• Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

March 17 of 2003 was Don Bauder Day in San Diego. (I suspected that most city council members voted for it because they were gleefully celebrating my departure from the Union-Tribune.) The honor was no big deal because a lot of people get it. But mine was memorable, because in accepting it, I lashed out at the council, charging that San Diego’s form of government was turning into a plutocracy, or government by the wealthy.

Had I known about research that was to come out two years later, I would have also mentioned that the San Diego economy was in danger of becoming a plutonomy, in which the majority of wealth is controlled by an ever-shrinking, super-affluent minority. In a plutonomy, economic growth is powered and consumed by the wealthiest upper class. Public policy should be aimed at massaging the superrich. A rising tide lifts all yachts.

The word “plutonomy” usually applies to a country, but there is no reason it can’t describe a metropolitan area. The concept was introduced by an economist at New York’s Citigroup in 2005. He concluded that of the major industrial countries, the U.S., U.K., Canada, and Australia were plutonomies and therefore were likely to enjoy better growth than other developed countries with more income equality. Continental Europe (with the exception of Italy) and Japan represented the “egalitarian bloc,” sneered the economist, and they would do worse economically than the plutonomies.

Like most forecasts, this one was only partly right. Both the plutonomies and egalitarian bloc countries got whacked in the mayhem that began in late 2007 and is still drawing blood. Canada, a plutonomy, is doing relatively well. Europe is doing worse than the U.S., although Italy, supposedly a plutonomy, is in sick bay, and the plutonomic U.K. is a mess. (Of course, Citigroup, which got the largest bailout of any U.S. bank, is itself a disaster.)

The Citigroup economist was right in several respects: he predicted that the rich would continue to get richer. Bingo! Between 2001 and 2007, two-thirds of income gains in the U.S. went to the richest 1 percent. The most affluent 1 percent owns well over half the nation’s stocks and rakes in more income than the bottom 50 percent of Americans. In 1950, top executives earned about 30 times what the average worker earned; now it’s 300 to 500 times. Last year, the top 25 hedge fund managers raked in $25 billion. The 400 highest-paid Americans had an average income of $345 million in 2007 and only paid an effective tax rate of 16.6 percent.

Now, as company profits zoom, consumer sentiment has plummeted to lows that are seldom seen. That’s because one reason profits are going up is that companies aren’t hiring and continue to send jobs overseas.

In the U.S. today, retail sales are soaring in upscale stores but not in downscale ones — just as the Citigroup economist predicted. Indeed, he said the economy can grow just fine without the poor and middle class; the upper crust’s purchases will keep it going.

Crucially, a plutonomy needs friendly, cooperative governments, said the Citigroup guru. That’s what San Diego has. The business overlords essentially run government, which then makes sure that taxpayer money flows to the affluent.

A classic example is the abuse of redevelopment money. It was originally meant to help the poor and middle class by creating affordable housing and eliminating blight. The San Diego downtown establishment hijacked the concept for the building of corporate welfare projects that benefit the developers, builders, and the affluent. Petco Park made John Moores an even richer billionaire. A new Charger stadium would make a billionaire family, the Spanoses, even wealthier. Upscale hotels, condos, and retailers downtown get fat subsidies while the neighborhoods, infrastructure, maintenance, fire service, and outlying libraries are ignored.

Normally, the City gets 17 percent of property tax receipts, and the rest goes to the County, school districts, and special-purpose governments. But in a redevelopment, 80 percent of the tax increment goes to the City and redevelopment agency, and the money has to be spent in the project area where it was raised. But there has to be “blight.” So despite all the redevelopment money poured into downtown, the establishment still claims it is blighted. “In San Diego, CCDC [Centre City Development Corp.] has so much power that the money goes back downtown,” says Vlad Kogan, doctoral candidate at the University of California San Diego.

In Los Angeles and San Francisco, governments have made sure that redevelopment funds go into the neighborhoods. But in San Diego, Centre City utterly dominates the city council, which is the redevelopment agency. That’s plutocracy.

“In San Diego, the establishment has a feeding trough, a dedicated revenue stream for pet projects, and it is not interested in the rest of the city,” says Steve Erie, professor of political science at the University of California San Diego. “In Los Angeles, the money is going to the neighborhoods,” but nonetheless, there is a downtown renaissance financed by private capital. “In San Diego, the only way we do business is with public money for private purpose and private benefit.”

San Diego will now pay a consulting firm half a million bucks to look, essentially, at the possibility of a Charger stadium. Big question: Is there blight? Why hire a consulting firm? You know what the answer will be: Gawd, yes! It’s blighted! Build! Subsidize!

“There was a time when downtown was blighted and needed an infusion of subsidies,” says Murtaza Baxamusa of the Center on Policy Initiatives. Today, “It’s like giving a blue [parking] placard to somebody who was handicapped but is no longer handicapped. The market can now take care of itself.” And the money that goes to subsidizing the wealthy “is money that could go for health care, to schools.”

But the political apparatus helps keep the rich stealing from the children. Centre City wants to triple the tax increment cap for its project area. The motivation is to permit an insolvent city to subsidize a Charger stadium to the tune of $600 million to $900 million. Councilmember Kevin Faulconer, whose district includes downtown, asked the independent budget analyst Andrea Tevlin to see if the raising of the cap would hurt the City’s finances.

The study she signed concluded that while the general fund would lose $300 million over 32 years, there would be increases in such things as hotel and property taxes that would more than offset that loss. (Have you heard this whopper before?) Civic activist Mel Shapiro points out that Faulconer’s wife runs a downtown business and Tevlin paid $575,000 for a downtown condo that is now assessed at $433,000. Both have a financial interest in downtown, he says. Both deny it.

Yes, a plutonomy works best under a plutocracy. San Diego is the paradigm.

  • Story alerts
  • Letter to Editor
  • Pin it

More from the web

Comments

Twister Aug. 11, 2010 @ 4:34 p.m.

If you're a plutocrat paying less than 20 percent in taxes, you don't really mind that much, since you're getting most of that back in LEGAL graft.* Over time, you're way ahead. But even that doesn't matter--you still don't take PERCENTAGES to the bank, you send MONEY off shore.

