I disagree that they delete opposing viewpoints.

It’s happened to me. I’ve seen happen to others, and I’ve seen others say it’s happened to them. And I recall an article in which Susan was encouraging people to come back to NQ, and admitted that the moderators had gone overboard in the past in deleting posts and banning people.

This happens, I think, because there is a very large NQ constituency that will not brook any disagreement with their views, and which labels all disagreement as trollery.

This is not just limited to the many, many commenters who routinely say “troll” to anyone who disagrees with them. NQ writers do it, too. NewHampster once put up an article from The Economist that referred to Hillary’s feminist credentials. The first comment responded on topic by criticizing Hillary’s feminism, which prompted a long and spirited thread. NewHampster reacted very badly to that, posting a long and bitter article the next day about how a “troll” had hijacked his thread, how all the comments were the “wrong” comments as a result, and how NQ readers should ignore “trolls” like the one who disagreed with him. He even claimed that Obama paid that reader to come here and disagree with him.

NewHampster’s demand was this: don’t disagree with me or talk to anyone who does. That attitude is so commonplace at NQ that no one should be surprised that dissenting views are deleted by an undefined group of moderators who act anonymously and surreptiously.

More accountability and transparency would help. Require moderators to identify themselves when they edit comments, and to acknowledge and explain their deletions.

(NQ focuses on the birth certificate?)

And I disagree that they delete opposing viewpoints.

You have done so much with just raw talent and passion, and the rapid evolution of this site and your audience is astounding.

I voted for you, and will ask my friends out here to do so, too.

Paul Kaihla
Soul’s Code
San Francisco

By the way, for those of you who haven’t heard…the site “Wonkette” is on a vendetta against puma sites. They have urged their readers to vote against Uppity Woman (for Best New Blog) and vote instead for a site they never read themselves, but thought the name was “cool”. (I can’t remember the name)

Wankette is up against the Confluence, and their website is busy trashing anyone who is not an obama worshipper. Their arrogance is really breathtaking, they apparently think they have the power & right to control the voting process.

So don’t forget when you vote, to support Uppity Woman for Best New Blog & the Confluence for Best Liberal Blog!