Comments on: On Blogging Ethics

By: Jdog

Jdog — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 01:18:05 +0000

Generally, I think that editing blog posts is a thing, not a bad thing. annotated, to correct an error? Good thing. Pulling a Juan Cole and removing traces of bogus claims? Bad thing. Removing the particular criminal lawyer’s name from your blog posts? A thing — other than that it’s your call, I dunno.

By: Mark Bennett

Mark Bennett — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 22:12:20 +0000

I had it in my mind that editing a blog post was a bad thing. I’ve decided, based on comments here and Ken’s actions, that it’s not. I’ve removed the references to the Fresno criminal defense lawyer.

By: Blawg Review #230 « Unsilent Partners

Blawg Review #230 « Unsilent Partners — Sun, 20 Sep 2009 21:10:53 +0000

[...] [...]

By: Blogging News – Submit your Articles and get information | freearticlesdbonline.com

Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:32:43 +0000

[...] Defending People » On Blogging Ethics [...]

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:30:15 +0000

I believe in redemption; or at least deferred adjudication. I’ll take something down if asked nicely.

However, I keep a storage of the taken-down post. I then set up a Google Alert for the subject’s name. So long as the subject remains “clean,” the post will never be republished.

By: Ken

Ken — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 22:09:47 +0000

Maybe I was just in a good mood. I figure the guy probably shit himself and had a very bad night. I’m confident he won’t do it again. And he was polite, when most people kicked that hard would have gotten nastily defensive. It’s not that he deserved it. I decided to extend some grace, like I need grace now and then.

And don’t pretend you aren’t a big softie too. You didn’t link your prior posts or repeat the lawyer’s name.