Wednesday, April 2, 2008

Blog Censorship

Some readers of this blog may not know that I read every comment you make before posting it to the blog.

I do this because there is such a thing as blog-spam, and I regularly have to reject comments from automated spamming programs that want to encourage readers to buy Cialis or some such thing.

This blog system has the option to require commenters to enter those funny looking letters to confirm that you are in fact human, but I always find those controls to be a pain, and would rather filter out the junk myself than introduce an obstacle to our dialog.

I can also reject comments from legitimate commenters. I can think of only two occasions when I have done so since starting this blog in Dec 2006. In both cases it was because I felt the tone - not the substance - of the comment was not in keeping with the spirit of this blog.

If you want to read about the latest comment I rejected (to this post), visit Jim Fedako's blog, Anti-Positivist, and tell me if you feel my rejection of his comments was inappropriate.

After all, this is your blog as well.



  1. If for no other reason, the personal attacks are enough for me to be turned off. I think we have a variety of views and opinions on this blog, yet are mature enough to "play well with others".

    I agree to keep this blog at a sophisticated level.

    Another point: Does he not read this blog? To claim that Paul Lambert doesn't get the fact that salaries drive education cost is absurd. Honestly, if Paul says it one more time I may have to puke (lol). Point being: I believe Paul has made it very clear that he believes the driver of education costs is salary. The "apathy" comment was out of context, as Paul was referring more to why levies fail. A little word-twisting occurred there I think.

    I appreciate this forum and those that share their thoughts and opinions. And while we don't all agree, the contributors to this blog certainly demonstrate a level of class that I think represents Hilliard well.

  2. Ditto what kj says. Referring to the author of a comment as a moron is self-defeating and, to me anyway, offensive. I frequent several different car forums and while the moderators there also are forced to "censor" some of the comments, I avoid the ones that have a large number of those kinds of posts. I think Paul has handled it in a very positive manner, and appreciate his insight on this blog.

  3. Paul -

    I too appreciate your professionalism and insight. I am an Olentangy resident, I found your blog while debating my vote for the Olentangy levy. The campaign run here was very much focused on educating voters. As a property owner, I am ashamed to say that I never really knew what the difference was between a bond or a levy, and the reasons we are on the ballot every few years. I learned a lot from your website and blog, and was grateful to have a place to go to to verify what I was learning from OFK. I truly believe that the educational focus was the reason our levy passed. As an Olentangy resident, I am actually embarrased about the rants of the other blogger. I just wanted you to know that there are people even outside of Hilliard that are pulling for you. Good luck to you and to your community.

  4. Thanks for the positive feedback!

  5. In case you're wondering about what Mr. Fedako has had to say lately....

    In the "Administrative Costs, Part II" post:


    These numbers are interesting, but they are simply "chasings after the wind."

    The classifications are meaningless, however the costs are real.

    Go to ODE, find your district's pupil/staff ratio. It's decreasing, as is the case in almost every district in Ohio (actually, I know of none where it is not decreasing).

    If Olentangy had simply returned to staffing patterns that existed as late as 2001, the district would NOT have needed a levy for three more years.

    Think about that!

    There are only two main factors driving public school costs: salaries/benefits and pupil/staff ratios (oh, sure, there are rising fuel costs, etc., but those costs are nothing compared to the two main costs).

    Simply force Hilliard to return to its staffing patterns at the turn of the century -- the 21st Century (do not call that cuts, call is right-sizing), and you can save your Hilliard schools.

    Oh, but that means no more johnny-come-lately frills such as publicly-funded bowling teams, etc. Yes, we have publicly-funded bowling teams in Olentangy now.

    Why are taxpayers paying for such activities? The Public Choice school of economics has that answer.

    Again, the cost centers are known, so why eat around the edges? Just bite into the middle where all the fluff is.

    My response:

    Mr. Fedako:

    Please spend the time to read more of what has been written in this blog (and the website) over the past year. You'll find that some of the first posts dealt with the fact that staffing is the primary cost driver.

    You'll also note that I admit that I know almost nothing about the field of education. Nor do I understand the requirements which have been put on our school employees as a result of all the fallout from standarized testing and ever-increasing government requirements. I'm learning more all the time, but it's not my expertise.

    But I do know a great deal about business and finance. I don't know the story of your district, but I know without question that our district has been blown up by unfettered residential development which has been aided and abetted by mayors and city councils which one would think have the economic viability of the school district as one of their top concerns.

    I understand human motivations, and therefore have my own beliefs why this occurred. But I have no proof and will therefore make no accusations.

    My mission has been to wake the people of our community out of their fog of ignorance and apathy which created the cover in which this situation developed.

    If you want a better understanding of what I'm saying, read Getting Around Brown by Gregory Jacobs.

    And give the shrillness a rest.


    and his...


    What exactly is your issue?

    I take your comments above to be right out of a Monty Python skit: "Know whatahmean, know whatahmean, nudge nudge, know whatahmean, say no more?"

    You've been around long enough to know this truism: Obfuscating creates issues where none may exist. Your "nudge, nudge" may not be what is implied. But, a lot can be read into your comments above, name of blog, and referenced book.

    I hope I'm wrong, but you leave too much unanswered?

    Mr. Fedako: If you have further comments to make, please submit them to this post for my review. Meanwhile you are of course welcome to say what you will on your own blog.