Comments


  • I don't think the problem is ANONYMOUS comments. I think it's ABUSE of the feature.

    November 20, 2009 at 10:02 a.m.

  • This comment was removed by the user.

    November 18, 2009 at 12:50 p.m.

  • You know ex, I have yet to see you disprove or prove anything with a single fact, besides your own opinion, and you know what they say about that....they are like a certian body part, everybody has them, but nobody really cares to hear them. So, try again, Good day. =)

    November 18, 2009 at 12:21 p.m.

  • No, there's no chest thumping here ex....just the truth put out there in front of you to denie.

    Hi Michael, It's Justin, but everybody calls me JR for short.

    November 18, 2009 at 12:12 p.m.

  • jr74 mines michael glad to meet you.

    November 18, 2009 at 11:55 a.m.

  • Yeah I know what it is...do you? You want other people to look it up for you...I hear that ignorance is bliss... I'm all for the using your real name. The only thing that would change for me is dropping the 74. How 'bout you ex?

    November 18, 2009 at 11:52 a.m.

  • my point on the original thread of this blog was that by only allowing posts signed by the person who posted it, would discourage people from sharing their views and opinions on important issues that face our city because they may fear reprisals from others or from the powers that be. As long as a post is not signed it allows us to freely debate these issues in an open forum. It is up to each and everyone of us to be civil and use this forum in a manner respectful of others rights and opinions. enough said on this issue.

    November 18, 2009 at 11:46 a.m.

  • Sorry "village idiots" was posted by gyroscope not you but it might as well have been posted by you.

    November 18, 2009 at 11:26 a.m.

  • exresident I can see that if anyone disagrees with your opinion no matter what is said or put up for discussion will be dismissed by you as silly, stupid or just plain wrong. I guess you are just so much smarter and know so much more than the rest of us " village Idiots" quoted from one of your posts. that having a meaningful trading of opinions with us is a big waste of your time. so why do you even bother wasting your time with us " silly village idiots"

    November 18, 2009 at 11:24 a.m.

  • victorianbybirth there are many references to owning and bearing arms in the bible ...Take up your sword and smite your enemy... is one that comes to mind.

    November 18, 2009 at 11:07 a.m.

  • Well Ex, since your so full of information....why don't you explain it for all of us? Just saying....

    November 18, 2009 at 10:57 a.m.

  • victorian by birth I am correcting myself here I am not implying in any way that you are one of the vocal few. I am stating my opinion on whats wrong with this country morally today. Sure its a right given to us by the constitution but these rights were believed to be god given by our founding fathers. I'm truely sorry if I affended you in any way.

    November 18, 2009 at 9:56 a.m.

  • victorianbybirth The declaration of independance states.... they are endowed by their creator (GOD) with certain unalienable rights...life, liberty, pursuit of happiness... This was RE-AFFIRMED in the constitution in the preamble (secure the BLESSINGS of liberty) given to us by the declaration on independance. Last time i checked our country was founded by "GOD FEARING" christians. I am tired of a vocal few taking away our "GOD FEARING" heritage from us and turning this country into a godless, politically correct, wasteland.

    exresident Ever hear of EULA statements you have to agree to them every time you buy and/or download programs to your computer. If the advocate did not fear lawsuits then why do they have user policies posted on this web site? How many people and/companies have lost the rights to use their own names online because somebody copyrighted it first. seems that there are a multitude of cases filed and judged every year on this issue. silly? in your opinion maybe. you better read this sites user policies since it seams you violated it. watch out I might sue you. LOL

    November 18, 2009 at 9:38 a.m.

  • I for one would not have a problem with it. I'll say exactly the same things I've been saying. Some people on this website have issues with putting their real names because with an annoymous name they feel they can spout whatever the feel like. I would almost be willing to bet that if you did have to use your real name there would be a real fast thining of the herd in here. I can think of 4 peopld right off the top of my head that would dissapear instantly. I think the VICAD should go to using real names.

    November 18, 2009 at 9:33 a.m.

  • holly, I wasn't aware God granted us the right to bear arms...I thought that was our Constitutional right? Is there a bible passage where God bestows this right on us? Thanks in advance.

    November 17, 2009 at 10:10 p.m.