*The LAW was invented by the hierarchy to protect it from social mores. And your truly effective tax rate is actually in minus territory. Were it not for taxes (the biggest profit-center of all) you would be limited to what you can suck from your shell-game.

0

a2zresource Aug. 11, 2010 @ 4:43 p.m.

Today's general market drop seems to confirm your observations on consumer cautiousness.

Citigroup and the other Master of Disasters on Wall Street live in a separate-and-unequal context, where cleverly-constructed financial instruments have generally pushed aside all ordinary notions in increasing wealth through reasonable economic growth. Instead, we now endure an endless cycle of boom and bust while bubbles congregate investors and speculators alike until things go POP.

Correct me if I am wrong about this, but wasn't there some announcement today that at least a billion would be pumped into a plan for the unemployed to buy houses with federal loans?

If so, then how characteristic!

0

Don Bauder Aug. 11, 2010 @ 7:16 p.m.

Response to post #1: The IRS vows it is really going after offshore tax cozeners. But will it? Or is it all show for the "little people" who are, after all, the only ones that pay taxes. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 11, 2010 @ 7:23 p.m.

Response to post #2: I don't remember such an announcement. I did hear today that as Dean Baker writes, almost all economists helped the market bubble expand by claiming that stocks in general go up 10% a year. (Those statistics are questionable. Stocks have gone up 0% a year for the last 11 years. This is a secular bear market. There have been plenty of them in the past.) Also, almost all economists blessed the notion that housing prices only go up. This false idea helped inflate the housing bubble. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 11, 2010 @ 7:25 p.m.

Response to post #3: Such a plan would be more logical and less destabilizing. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 11, 2010 @ 7:27 p.m.

Response to post #4: This week we have had a program to help bail out the states. There will be many more. Best, Don Bauder

0

SanDiegoParrothead Aug. 12, 2010 @ 12:06 p.m.

...that stocks in general go up 10% a year. (Those statistics are questionable. Stocks have gone up 0% a year for the last 11 years. ....

========

Don:

PLease elaborate on your statement 0% a year for last 11 years. How so?

thanks,

0

Don Bauder Aug. 12, 2010 @ 1:19 p.m.

Response to post #9: The Dow Jones Industrial Average hit 10,000 for the first time on March 12, 1999. The next month, on April 28, 1999, it hit 11,000. At this moment, it is trading at 10,320. It has actually declined a bit over 11 years. I gave it the benefit of the doubt and said it had gone up 0% a year. Best, Don Bauder

0

Brian_T_Peterson_DVM Aug. 13, 2010 @ 2:44 p.m.

Here’s an example of a neighborhood getting screwed to further enrich downtown: Grantville. The City and the County resolved their differences over Grantville redevelopment by agreeing Grantville should send over $31 million of its tax increment to fund downtown improvements. The immediate beneficiary is the C Street trolley line from Kettner to Park Blvd. In September of ’08 the Grantville Action Group filed suit to stop this arrangement, because it is blatantly illegal. So, as if it is not bad enough that downtown sucks money legally—although not legitimately—through diverting its property tax receipts, in Grantville’s case they elected to break the law to take it.

The Grantville trial date is October 29. So far, we have collected over $45,000 in contributions to fund our endeavor. We are still a few thousand short of full funding. If you would like to contribute to our effort to rein in San Diego’s plutocrats, go to www.GrantvilleActionGroup.com.

0

Founder Aug. 13, 2010 @ 3:43 p.m.

Like any two edged sword, Redevelopment can cut both ways but there the comparison ends because of the "one" wielding that sword. In San Diego, it is a two faced entity (think City Council which also sits as the Redevelopment Agency)!

When both need money and one has lots and the other needs lots; you would think that they both would "pool" their money and do their best for San Diego!

Instead, what we the voters have here, is two competing entities that not only are dysfunctional but are so proud of it, that they continue to do more of the same, year after year. Even during times so tough, that they on one hand, have actually begun Public Service "brown outs", ballot tax increases and talked of possibly going bankrupt; while at the same time, they have on the other hand, have begun construction of a new partially funded Library and are promoting for building both a new football Stadium and City Hall!

Instead of making things better,they are now deciding how they can squeeze us some more, to keep up the appearance of GOOD Fiscal Leadership.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 13, 2010 @ 7:40 p.m.

Response to post #11: Agreed. The Grantville deal smells to high heaven. I hope you triumph in your efforts. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 13, 2010 @ 7:46 p.m.

Response to post #12: Well said. It is astounding that a city in which even establishment members have openly discussed bankruptcy can still push ahead with massive corporate welfare projects such as the library, convention center expansion, new city hall complex and, worst of all, a stadium for the billionaire Spanos family and its pro team, the Chargers. I think the city hall complex might drop out here. I think if the convention center deal involves new taxes, it may drop by the wayside. The Chargers? A technically insolvent city could wind up subsidizing this crew to the tune of $700 million or more. Best, Don Bauder

0

princely1976 Aug. 14, 2010 @ 4:49 p.m.

I hadn't read the Reader in some time but I'm glad I did today. You need more articles like this. This town's populace is asleep at the wheel.

0

Founder Aug. 14, 2010 @ 6:14 p.m.

Reply #15 Welcome back princely1976

We need more folks to get "interested" in SD and so far the ONLINE Reader is the best "Deal" in town...

0

Don Bauder Aug. 14, 2010 @ 11:22 p.m.

Response to post #15: I've written on this several times -- once just a couple of months ago. You have to read the Reader and look at our website more often! You won't hear about this establishment scam in any other medium in San Diego, to my knowledge. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 14, 2010 @ 11:25 p.m.

Response to post #16: Once again, I agree with you, Founder: the one place where you will find details on establishment scams is the Reader. Best, Don Bauder

0

Founder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 8:36 a.m.

Reply #18 If I may be so BOLD, I'd suggest:

"The only place where you will find details on establishment scams is the Reader and if that is of any interest to you, then be sure to also read the ONLINE Reader as it contains BOTH updated information and in depth discussions about all the hot topics in San Diego."

http://www.sandiegoreader.com/

Best

BTW: I'd like the Reader to start advertising it's own ONLINE Version, because too many still do not think the ONLINE Version is anything different than the printed version, which is"put to bed much to early" for most Readers that would like to be in the know...

