Percy's Peace Plan for Blog Commenter Wars (Inspired By Michael Richards)
I've come up with a way to prevent the nasty fights that break out in the comments sections of blogs, particularly those focused on political issues. I call my approach "jujitsuing the problem." As explained below, I came up with the name in honor of Michael Richards' efforts to defuse a racially-charged situation during his recent stand-up routine. Here's how it works:
Suppose you're talking about current tax policy and a commenter says that she thinks Bush's tax policies hurt the poor. Suppose further you disagree with that statement. The typical approach would be for you to express your disagreement, which would result in a back-and-forth about who is right. The back-and-forth would inevitably turn into a skirmish and then escalate into a full-blown name-calling war.
Rather than disagreeing with the commenter, you should agree with her with excessive vigor or, as I like to say, agree x 1000. For example:
Let's try it a different way:
How does this relate to Michael Richards? Well, Richards was performing before a predominantly white audience when he was confronted by predominantly non-white hecklers. Sensing the discomfort of the non-heckling part of the audience, he tried to jujitsu the problem by throwing some N-grenades at the hecklers. This resulted in the entire audience bonding together against him and ended the possibility of a fight between hecklers and non-hecklers.
I'll be keeping my eye on the level of discourse at Ed Cone's blog and awarding commenters who are particularly good at "jujitsuing the problem."
Peace.
Suppose you're talking about current tax policy and a commenter says that she thinks Bush's tax policies hurt the poor. Suppose further you disagree with that statement. The typical approach would be for you to express your disagreement, which would result in a back-and-forth about who is right. The back-and-forth would inevitably turn into a skirmish and then escalate into a full-blown name-calling war.
Rather than disagreeing with the commenter, you should agree with her with excessive vigor or, as I like to say, agree x 1000. For example:
Commenter #1: "Bush's tax policies hurt the poor."See, you've put Commenter #1 in a position to defend Bush. Before long she'll be in agreement that Bush's tax policies don't hurt the poor.
You: "Bush is a Nazi."
Commenter #1: "I didn't say that?"
You: "A fascist?"
Commenter #1: "No."
Let's try it a different way:
Commenter #1: "Kerry's policies would hurt our military."You can see where this is going.
You: "Kerry was a coward who didn't deserve any of his Viet Nam medals."
Commenter #1: "Well, I respect his military service to our country."
You: "So you respect him?"
How does this relate to Michael Richards? Well, Richards was performing before a predominantly white audience when he was confronted by predominantly non-white hecklers. Sensing the discomfort of the non-heckling part of the audience, he tried to jujitsu the problem by throwing some N-grenades at the hecklers. This resulted in the entire audience bonding together against him and ended the possibility of a fight between hecklers and non-hecklers.
I'll be keeping my eye on the level of discourse at Ed Cone's blog and awarding commenters who are particularly good at "jujitsuing the problem."
Peace.
Ooooh. Ooooh. I got one!
JR -- Happy thanksgiving everybody.
Commenter -- Your an idiot and Lex is a liberal.
I think you'll need more practice, JW. Your example is the opposite of what I'm suggesting. Here is the jujitsu method:
Next thing you know JR will be comparing Lex to Pol Pot, like I did in this jujitsu example.