  • sure this blog is owned by the advocate but by putting it online on the web ( a free and open forum) it loses some of its rights of ownership. The only way it can regain that ownership is to either pull it off the web or to restrict posters use by making them register on this site with a full profile that uses your name on the post. The only thing they would have to do is post a page stating that fact, when you register to use this site. Without doing that they would be open to law suits. I praise the press for protecting their sources, at least some of them still have ethics and a sense of what the first amendment stands for. (The ultimate anon. post.) by protecting their source they are fighting for the rights of the common man. Any judge that would sign a warrant to obtain that info should be disbarred for not upholding the right to free speech and several other of the first 10 amendments in the bill of rights. Its a shame the schools don't teach these rights any more. No wonder people don't protest losing their rights. They don't even know they have these rights to lose anymore. Just the way the liberal democrates like it!!!!!.

    November 17, 2009 at 9:52 p.m.

  • Interesting discussion. Now as a journalist under which ever amendment or law --they fight to not reveal their sources...why if annonimity is not important?

    Victoria is a very small town with a lot of judgmental people. In 40 years we may have expanded our city limits, but the minds have not changed as rapidly. Allowing our monikers is a method of free speech.

    Just week or last week the story broke of the justice department wanting user names, addresses, ip addresses, credit card numbers, social security numbers and other items for June 25, 2008. Come to find out the warrent was not prepared according to Justice Department procedures and agreements with journalists. The warrent was withdrawn.

    Sometimes certain people having that information can create havoc for others. I think Victoria is still small enough with deep emotions of religions and others wanting change. Providing a little annonimity to readers allows a forum for discussion and exchanging of ideas. Please allow it to stay.

    November 17, 2009 at 4:21 p.m.

  • ..."Where in the constitution does it say anyone has the RIGHT to anonymous speech?

    Where does it say that they don't?

    November 17, 2009 at 7:47 a.m.

  • As long as I'm on a roll wouldn't it be great if our children could go to schools and colleges and get an education instead of being fed daily doses of left-wing propaganda and Ideas that may or may not conform to our beliefs and standards. We as parents should demand teachers, educate our children , not push their political beliefs on our children.

    November 17, 2009 at 6:50 a.m.

  • another case in point suggested by John hatcher and printed by gabesemenza is that anon. posts should be banned. As long as a post is not hateful or totally out of line it should be allowed in any forum. The banning of these posts would be another way of stripping us of our right to free speech protected under the first amendment. If we stand for this what other right will those in power take away. The news reporters and broadcasters have forgotten what it is to be the caretakers of the news. They for the most part have become spokesmen and women for one side or the other and this makes there articles opinions not news. what ever happened to reporting news not agendas? wouldn't it be great if one could read a paper or watch a news broadcast without being bombarded with opinions and propaganda!!!!

    November 17, 2009 at 6:37 a.m.

  • gyroscope using you reasoning,am i to assume that the founding fathers signed everything they wrote, of course not. If they had they would have been jailed at the least and most likely killed for treason to the crown. They were wise enough to make it the first amendment for a reason. they knew that without freedom of speech there is no freedom at all. Now our biggest fight is to keep the rights, granted in that ever so noble document, protected from the well meaning politicians who " for our own good" are taking those rights away from us at every turn. A case in point would be our 2nd amendment right to own and carry arms. where in that passage does it give the government the right to outlaw our god given right to carry a gun anywhere we please. Having to apply for a permit to carry one is unconstitutional and a major breech of our rights as freemen and women. If we don't stand up for the few rights we have left we will have none left. The founding fathers called it the bill of rights for a reason, because they knew if they did not set these rights to pen and paper, the government would deny us these rights. Which they are now doing anyway. Where is the highest court in the land, whose job it is to protect these rights, not to legislate from the bench.

    November 17, 2009 at 6:04 a.m.

  • Now that is funny Gyro, considering that both you and I are commenting anonymously.

    November 16, 2009 at 6:47 p.m.

  • freedom of speech is a right protected by the constitution of this great nation. It should be protected at all costs. The little guy needs a place to express his or her opinion without fear of reprisals or unwanted attention. The day we lose this right will be a dark day indeed. We have lost to many of our god given rights already to the enlightened few we call government officials. If I remember correctly they all swear to protect and defend that great document so wisely written and adopted by our founding fathers. Its about time these office holders stop trashing this great document and uphold their oath of office instead of stripping us of our rights at every turn. When will the people wake up and defend our rights with their votes. Soon I hope before it's to late.

    November 16, 2009 at 3:45 p.m.

  • Succinctly and very well put, TrueOne. Thanks.

    November 15, 2009 at 1:50 p.m.

  • To hear truth and wisdom is more important than to know who speaks that truth or from whom that wisdom resonates from. The readers' perception of the messenger will influence the acceptance or rejection of the message.

    November 13, 2009 at 11:41 p.m.