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 8:42 a.m.

Response to post #19: Maybe we should promote our online version more. I agree with you that it has a lot of material that you won't find anywhere else. But I am not involved in such decisions. Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:13 a.m.

Founder, I do agree with you. I'll offer this suggestion here. Whoever is in charge of promoting the Reader on Twitter and Facebook, it's possible that they are stretched too thin. Someone really needs to push the online version of the Reader on these social networking sites. Some entries are made, but more can be done.

Hand that Twitter and Facebook account over to a few different people and assign them different sections of the online version of the Reader to promote! Maybe one person gets City Lights, another gets Barb/Brizz/Etc. and another gets Naomi/Bedford, and so on. People respond to these links. Even when I blog in here, if I link it to Facebook, I'm sure the Reader gets hits from it.

And encourage the writers to respond to comments. People come back for that, they love the interaction. Barb responds, Don always responds. I know this takes a huge chunk of time out of the day, but in the long run, it's worth it, not only in added revenue, but in garnering a great following for the publication and the various writers.

/mytwocents

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 15, 2010 @ 10:41 a.m.

I hadn't read the Reader in some time but I'm glad I did today. You need more articles like this. This town's populace is asleep at the wheel.

Not only alseep at the wheel, but KFC Sanders has driven our car off the cliff..............

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 15, 2010 @ 10:50 a.m.

Don:

PLease elaborate on your statement 0% a year for last 11 years. How so?

thanks,

By SanDiegoParrothead

I have posted this DJIA stat recently in response to the 3%@50 pension that was approved by the CA legislature in 1999 and implemented in 2000 (for the CHP, but spread to every muni in the state covering numerous employee classifications).

The claim by Calpers in 1999 was stock market investments would pay for the ENTIRE 50% retroactive increase in pension benefits that were allowed to be collected 5 years sooner-at age 50;

DJIA 5-13-1999 = 11,100 (when SB 400 was passed) DJIA 6-30-2010 = 9,774

A full 1,326 point LOSS in more than 11 years

Don most likely refers to this fact.

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 15, 2010 @ 10:51 a.m.

It takes a thick hide to survive on this site.

By Parker 10

You aint kidding brother!

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 15, 2010 @ 10:57 a.m.

This week we have had a program to help bail out the states. There will be many more.

By dbauder

The feds are now doing for the states what the states cannot do for themselves-run budget deficits.

But then again, all the feds do is turn on the money printing machine in the WH basement-and whaaaallllaaaaa, instant cash.

What the feds should have done was tell the states to cut comp for state employees who are already vastly over comped-and have so far shown no intentions or reeling in that comp.

0

Founder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 10:59 a.m.

  • HELP Online Reader -

Reply #20 & #21 Thinking of ways to help the Online Reader's fun

Advertising pays, but it's not what the Online Reader has, just ask the great folks, that sell all of those juicy Reader ads!

If the Online version, was promoted "better", starting soon the number of hits, on their web server, would sing a new tune.

There would then be, many more new Online Readers (no pun intended) and their interaction, with all the writers, could get "issues" mended.

It would promote the Reader, in an entirely new light, and give all San Diegans some more, much needed, insight

That Online Reader idea to me, would be like, well written "Poetry"!

0

David Dodd Aug. 15, 2010 @ 11:12 a.m.

Here's an experiment, Founder, I hope the Reader management types keep a heads-up. I just pimped the latest cover story at 11:05 AM on my facebook page. I only have 144 friends, I haven't really tried to reach out yet. However, I bet they see hits. It would be cool to see if they would give some feedback into this, but people really do want to dig on what we all dig on. We're some pretty awesome monkeys sometimes.

0

Founder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 11:22 a.m.

26

and here is why he has no fear when driving our "car": 1. He is Strongest SD Mayor in History. 2. He already has more than one "Golden" parachute. 3. He is completely surrounded/protected by air bags...

0

Founder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 11:36 a.m.

Reply #32 "We're some pretty awesome monkeys sometimes."

Who better to ID "Monkey Business"?

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 11:53 a.m.

Response to post #21: Jim Holman, the editor, has to make such decisions. You can reach him by phone or email. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 11:56 a.m.

Response to post #22: There are other neighborhood projects in San Diego that have not gone forward, I am told, as the downtown crowd sucks up all the money for purposes that redevelopment was never supposed to serve. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 11:59 a.m.

Response to post #23: If your husband is as brilliant as you say he is -- and I have no reason to believe otherwise -- then I would encourage him to contribute. If we're all a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals, as you say, he can add some class to the joint. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:01 p.m.

Response to post #24: We definitely need some new frogs in the old pond. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:03 p.m.

Response to post #25: This site does require a thick hide, I suppose. It has evolved that way. We welcome those without such a thick skin. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:05 p.m.

Response to post #26: Yes, the car has gone of the cliff, but nobody seems to notice. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:07 p.m.

Response to post #27: That one zoomed right over my head. I know there was a movie named Thelma and Louise, but I don't know what happened in it. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:13 p.m.

Response to post #28: The Dow got above 14,000 and below 7,000 in that period, so some alert people made money, but still, the Dow has gone nowhere in 11 years. High quality long bonds have done well in that period -- just as they did well in the 1980s and 1990s when stocks were zooming. Some argue long bonds did better than stocks from the early 1980s through 1999. Nobody argues about the fact that after 2000, quality bonds widely outperformed stocks. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:15 p.m.

Response to post #29: But maybe all of us should tone down our rhetoric, toss fewer invective darts, so people less prone to hurling pejoratives can join in. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:19 p.m.

Response to post #30: In a sense, all the ailing states have done is cut excessive benefits for new hires. There has been little progress in actually bringing bloated benefits down for those already on the payroll or already retired. The legal barriers are considered too high. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:21 p.m.

Response to post #31: Tell it to the brass at the higher levels of the Reader. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:25 p.m.

Response to post #32: I do believe some people at the Reader have considered that strategy. They may be pursuing it. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:29 p.m.

Response to post #33: But as Dr. Seuss said, he doesn't know the cliffs from the bluffs. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:31 p.m.

Response to posts #s34 and 35: You folks are going over my head again. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:34 p.m.

