Comment Policy

This seemed like a good time to post a reminder about my comment policy:

This blog allows both pseudonymous and fully anonymous comments. I may respond to the former from time to time, but I will not engage with the latter.

I will delete comments in the following circumstances:

When they include personal attacks or insults (allowing slightly more latitude when I am the target);

When they are irrelevant, intemperate, whiny, or repetitive;

When they include lengthy rants;

When they devolve into long, tedious exchanges;

When they include questionable links that were not caught by the spam filter.

The deletion of comments is within my sole discretion, which I will attempt to exercise reasonably and sparingly (with no guarantee that individual readers will agree with it). Please don't complain about "unfairness," as no one will reliably know which or how many other comments have been deleted. 

Finally, most comments with hyperlinks are automatically sent to the spam folder. I try to check the folder every few hours following a new post, so that I can release the valid ones. That is not always possible, however, so please have patience.

Comments

[Hedley Lamarr, Car Wreck Counselor at Law, Call 1-800-BIG CASH NOW!]

Life is not fair. Just ask Al Gore, Hillary Clinton and my clients locked up after paying me three bills on their criminal matters. Maybe they should have paid four bills. I too wish I was a millionaire Republican; it just did not work out that way. That fairness thing....

[anon]

Steve

You say that no one will ever be able to call you on your choices, because no one will know "how many other comments were deleted." But, what about comments that aren't deleted?

Certainly, I suppose that some comments that I have posted could be deleted according to your "rules" and, some have been deleted. But I want to ask you to consider these rules in light of the commentator above.

I don't know whether you consider this commentator to be "pseudonymous" - given the number of names and the impression that the same area of the country seems to be home - but, really, can you consider whether another other considerations might apply here?

Irrelevance comes to mind. Repetitiveness. Irrational attacks, seemingly posted just to act as a jester. Any others?

[Hedley Lamarr, Car Wreck Counselor at Law, Call 1-800-BIG CASH NOW!]

anon^^^^You're just jealous that I am so good looking. If I lost a little weight and got some spray on hair, the proprietors of this blog told me that they would offer me a daytime pod cast.

[Anon]

Hedley - we get it. You're super witty. But now you're making me agree with anon here, which I am hate to do (and may be a first).

Can we have the blog back now?

[anon]

BTW, haven't we seen that "joke" about "if I lost a little weight and got some spray on hair" many times?

Repetitive as the "three bills" and all the rest.

Steve, really ... is this guy a friend of yours?

[The Law Offcies of Kavanaugh Thomas, LLC, PC, LTD, Chartered, AV Rated]

Just like baseball, hotdogs. apple pie and Chevrolet... I have brand recognition on this blog. That's an asset. Thanks for reading my stuff...

[anon]

Sy, et al.

What brand is that? What do you think that brand is/represents?

In all seriousness, it seems to this reader that a tremendous insight into the mind of this collection of names might be possible here: please don't delete this question, Steve, especially while you are allowing the "last word" in this thread to be crafted by one whom you must believe to be expressing something worth leaving up: a respected commentator on this blog thanking all of his "readers."

He thinks "readers" are following his "stuff" because they recognize and admire his "brand." He thinks this is a "asset."

Let's collectively ask: Sy, etc.: what is your brand? What does that brand represent? Try to be serious. What are doing and why are you doing it? Why is your "brand" on this blog an "asset" to you?