  • I still agree with Mr.Gomez about our AD. whether he wrote it as a 'letter to the editor' or as a 'blog entry'. There is alot of ill feelings towards several high position people in VISD and why nothing is investigate or even written about it is amazing. Just enforce your ethics bylaws and everything will be OK.

    I even seen a comment by 'Ash Wade' using the word BITCHING. His comment was not removed! WHY.? I guess it depends who the writer is or if you use the word as a verb or a noun in the sentence.

    November 13, 2009 at 8:06 p.m.

  • Maybe anonymity could be the perk of a "premium" service at the VA site. Or, with your subscription to the Victoria Advocate you get your code so you can sign up for an online account. ;) "Limited availability" and "secret codes" are in high demand these days. Look at webkinz. Wait, those are already a thing of the past...

    November 13, 2009 at 7:57 p.m.

  • Zorro you have a good point. One thing I noticed since I have been back in Victoria is that if someone makes anykind of remark about the drill team or its director, they get removed immediately if not sooner. then usually my neighbor, who has NO computer access at all, gets egged etc. Its almost like she is getting the blame for what others are saying. She says she knows who it is behind it but the person isnt worth validating.

    November 13, 2009 at 7:48 p.m.

  • Ugly anonymous comments remind me of high tech prank calls. I guess some type of internet "caller ID" would help some with that. No one complained about free speech when caller ID became available. I realize it's different. =P On the other hand, I don't abuse this privilege, so being punished because other people can't be nice doesn't feel good. On the other tentacle, you might be able to have more of a community if people engaged in discussions without dressing up as someone or something else. Just thinking.

    November 13, 2009 at 7:40 p.m.

  • Check out the Delphi Forums as a successful series of forums where almost everyone uses a pseudonym.

    November 13, 2009 at 7:38 p.m.

  • You have to learn to judge the comment and not try and put a face to it. Most poeple wouldn't post here if you had to give your real name.

    November 13, 2009 at 5:24 p.m.

  • Despite all the monitoring the Advocate staff does in here there are still veiled threats posted from time to time. If the nutbags and authorities have your name and address they would come after you. Everyone saw the response from the chief of police and how he got bent out shape because someone complained about the heavy hand of the law. That article seemed to have merely raised the issue of what responsibility police have for enforcing grossly unjust, but arguably binding laws. Many of us merely thought that the chief explaining that he was simply acting in what he believed to be in the best interest of the community did not absolve him from criticism and responsibility.

    November 13, 2009 at 5:15 p.m.

  • and once I saw a post by one blogger that he saw another driving down his street.........Its not like this town is too big for us to recognize each other?

    November 13, 2009 at 5 p.m.

  • Now Lets SEE. If I have to identify myself, I will still say the same things. I will still tell the truth as I see it about any particular suituationor person. And I guess the end result will be that I will get egged, get my mailbox smashed, and my car all chalked up in revenge.

    November 13, 2009 at 4:53 p.m.

  • Some of us are sincerely fear retribution if we were to be identified. You saw the reaction to your Wildwood Street story when you mentioned names.

    November 13, 2009 at 4:17 p.m.

  • Anonymous writings have their place. For example, the Federalist Papers. Even Thomas Paine's Common Sense was anonymous when it was first published. I don't think comments on a website carry as much weight as a published article or book so they should be taken with a huge grain of salt.

    November 13, 2009 at 3:28 p.m.

  • small papers have issues because the staff is associated with programs/people being blogged. Larger papers delete only the worse entries. Just remember that information is currency. Also that VICAD offers a voicebox to those with no to minimal. Let them communicate, imo.

    There is a lot of bloggers from out of your delivery boundaries. That is very good. Dont let a few dictate for all and hurt your online community. I will stop for sure. imo.

    November 13, 2009 at 2:37 p.m.

  • As a long-time writer of letters to the editor, which do identify me by name, as well as a poster of comments on your web site, I see several aspects of this issue. Since my website comments are rarely deleted by your Politically Correct Police, I guess I do not tend to "mean-spirited, divisive and cowardly rants". However, I would agree with you that some of the posts I have seen would probably not have been made were it not for the cloak of anonymity.

    That said, my inclination is to err on the side of the First Amendment freedom of speech. I have come to recognize the screen names of posters who are both ill-informed and dishonest, stating their opinions as facts. It would come as no surprise to me to learn that many of your readers do as do I when encountering something from someone like this -- either just skip to the next post or read it with a very large grain of salt.

    It seems to be an inescapable fact that freedom of speech inevitably includes allowing the clueless and those with a hidden agenda a soap box from which to spew their inanities. That is a price that, on reflection, I am willing to pay.

    November 13, 2009 at 2:34 p.m.