Response to post #41: Yes, that is another project going nowhere while the money is steered downtown to line the pockets of the rich. Your last paragraph says it all. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:36 p.m.

Response to post #44: We mean-spirited bloggers are working to reform. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 12:38 p.m.

Response to post #45: Oh. That explains it. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 15, 2010 @ 1:01 p.m.

But maybe all of us should tone down our rhetoric, toss fewer invective darts, so people less prone to hurling pejoratives can join in

It's the Internet-it was made for hurling anonymous, invective rhetoric.

That's why it is so much fun!

0

Visduh Aug. 15, 2010 @ 3:22 p.m.

Mindy, I have to agree with you about our North county politics and politicians. That's kind of nice, since we disagree on other things. One thing though: the comments I see posted to NCT articles are not of the quality you see in the Reader and more specifically Don's blogs and columns. In fact in most dailies the comments run to illiterate, invective and incoherence. And I don't think they do much for debate. Look at a typical comment in the U-T. There are inveterate posters who can be counted on to say the very same thing in every posting, riding their particular hobby horses into the floor every day.

Most of these Reader comments aren't insulting as much as impassioned. Most of us who comment frequently have learned that insults accomplish little and tend to damp down the discussion that we actually enjoy. I think the Reader is on the right track with this approach. But the NCT may also be right when the editor as you say "yanked" it off the site. Just so you'll know, I was tempted to comment to both the NCT and the U-T but have never done so because of the lack of quality of the other comments.

0

Founder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 3:31 p.m.

Reply #60 RE: Getting RID by yanking: I'd like try having the person posting the Blog to be able to get rid of comments that are not helpful (in their humble opinion) to their blog; then perhaps some Blogs would flourish and be more inviting to new bloggers. If other Bloggers felt their comments were not welcomed then they would simply post else where and the Blogs that were not popular would fall by the wayside leaving the more popular ones to retain the Publics eye... That would allow an exchange of ideas yet limit the background nit picking that makes some Blogs less exciting (in my personal opinion) and would prevent say two folks (or maybe even the same person using 2 user names) from having a semi (?) conversation with themselves or each other...

RE: North County: I urge you to get all your friends (and their friends, etc.) involved because the ONLINE Reader needs all the Blogging help it can get; to deal with all the things going on in San Diego these days which affects US all...

0

Founder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 4:06 p.m.

  • Thickened Skin -

Reply to Parker, #63 Or, an enlightened mind, like inside me,

It's fun, to see what others, will say, if you do not let it, spoil your day,

I enjoy making most into a Rhyme, as long as I have interest and the time,

but agreed with you, on one thing, I sure will, we would ALL benefit, from many more still.

Maybe soon, some of US, will get the chance, to really make, this Online Blog site, dance!

It possibly could be you, or it could be me, I guess both of US will just, have to wait and see...

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:13 p.m.

Response to post #56: Good philosophy. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:15 p.m.

Response to post #57: That or croak. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:16 p.m.

Response to post #58: Yeah, but we don't want to silence the gentle. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:18 p.m.

Response to post #59: I thought it was Phineas T. Barnum that said there is a sucker born every minute. But I may be wrong on that. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:21 p.m.

Response to post #60: You may be right that N. County is underrepresented in the Reader. Again, that is a matter to be considered by the editor. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:24 p.m.

Response to post #61: I do think we tackle some pretty recondite matters on this blog. I'm proud of it. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:28 p.m.

Response to post #62: In case anybody wonders, I will repeat what I have explained before: I have no control over who comments on the blog, and I have no idea who is making the comments except in a couple of cases in which the blogger has let me know that he/she is posting under a pseudonym. If I see something that I think is libelous or in very bad taste, I contact the administrator. If he doesn't agree with me, he does nothing. If he agrees, he removes the post. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:31 p.m.

Response to post #63: Again, we want folks with thick skins and those with thin skins. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 15, 2010 @ 9:33 p.m.

Response to post #64: Oh dear. I'm a lousy dancer. Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd Aug. 15, 2010 @ 10:21 p.m.

"I would suggest to the Reader powers-that-be that they get rid of the comments under the blogs, except for the professionals."

This is interesting, I've though about it quite a bit. First, some people have a problem dividing actual stories from blog entries (I've read comments in stories that refered to the stories as "blogs", for example). Stories are stories and blog entries are blog entries. I think that anyone should be able to comment to their heart's content on stories, and that the authors should be encouraged to comment back, but shouldn't take the criticism personally. If you get paid to write, then your audience gets to take a hatchet to your stuff, that's just how it goes.

With blogs, it's different. These are just people, some are good writers, some are simply people with an opinion. But I'm not in favor of knocking out the comments there, either, because a lot of those comments are positive and helpful. It would be nice, however, if at some point the Reader considered allowing the author of the blogs to delete the crap comments. The negative: It might invite a lot of monkey-business by people who are simply here for a cheap thrill. The positive, is that the Admin will do less policing in the long run, and the blogger has the opportunity to weed out comments that are obviously meant to be hurtful or possess verbage meant to be personal in nature in a negative manner.

0

thestoryteller Aug. 16, 2010 @ 1:12 a.m.

I'd be in favor of that--allowing bloggers to delete comments, or how about blocking comments from certain posters? Or have comments only if you want them?

Most of the people on this site are pretty rude. I've been reading comments on youtube, and was surprised when I didn't encounter one rude comment. Every one of them was about how much he/she loved the music. Quite a different world.

0

David Dodd Aug. 16, 2010 @ 1:55 a.m.

"...or how about blocking comments from certain posters? Or have comments only if you want them?"

The blocking of comments from certain posters could only be done through the servers, and I'm guessing that the Reader doesn't want to screw with that. Blocking comments (all) or even deleting comments (they wouldn't actually be deleted, but would rather be invisible to the public) could actually be accomplished without taxing the servers (guessing that's why the option doesn't already exist). But that's up to them, I'm simply planting a seed here ;)

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:42 a.m.

Response to post #74: Mea culpa. Lesson: don't go with the conventional wisdom. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:44 a.m.

Response to post #75: Yes, I think some erudition comes through on this blog. Maybe not from me, but from some who post. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:46 a.m.

Response to post #75: That's what people like me say upon rising every morning: "Croak, no." Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:50 a.m.

