@Waldo (#16):

Thanks, I like to be right. Except that I didn't mention Monticello. That would be Ankh.

Now, see, Golden Age Wonder Woman would have found a better use for that tie.

I had to click, just to know how this post had possibly generated 39 replies.

Buncha ephemera-lovin freaks.

My favorite local coffee shop uses this system, too, except more with the artsy-writing than the obscure-referencing.

I hope you get over your body image issues and sport one of these on the "Studs of BoingBoing Calendar". (2009? Fingers crossed!)

I certainly don't know more about d'bees than anyone else who can read, but Michael Pollan talks about it in this NY Times article (on page 2).

#9 "It's largely a myth by the doom-and-gloom, mankind-is-killing-the-planet crowd. The losses are either within normal range, or are associated with beekeeping practices known to be bad. The narrative of "bad mankind" is so attractive to some..."

Don't "bad beekeeping practices" fall under the category of "bad mankind"? I agree that, to some extent, environmentalism builds a mythos, and your link is interesting... But that doesn't mean bad practices shouldn't be addressed.

I'm sure glad BB turned me on to Vandermeer (thanks, Cory!). I picked up City of Saints and Madmen and found the first story ("Dradin, In Love") to have some great bits but to be slow and so nearly despaired (because I could just tell it's something I should like, despite my short attention span). But now I'm on the second long piece ("The Hoegbotton Guide to the Early History of Ambergris") and find myself completely immersed in its bizarre convolutions.

It almost makes me consider reading a Predator novel, just to see what Vandermeer's writing is like when it's not "layered." Almost.

The First Time I Got Paid for It is a fun look at various views on writing for movies and television.

This guy is funny. (Why can I not escape The Pina Colada song, wherever I go?) "Last night I snorted meth off a dead tranny's ass behind Circus of Books and and then rammed my car into an In & Out. Write an article about me."

That was some mighty spirited stumping on freedom of speech, but it's beside the point.

The people who comment here are your readership. Comments are a way your readership can communicate with you. It's ridiculous to resent communication from the people that consume your product and support your advertisers, even when that communication consists of critique. Even when it consists of immaturity.

Yes, yes, the editors have every right to control content. They have a right to ignore their readership. I will not be writing to my congresswoman to demand a government response.

But the editors have set this place up as one that welcomes a diversity of ideas, that abhors organizational dishonesty, etc. etc., so why are you so surprised that people question acts of censorship by good ol' activist BB? (In a similar vein, why are you surprised when people want to talk about suicide in a topic about a guy who killed himself? Why did you think a post about vegan survival kits wouldn't spark a volley of comments on vegetarianism? Why does the natural flow of online conversation so annoy you?)

Well, Themelonbread, exactly what TNH was talking about--that if you make the comments of one person invisible to yourself, you might miss out on or make unintelligible the conversation of someone you respect.

I've no interest in it myself, being perfectly capable of scrolling past posts I'm not interested in. I'd rather know what people are saying, even if I don't like it. But I do like Monkeyboy's improvements in concept.

Oh, gosh, I don't plan to even open the file again for at least another two months. I admire those courageous enough to make their first drafts freely available, but I've gotta admit that they don't tend to make me want to read more from that person.

First drafts are only interesting (to me) when you have a completed and awesome work to compare them to. Btw, Jeff, lots and lots of writers, pretentious and very much otherwise, enjoy talking endlessly about how they "do it" on LibraryThing (in the Writer-Readers forum, for example).

The thing about the disemvowelled comments is that I have to spend 3 times as long reading and deciphering them.

On the other hand, I'm really gonna kick ass on Wheel of Fortune, now.

TNH has referred to her policy for choosing what gets deleted or altered as "not rocket science." In fact, it doesn't seem to be a science at all.

But TNH, I do agree that a killfile is an incredibly un-nuanced way to go about filtering what you read. It takes a sledgehammer to a delicate problem.

