the web, you’re inherently selling a personality along with the content. That’s simply how internet users perceive the information they consume. You don’t seem to grasp that or at best have a very unique expectation of how that should play out.
Like I said, I don’t know you or your site — but I can see clearly how you invite a lot of the hate that seems to come your way. Best of luck!
I think comments that engage in personal attacks rather than discussion of ideas should be deleted. Some bloggers have thicker skin than others, obviously,and some are more willing than others to admit they might be wrong. Few readers really want to wade wade through lots of personal attacks in order to find the helpful material that can often emerge in comments.
I think Leff bends over backwards to accept criticism, perhaps too much so at times. I think Elliott is very quick to see criticism of his ideas as a personal attack or some sort of threat and bans people readily. He banned me, and as a result I don’t read his blog any more.
Well, there is this:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/article/20121119145727-332179-frequent-flier-programs-are-a-scam-here-s-why-you-should-quit-yours-now
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/article/20121126124854-332179-are-business-travelers-stupid
I think the language’s deliberately provocative (I mean that quite clearly: delibrately meant to be provocative).
Of course, I might not suffer trolls gladly if I felt I was tired of suffering their outrageous slings and arrows.
So, tell you what, Chris, if you’re game: why should frequent flyers/Flyertalkers who DO get benefits from the system as is (as written about here and elsewhere) should want to change the system they benefit from?
And, yes, we do benefit; I’ve flown overseas in champagne and caviar class at pennies on the dollar. It’s possible to do this and not be captive to an airline or overpay for your tickets; in fact, it’s possible to do this and not think some plastic card named after a precious metal or gem that an airline or hotel chain gives you matters in the grand scheme of things, or validates your worth as a person.
But let’s assume that the whole rotten frequent flyer game is rigged as badly as blackjack is in a casino… why should the FlyerTalker cardcounters who do well at it care, as long as we’re making money and getting our end of the bargain?
@Pavel, this is starting to sound like a playground argument, isn’t it?
“Is too.”
“Is not!”
“Is too.”
[Eyroll]. I’m not playing along.
@DaveS I don’t ban, my moderation team does. If you were banned permanently, you must have really piled it on. Happy you’re reading another blog now.
I like your blog a lot, but you are not honestly a travel blog. Poor Elliot to have listed you. You are a niche blog as to credit card leverage and points. You are not good on travel discussion at all. I have never seen a good unique travel idea or article yet from your blog. Any travel is to regular places and staying at large hotels where you can stay on points. The most that you add is a discussion of restaurants sometimes as you love your food. So that is good, but rare and limited discussion. Discussion is only of points and points related travel which is narrow.
@Mary, your rant is long on hyperbole and short on specifics. You won’t even give me your full name or the site you claim to have created. Sorry, but I can’t take that very seriously.
You seem to think this post is about me. It’s not.
It’s actually about you, your fellow commenters, and Gary. You’ve managed to create a poisonous echo chamber inside the Holy Church of Points. You have no interest in hearing from those in the back of the plane, the “gate lice” as you call them.
I am clearly not welcome here with my progressive, pro-consumer views. Pardon me for expressing my disappointment.
@eponymous no, indeed. You would defend it as if it is your religion. Even if it means the rest of us must suffer. I understand that, and I’m beginning to understand why the FT crowd is so threatened by my advocacy work and my criticism of loyalty programs. If enough people listen to me, there goes your first class upgrade, your champagne brunch, your “free” flights. I gotcha.
I don’t even read Chris’s blog but reading his comments here make me dislike him already. The internet says some bad things about you, but you make it worse by whining and moaning about how mean they are.
You haven’t taken a single ounce of criticism by anyone and a lot of it seems to be on the same things reiterated by multiple people. Either suck it up and get over it or listen to the recurring themes and improve yourself. Someone needs to build a bridge and get over it. As you put it [eyeroll]
@Christopher Elliott wrote: “Hey @ED, where did I claim to be an “EXP.” I’m a consumer advocate. If you don’t want help, by all means, stay in the echo chamber.”
LMAO! Gary is an EXP, i.e., an Executive Platinum with AA. So am I. I find what he writes is very relevant to what EXPs experience.
But in your case, Mr. Elliot, there’s a Hilton Suite next to Kevin Trudeau right now who also claimed to be a “consumer advocate”.
Thanks.