Response to post #77: We have standards (no libel, profanity, etc.) but I don't think the author should be able to delete postings he doesn't like. As authors, we have to stand and take it, particularly if we are dishing it out. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:52 a.m.

Response to post #78: I don't think our commenters are rude. They have strong opinions, yes, and often express them colorfully. Best, Don Bauder

0

Founder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:53 a.m.

Reply #79

My 2¢ on "about blocking comments from certain posters" is that "IT" would not work, because then folks that are blocked would simply invent a new User name and use it until they got blocked and were "forced" to do the same thing again (i.e. Think "arms race")!

By allowing the author (of the Blog or the story) to delete comments just on their own story/blog's would allow them to focus the comments to "enhance the discussion" about what they submitted. Some might apply their "power" to really limit comments while others might only remove comments that are completely off the wall. How a writer uses their "censor power" would then be as interesting as what is being said.

Two examples:

A. Say I start a Haiku blog and someone wants to post a rant about their pet hog that thinks it's a dog; if that comment was not in Haiku format, I'd probably zap it...

B. Say the story was about graft in the City and many posted their personal feelings about "Graft" vs. "just doing Business" in everyday life, I'd probably let all that stay unless two users started to go "one on one and spoil the fun" at which time I would post a comment for them to "cool it or get zapped"...

If readers like how I used my "censor power", they would continue to read and comment about what I post and if they did not, then soon I'd find myself blogging to myself, ("Writer Censors Self")... This would increase readership and I think that would be good for all. Either way, the larger group of Readers (of the Online Reader) would then determine which ones they liked and which ones they did not care for. This would allow the Reader Admin. "Rulers" to review (say monthly) the number of hits that different story/blogs authors get and they could then either extend or remove "censor power" as they see fit.

Think of a large land owner (Reader Admin.), that allows share croppers (Writers & Bloggers) to work his land (Website) for a percentage of their total harvest (Readership= Advertising$); it makes good business sense for the land owner to reward those that produce the biggest crops (comments) to work more of his land and even take extra care of them (awarding "censor power" and or even some green to improve their own lives) while also "weeding out" those share croppers that are not successful or let his land go to "waste" (drive Readership away)...

All Hail Our Rulers and Long May They Reign!

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:54 a.m.

Response to post #79: Sorry, I am a First Amendment guy. People have a right to state their opinions. Particularly in this day of frightening public apathy, we should welcome all posters, as long as they play by our rules (no libel, etc.) Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 7:57 a.m.

Response to post #80: That's one I can't answer, because I don't have the ability to remove anything unilaterally. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 8 a.m.

Response to post #86: I, for one, do not want to weed out so-called sharecroppers. Best, Don Bauder

0

Founder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 8:03 a.m.

Reply #89 What if they are driving away Readership?

0

David Dodd Aug. 16, 2010 @ 8:17 a.m.

@ #86 & 87: All good points. However, write a eulogy in honor of a fallen friend for his family in San Diego to read, then let a commentor with an obvious personal axe to grind against the person who posts that eulogy enter a comment of disrespect, and with no way to remove the comment before his father reads the post and the comments...

That happened in my case.

Here's another thought: I can't share this website - at least, the fact that I enjoy contributing to it - with my own parents. Why? Personal attacks. Apparently, they are permitted so long as they don't violate the TOS (I'm still having trouble wrapping my head around the ever-changing TOS in here).

So, consider this irony: Your 1st Amendment here now limits my audience. If I'm writing a story (published, not a blog), then that's the price you pay. I'm not so sure that should be the case if someone writes and expects nothing in return.

0

Founder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 9:25 a.m.

Which US back "full circle" (?) to Redevelopment, Money and schools...

Every front has a back and "there is no free lunch".

We have been trustful of our elected Leaders to do the "RIGHT" thing and what has happened lately is that "RIGHT" thing has morphed into a much different thing than it used to be...

Personal gain in power and wealth have taken front stage away from what's best for the "City" and even what's best for our Country...

It is not "News" that our once trusted news anchors have died, retired, been fired or been replaced with talking heads and now our news reporters spend more time in makeup than they do in reporting. "In depth" now means continued after the break...

So how does this change in "time factor" relate to how we spend our Redevelopment Money?

Redevelopment dollars can only be spent on "approved" projects and our elected Leaders are the ones that get to do the approving! If they fail to do a good job for US, then we don't get good value from the money, it's that simple. Here is a good example, you plant a tree and water it hoping to have a nice shade tree in the future, but then that tree sometime later, gets used to hang someone. Is it fair then, to ask if planting that tree so long ago was a good idea? Hind sight is great but promoting for a "better" future is tough duty and much depends upon whose at the "switch" and for how long...

It's easy to see what we as a City have gotten and we all know whose been at the "switch".

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:25 a.m.

Response to post #90: I'd have to see convincing evidence of that. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:28 a.m.

Response to post #91: This decision will be made at a higher level. I'm low on the totem pole. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:32 a.m.

Response to post #92: I would have had no such problem. My late father constantly blasted people left and right (mostly left). Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:34 a.m.

Response to post #93: I am unaware of those purported actions. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:36 a.m.

Response to post #94: That's right. No matter where a writer goes, he/she will be edited -- if not by an editor above him/her, then by the readership. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:36 a.m.

Don i didn't know u were having a blogging class here...but then how would i know...i'm not erudite and am just one of ur amiable sharecroppers

perhaps this ability to delete comments one feels is distracting from the main thrust of one writing would be valuable

do they bring more commenter's..like the people who slow down or stop to view an accident on the freeway...or drive people away with their nonsense

it's a psychological conundrum eh???

wait...where did that word CONUNDRUM come from?

i'm not erudite enough to use that word....hahahahahahahahaha

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:39 a.m.

Response to post #95: In San Diego, the right thing is that which massages the political right. CCDC has outlived its usefulness, if it ever really had any. Neighborhoods should revolt. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:42 a.m.

Response to post #101: The dictionary I have (admittedly about 60 years old) says that the origin of the word conundrum is unknown. Fascinating question. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:44 a.m.

Response to post #102: We had one in our family: our mother washing out our mouths with soap. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:48 a.m.

yeppers that words fits me to a T Don...the word Conundrum means

A riddle in which a fanciful question is answered by a pun.

i think i have the same dictionary Pooh

0

David Dodd Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:49 a.m.

