"Internet comments have long been a conundrum. Like communism, they’re great on paper but not so much in practice. Done right, publishing comments can drive discussion and increase reader engagement. But more often than not, publishers have seen their comment sections devolve into a free-for-all in which decorum and even social norms are tossed aside in the name of some grievance, real or perceived. That’s why a small but growing number of publishers are turning their backs on the entire notion of Internet comments." —Quick question: How do you feel about Internet comments? Do you still leave them? Do you even read [...]
From time to time, even our spectacularly intelligent, thoughtful and hilarious commenting community runs into a spot of trouble. That's okay! It happens—pretty much every four months or so, something here provokes heated feelings and words. (And often that's a good thing, in the end. Sometimes, less so, sure.) But in general, things are so relatively well-oiled here (sorry, that sounds gross?) that when there's some conflict, it's surprising and even upsetting! Upsetting to the feeeeeeelings.
Today's Post reports that "An officer conducting an inspection at a Bronx narcotics unit last week found a soft-core porn movie playing on one of the TVs in the facility, police sources said. The skin flick was playing on a satellite-TV premium channel. That violates an NYPD policy banning such channels at work." Okay, so! The newspaper has done its job, by playing straight man. (Although this is a terrible headline.) Still, they have set up, by my back-of-the-envelope calculations, at least 450³ possible jokes. Heaven! And yet, the lone commenter on this story at the Post is doing it wrong. Let's explain!