This reminds me of The Snowflake Method, which I got to try out for my (wretched but enlightening) NaNoWriMo novel. I just used the first few steps, but the point was to go into the thing with a detailed plan. It lets you examine the begining, middle, and end simultaneously, rather than the novel form being like a tube you can't see the end of.

I love all the process tidbits you give us, Cory.

Cpt. Tim and Jeff -- I'll chime in and say that my comment--the one that said "I love BoingBoing, but I wish you'd stop this deletion and disemvowelling of comments"--was deleted. And then the comments that agreed with mine were deleted. (One that disagreed was left up.) And then my follow up asking why my comment was deleted was, you guessed it, deleted. And then I wasn't allowed to post on that thread any more.

Users are smart enough to skip comments they don't like. This script just gives users another tool (albeit a silly one) to control their own content, just reinforcing the idea: unless violations are egregious, we don't need them moderated. We are smart and scrolling is easy.

My favorite part is "ee-see-over-eye-naught". Like Mother Goose nonsense. But for geek children.

I just want to make sure I have this right--

This is no longer coincidence and crosses over into irony, right?

Every need is anticipated. The Wii Remote Whistle Keychain "Can be used to ask for help in urgent situations and prevent perverts."

Finally.

You could keep your weed in there.

I just like what a cool uncontextualized headline that made: Nature releases genome papers under Creative Commons licenses

Go nature!

It's probably too bulky for some folk, but it's got a clean look that I like quite a bit.

Who is it not too bulky for--Robot Elvis?

"As a civilian commuter, your more immediate concern is trying not to behave like the kind of character the cops are looking for."

Really, Tom? I mean, REALLY? It's no longer good enough to simply not break the law--we are now required to act in some specific way that ostentatiously reassures authority that we could not possibly be breaking the law? I don't buy it and there's no reason that that should have to be anyone's chief concern, whether they're commuting or not.

I have a question, in case anyone has sufficient legal knowledge to answer: The closest things I can think of to this "sting" operation are the stings I've seen on COPS where they put an unlocked bike out on the street and wait for someone to walk off with it. This, from what I can tell, is completely legitimate and legal--but what's the actual legal principle that differs? What keeps someone who takes an unsecured bike from a public place from claiming that it was abandoned property? Anyone know?

This concept of inalienable rights in "the widest public space that mankind has ever known" really is cool--starry-eyed and likely to stay that way, maybe, but still cool. Freedom of expression is definitely a "kick-ass value" and I love to see people reminded how important it is.

Curious, though, that BoingBoing has a policy of deleting comments. I've had mine deleted, without explanation, even though they weren't flamey or offensive. Cory, your response in #2 to Mokey in #1 is so awesomely the right way to handle a disliked comment--by responding intelligently to it. (Also good: ignoring it completely.) (Which, honestly, in this case, is the best I'm hoping for.)

@Woid - That's a fascinating comparison. Thanks for the link. I'm not anti-aspirin or anything, but that ad sure sounds like it's engaging in some kind of weaselly doublespeak, e.g.: "Check these facts with your physician:" (then a list of facts--is it therefore my own fault if they're wrong, if I didn't check with my doctor?) and "Medical science knows that a pain reliever must go through the stomach and into the blood steam to relieve pain." (Who is this medical science of whom you speak? Does s/he have a degree? In medical science? And did they *really* think in the 50s that the only way to deliver medicine was via the stomach?)

I wonder if it'll one day seem as ridiculous to advise someone to take Zicam when a cold is coming on as it does to recommend aspirin at the onset.

Muy interesante. I'd love to hear about all the books that aren't about writing but have everything to do with it. Much better for not looking pretentious while reading in coffee shops...

Joel, your brilliant and hilarious writing has been endorsed by the Association for Gratuitous Employment of Acronymic Kineticism (AGEAK).

Such a great link. It's in line with one of my favorite Dumb Pastimes-- to watch only what's happening *around* the characters in TV shows and commercials.