Editors use a blue pen or pencil.

@ #98: That's the exact issue, my mother would likely rip at least one commenter up. I'd like to see some semblance of rationality, regardless. If she ever read our differences in economics, for example, it is perhaps the only point in which she would take my side. Otherwise, I'm the liberal of the family. Imagine that.

0

nan shartel Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:56 a.m.

To disagree, one doesn't have to be disagreeable. ~Barry M. Goldwater and Jack Casserly, Goldwater

Hospitality is making your guests feel at home, even if you wish they were. ~Author Unknown

u do this admirably Mr Bauder

0

Dennis Aug. 16, 2010 @ 1:29 p.m.

VOSD has implemented a system that allows a user to have a screen name but also allows anyone to view their actual name. I think this tends to tone down some of the nasty comments that get thrown around. It also makes it a bit easier to determine if someone has a vested interest for or against an issue.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 3:25 p.m.

Response to post #106: This year we heard a wonderful concert by a wind quintet called the Conundrum Quintet. I think if you asked most people, they would think a conundrum is a condom. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 3:27 p.m.

Response to post #107: The words "liberal" and "conservative" don't have much meaning these days, except as political pejoratives. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 3:29 p.m.

Response to post #108: I love that hospitality aphorism. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 3:36 p.m.

Response to post #108: In my own opinion, I think you should keep that privacy. I have noted that some other blogs are having people write their real names, or at least make it so readers can find out who is making the post. I don't agree with that. Blogs are for blasting off without fear of being unmasked. I must say, however, that I am speaking for myself, not the Reader. However, I have not heard that any change is in the works at the Reader. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 3:40 p.m.

Response to post #110: The truly erudite don't try to solve a problem if it is in fact insoluble, as the definition suggests. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 3:43 p.m.

Response to post #111: In another generation, the words to "blue pencil" objectionable material from a manuscript will be completely out of date. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 3:45 p.m.

Response to post #112: The Voice must have had a reason for doing this. I am curious to know how it has gone. Best, Don Bauder

0

thestoryteller Aug. 16, 2010 @ 4 p.m.

The commentators aren't rude, but I recently posted a story on another site, naming the bloggers/posters/stringers who have left the site because they "couldn't take it anymore." If you aren't going to pay people to post on a site, then you should at least be courteous, and the Reader has not been courteous. They say they don't allow harrassment, but they do. They allow staff members such as Jay to schmooze, play favorites, and take sides. They allow the Diva to make snippy comments to diegonomics. We are customers, not your slaves.

But what happens here, fits in with the reputation of the Reader, in general. Comic Con wouldn't allow Josh a press pass, the mayor won't allow city employees to talk to "The Reader," former mayor Susan Golding wouldn't allow Josh into a party. I attribute all of this to the fact that the Reader is run by men, and it is one of the reasons why I firmly believe women should rule the world.

0

thestoryteller Aug. 16, 2010 @ 4:18 p.m.

Re: #61 Visduh, I believe you are referring to the comments posted in the articles and staff blogs, while I am referring to comments in the nonstaff blogs. It is a completely different game. Last year, I told a LCSW about the stuff that goes on here, particularly in regard to comments by Refriedgringo and Sdaniels. She was disgusted, and called it "appalling," that this would be allowed to gone on. So even though the comments posted on the NCT and Trib sites are probably written by a bunch of dumb, uneducated kids (that's my impression), that doesn't make what goes on here, any better. However, I do agree that things are more civilized in places where the issues are being discussed, rather than the neighborhood blogs.

About our disagreements, I don't recall agreeing or disagreeing with you, one way or the other. Maybe you're just saying that in a generic way. Josh used to say, "I know we haven't always gotten along..." and I'd say, "Since when?"

0

nan shartel Aug. 16, 2010 @ 4:58 p.m.

113...not the erudite people Don...they wouldn't think it was a condom

they would think it was a playful remark made to illicit a laugh...as crystalcove did...thx CC...u got the message quite nicely

i freely admit that i'm a attention getting ignorant bore not fit to grace the comments spaces of a fine upstanding honey-pot of a Pooh like u DON

pouting

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 10:20 p.m.

Response to post #120: I agree that women should rule the world. One certainly runs our household, in which the men (earlier boys) outnumbered her 3-1. But I don't think the Reader has any kind of bullying, ergo masculine tone. It's just that the Reader has the courage to take on the establishment. This takes a thick skin, and that quality can be mistaken for a male trait. It isn't. We have always had women who took on the establishment. My editor, Heather Goodwillie, is tough as nails on the establishment -- and on me, thank goodness. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 10:24 p.m.

Response to post #121: I don't read the comments on other blogs very often, so any comparisons I make would be a bit invidious. However, I do think we have a pretty high cerebral content on this site -- despite some backsliding -- and the same is true on other Reader sites. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 10:30 p.m.

Response to post #122: There you go denigrating yourself again. You're one of our creative stars. Incidentally, when I was in high school, I worked on the street and sewer department in my home town (a Chicago suburb). The condoms were quite visible in the sewage. The men I worked for (who weren't the least bit erudite) called them "cundrums." Maybe that's why I felt most people wouldn't know the difference between a conundrum and a condom. Thank goodness, there was no such thing as a condominium then. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 10:32 p.m.

Response to post #123: I'm not aware of anyone being banned from this site, but I might not have been told. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 10:34 p.m.

Response to post #124: She is never boring and writes good poetry. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 16, 2010 @ 10:36 p.m.

Response to post #125: In sticking with it, Parker might find it addictive. Best, Don Bauder

0

Burwell Aug. 16, 2010 @ 11:08 p.m.

Response to post #123: I'm not aware of anyone being banned from this site, but I might not have been told. Best, Don Bauder

============

Fumber was banned from this site, and the powers that be deleted every single post that he wrote. Probably for good reasons.

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 17, 2010 @ 6:51 a.m.

pistolpete was banned about the same time as fumber.

Fumbler was banned TOO?????

Man oh man.......What is this place coming too......and how did you know Fumbler was also banned??

I am still pissed off they banned Cuddles. I hope she comes back soon under a sock puppet account.

