Anyone else with a comment, part 7

Let’s try this again.  Maybe waiting a couple of months has led to my biggest detractors giving up.  All I can say is that if people want to post comments, I welcome them.    As I have said before the majority of comments on this blog historically have been opposed to my point of view – sometimes vehemently.  I have no problems with that.   But let’s follow the simple rules: No profanity, no direct character assaults and an effort to add something to the conversation rather than just “you are an idiot”.  That may be cathartic but there are other venues for that.

This blog has been around now going on eight years.  Thousands of posts, – on average about one a day going back eight years.

Let’s keep chatting.

Although I have to say that Kurt Peacock’s micro-blogging on Twitter is increasingly making this site irrelevant.  Wait until he gets free access to CANSIM next year.   He may lock himself in a closet and never be seen again.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Anyone else with a comment, part 7

  1. Ah! Comments are working again. :) (I’ve tried a bunch of times to comment but without success)

  2. Don Dennison says:

    I am pleased that commenting is back, and that names are required. I hope they are real ones. I heard Neil Reynolds give the Dalton Camp lecture two weeks ago, and he focussed on the downside of anonymous source reporting.

  3. anonymoose says:

    Yay! Comments!

    Hope it works out.

  4. Kurt Peacock says:

    A well-reasoned blog is much, much more valuable than 140 characters. And this comes from a mad tweeter…

    Creative destruction (as has been mentioned in recent posts) is a wonderfully important economic concept, but so is intellectual curiosity. It makes any idea relevant, whether that idea is transmitted in short tweets or the more reasoned analysis of your posts. And there is no doubt that Atlantic Canada would benefit from more intellectual curiosity.

  5. richard says:

    “I heard Neil Reynolds give the Dalton Camp lecture two weeks ago, and he focussed on the downside of anonymous source reporting.”

    And he was wrong about that, too.

  6. richard says:

    “This takes us back to the billion-dollar boondoggle in New Brunswick, where 14 weeks of work buys a year’s worth of government paycheques – year after year. You don’t need to cut adrift the province’s seasonal workers but you could try for promises that can be kept. What if seasonal workers had to work 20 weeks a year? Or 24? However the EI promises get juggled, the current formula is an affront to decency.”

    Himself, Neil Reynolds (an affront to decency in journalism), in the Mop & Pail, predictably using your posts on EI to pretend that rejigging EI will make a significant difference to economic growth in NB. Congrats.

Comments are closed.