PS, who else has been banned????? Any chance you can get Russl on that list?????

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 17, 2010 @ 6:55 a.m.

But what happens here, fits in with the reputation of the Reader, in general. Comic Con wouldn't allow Josh a press pass, the mayor won't allow city employees to talk to "The Reader," former mayor Susan Golding wouldn't allow Josh into a party. I attribute all of this to the fact that the Reader is run by men, and it is one of the reasons why I firmly believe women should rule the world.

By thestoryteller

LOL...I don't know you, but I like you thestoryteller.......how come I have not seen your posts here before????

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 7:15 a.m.

Response to post #132: Ah yes. I had forgotten about fumber. But I don't think I ever knew he had been banned. I thought he disappeared. I was no doubt wrong. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 7:18 a.m.

Response to post #133: I remember pistolpete, but to the best of that memory, I didn't know he was banned. They don't tell me these things. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 7:22 a.m.

Response to post #134: I'm sure we try to be consistent. I, for one, would not have wanted the baseball posts removed, even though they veered off topic. They were fun and informative. But I have no say in such decisions. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 7:26 a.m.

Response to post #135: We haven't heard from Cuddles for awhile, but I have no information that she (or he) was banned. You would like Russl banned? He makes some very intelligent comments. Some of his barbs may be aimed at you, but you can take it. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 7:27 a.m.

Response to post #136: I, too, would like to hear more from storyteller. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 7:29 a.m.

Response to post #137: You got me. I don't hear about such things and don't inquire. Best, Don Bauder

0

nan shartel Aug. 17, 2010 @ 10:22 a.m.

denigrating...wow there's a $10 word...i think i'll steal it and put it in my pocket

when i was in high school i worked at Marstens...had lunch at Mannings on 5th Ave...bought Lanz dresses for dirndl day at Hoover...and whistled at high school sewer workers in Chicago

that last part was a lie

oh and for Christmas this year i want all my old friends here to come back as sock puppets!!!

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 11:20 a.m.

Response to post #145: Damn! I remember a beautiful lass whistling at me in summer of 1952 while I worked with the sewer rats. It must have been somebody else. Best, Don Bauder

0

Founder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 2:38 p.m.

Reply #145 Talking to yourself again Don, you know - Best!

:-) + I wanted to ask if working with sewer rats as a young man helped better you ID other rats as you got older and "Bolder"?

BTW: Anybody ever call you Don Bolder? Best

0

David Dodd Aug. 17, 2010 @ 4:07 p.m.

@ #135: The only person I know of that was banned was PistolPete because he announced it somewhere else. He didn't care a thing about reinstatement, he knew why he got banned, and I think it amused him in the end. I seriously doubt that the Reader would comment on such occurrences like banning, probably keeping such information between a couple of people only. As wild as they let the comments sometimes get, they are professionals.

Everything else is speculation so far as I know.

I have noticed the absence of Fumber; that person is bizarre.

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 17, 2010 @ 4:23 p.m.

I have noticed the absence of Fumber; that person is bizarre.

The thing about Fumbler is he would leave for months at a time and then appear with his wild comments, then be gone as fast as he was here. I always thought he was a guy that would land in county jail for a few weeks/months at a time and that was the reason. Pure speculation, but it made sense to me.

. . . What are sock puppets ? ================= Oh Parker, what are we going to do with you.

A "sock puppet" is the infamous "gimmick" account, a second (or third, or fourth, or fifth) account to use as a back up to the main account. You can post under the sock puppet, on the sly, to bolster and vouch for your own posts-sort of like slapping yourself on your own back. Or in the case of Cuddles, who was banned for some stoopid reason, she could use the sock puppet instead of her banned Cuddles account.

Most people don't use sock puppets, but there are always a few wannabes who do-and one of the Admins on here has confirmed that there are in fact a few here using sock puppet accounts (posting under multiple accounts from the same ISP address).

0

David Dodd Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:07 p.m.

"The thing about Fumbler is he would leave for months at a time and then appear with his wild comments, then be gone as fast as he was here."

The comments were almost comical, as though he were making them so outrageous that you almost had to laugh them off. I mean, most of the time, the insult made no sense!

0

nan shartel Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:20 p.m.

other beautiful young lasses were whistling at u??!!!

DAMN IT!!!

no Founder...i'm BOLDER...even in Catholic boarding school i was called

BOLD AS BRASS!!!

0

nan shartel Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:24 p.m.

i'm totally unabashed....and talk a lot of trash to.......er..um...u know

0

nan shartel Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:27 p.m.

152

I think the Reader needs to have everyone take the Legion of Decency Pledge to be good and boring. That way no one would ever be banned again.

~~i'm choking~~HELP~~i'm choking~~on the bile and the guile of the woman!!!

or man

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:39 p.m.

Response to post #156: No, but until I was out of grad school, I was known as Bud Bauder. So, of course, in high school some called me Bawdy Budder. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:42 p.m.

Response to #147: Aren't they the puppets that go on your hands, instead of being dangled on a string? If not, I have no idea what they are. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:44 p.m.

Response to post #148: Somebody said Fumber had been banned.I don't know if that is true, but his stuff was in very bad taste. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:46 p.m.

Response to post #149: I used to call him Fumbler, and so did others. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:48 p.m.

Response to post #150: See how dumb I am? I didn't know what a sock puppet was. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:50 p.m.

Response to post #151: Or some kind of shadow boxing -- you know, the pugilists in training sock puppets. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:53 p.m.

Response to post #152: How does one be good and boring at the same time? A famous literary critic once said of Restoration England: "The only sin was to be dull." Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:55 p.m.

Response to post #153: Maybe he got elected to Congress. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 5:59 p.m.

Responser to posts #s 154-156: In her novitiate, Nan was bold as brass. Methinks she never made it to Mother Superior. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 6:03 p.m.

Response to post #166: Look out. Pistol Pete and fumber may be chairman and president, respectively, of a major Wall Street bank. Best, Don Bauder

0

MsGrant Aug. 17, 2010 @ 7:57 p.m.

Re #143: And nan never jumped the gun. Bang, bang, shoot, shoot.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 17, 2010 @ 9:27 p.m.

Response to post 145: Pistolpete was the gunnery expert. Nan is the nunnery expert. Best, Don Bauder

0

David Dodd Aug. 17, 2010 @ 11:13 p.m.

I've found it mostly to be pretty simple. Disagreement is encouraged, but so is civility. You should listen to Keynesian and Hayekian economists disagree, at times their ideologies are entirely opposite, but you would never hear it in the tones of their voices. Well, except perhaps for Krugman, I've listened to him go off, and he's written some pretty caustic articles, too.

0

thestoryteller Aug. 18, 2010 @ 12:33 a.m.

Re: #136 Dog people are the best people, Surfpuppy. Thanks, Don.

I come from a VERY right-wing family. And I've been bucking the establishment my whole life. Pictures of Nixon shaking hands with Grandpa, or Reagan with his arm around him, are among the family photos. That's why I voted for Obama.

I don't mind raising hell, in fact I thrive on it. Pissing off the other posters is my pass time. I'm like a cat playing with a ball of yarn.

BTW, I haven't celebrated a holiday with my family since 1992, when they wouldn't let me bring a black man to Thanksgiving dinner. I also used to bring McDonald's to my sister's gourmet restaurant (where we celebrated many holidays) because I didn't like the food.

A bf once said, "You know what I like about you, you don't take crap off of anybody. You don't care who they are. You'd tell the president of the United States where to go, if he rubbed you the wrong way."

Needless to say, I'm known as the rebel of the family.

0

nan shartel Aug. 18, 2010 @ 3:25 a.m.

Dog people are the best people, Surfpuppy. Thanks, Don.

truer words were never spoken...yay surfpuppy!!!

0

Jay Allen Sanford Aug. 18, 2010 @ 3:45 a.m.

Not to keep straying off Mr. Bauder's blog topic, but to address all this chatter about supposedly banned commentators and allegedly deleted comments - many if not most of the references toward such instances may instead be due to the bloggers themselves deleting or changing their posts to "draft." This explains many vanishing or altered entries - if the blogger then reposts their content, that wipes all the previous comments from the original entry.

I just work here, I don't run the place, but it's my understanding that only a couple of individuals have ever had the Reader welcome mat completely pulled out from under them - and those were the result of flagrant and repeated site abuse.

0

David Dodd Aug. 18, 2010 @ 4:02 a.m.

I didn't know that you could change a "comment" to draft... Heck, I only just recently noticed that I could edit them if I did so fast enough.

0

nan shartel Aug. 18, 2010 @ 4:52 a.m.

i didn't know u would loose ur comments if u put a blog to bed (draft)...i put one of my blogs to draft because i was tired of the bullying

and edit comments...wow that is a revelation.....ur own or others Refried??

and i thought only the web admin could delete a comment...and would do so even if the blog writer didn't feel they were offensive

0

David Dodd Aug. 18, 2010 @ 4:59 a.m.

You can only edit your own comment, just after you make it. After a few minutes, that option goes away. You'll see the option right in front of the "Report it" tab on the right hand of the date/time stamp right after you post the comment and then view it.

0

nan shartel Aug. 18, 2010 @ 5:58 a.m.

wow...that means i can correct my own speeling for yet another time...thx Refried

0

Founder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 6:34 a.m.

Reply # 176-180 If you "save" the preview page that you use to post your comment you can edit yet again even after the edit option disappears, but I have not tried to see how long this will continue to work...

I edit edit Seeking to make my thoughts clear Different word thoughts

0

Founder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 6:47 a.m.

Reply #176 Thank you for your insight, perhaps you might suggest that Reader do a story or post a blog that describes how to use this blog site, with things like editing, saving as draft, adding web links and or video. This would make it easier for all users to "USE" and that would increase the number of folks that enjoy using the Online Reader... + It's nice to think that the Reader staff actually follows some of the blogs and "listens" to some of the suggestions posted! I also think it would be great to add a button on the Preview You Comment Page that would also link to a "suggestion" notice for the Web Team as containing something they may be interested in reading...

I for one look forward to more posts from Jayallan.

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 7:43 a.m.

Response to post #171: Krugman writes some caustic columns that are brilliant. Ditto for Hayek supporters. I have no problems with caustic columns or blog entries. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 7:45 a.m.

Response to post #172: Great. Stick to your guns. In fact, fire them once in awhile. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 7:50 a.m.

Response to post #173: There is another meaning of nunnery, although in your case I was using the common definition: the home for Catholic sisters. But I learned this past weekend from a Shakespeare expert that when Hamlet says "Get thee to a nunnery," he was talking about a bordello. Back in those days, a nunnery was a house of ill fame, believe it or not. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 7:53 a.m.

Response to posts #s 174 and 175: We had two dogs and five cats when our children were growing up. Try going to a dog show and looking at the people. It's hilarious. Don't waste your time looking at the dogs. I've never been to a cat show, but I understand it's the same: get your jollies looking at the people, not the cats. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 7:55 a.m.

Response to poste #176: That is very interesting information. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 7:58 a.m.

Response to #s 177-182: It looks like we should give out more information to our blogsters. Best, Don Bauder

0

SurfPuppy619 Aug. 18, 2010 @ 8:53 a.m.

Needless to say, I'm known as the rebel of the family.

By thestoryteller

That's my kind of girl!

Your family does not have a compund in Point Loma on Silvergate does it?

0

Founder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 9:49 a.m.

Reply #172 thestoryteller, Visit North Park sometime, you'd be most welcome!

The Clinical description of folks such as yourself is:

"Full On"

:-)

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 10:27 a.m.

Response to post #190: Pt. Loma is the place for storytellers. Look at the street names. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 10:29 a.m.

Response to post #191: I'm getting an education here. Best, Don Bauder

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 10:31 a.m.

Response to post #192: North Park would welcome her. So would many other places. Best, Don Bauder

0

Founder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 11:40 a.m.

Reply 195 I as always, stand corrected :-)

and you and your Readers might like to see a similar example of School waste at : http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/20...

0

Don Bauder Aug. 18, 2010 @ 1:33 p.m.

Response to post #196: I'm not sure I get your drift. Best, Don Bauder

0

Sign in to comment

Join our
newsletter list

Enter to win $25 at Broken Yolk Cafe

Each newsletter subscription
means another chance to win!

Close