Liberal Avenger Site Rewrites Comment to Make It Look Like the Commenter Had Sex with His Sister
Longtime Patterico reader carlitos waded into the comments at the Malkin-hating Liberal Avenger web site recently. Commenting as “carlito,” he took on the liberals there for their unbelievably ridiculous use of an Allahpundit parody as evidence of his hate speech for Catholics. The discussion moved into abortion, and soon carlito found that one of his comments had been altered by one of the blog’s hosts, to add this disgusting passage (content warning):
Still, there are some valid and acceptable reasons to have abortions – reasons I think we can all agree with. For example, when my sister and I were in Junior high school we used to experiment sexually – you know, the usual stuff that horny, young brothers and sisters do: rimming, finger-fucking, dry humping, etc. We practically spent the entire summer between 7th and 8th grade in bed – it was great. Of course, by the end of the summer my sister was pregnant. Given our age and maturity levels, we knew she had to get an abortion. Fortunately at that time our state still recognized women’s health as an important social service and access to safe, inexpensive abortions was easy. To this day I wonder what our lives would have been like had my sister carried our baby to term.
I guess what I am saying is that, yes, I understand that there are RARE circumstances above and beyond the usual pregnancy-as-the-result-of-rape and endangers-the-life-of-the-mother that require abortions and should remain available.
I’m glad that I came here to discuss this with you folks. This conversation has forced me to really think this through and I feel far more comfortable with myself and with the subject in general. Thanks!
Nice, huh?
I have corresponded with carlito and he says that he did not write a word of this.
Understand clearly: this is not a comment left by another commenter spoofing carlito. carlito’s comment was edited by someone with posting privileges at Liberal Avenger.
Someone has partially come to their senses over there, and removed the comment. But I saved a screenshot for posterity:
Now, there’s a large group of people who post at that site, so we can’t assume that Liberal Avenger himself did this. But if one of my guest posters did something like this, I wouldn’t just remove the comment and stay quiet. I’d find out who did it, and I would can that guest poster — and if nobody ‘fessed up, I’d can them all, until someone admitted it.
And I’d apologize.
But that’s just me. Obviously. Since none of these actions appear to have occurred over there.
UPDATE: I have more here, including Liberal Avenger’s defense (I made it up!), full screencaps, and the reason that this was so hurtful to carlitos.
Tell Liberal Avenger what you think of this here — until he closes comments again, that is.
Simply. F’n. Incredible.
Old Coot (581b7e) — 2/13/2007 @ 6:57 amAn action like this certainly should give one pause about engaging those with whom one disagrees. If you wanted to stifle dissent on a blog, I can’t think of a better way to do it without banning posters. What better way to refute than to do it with someone’s own words (whether they wrote them or not). Of course if all you want is a group think revival and damn the dissenters and intellectual argument, then it makes perfect sense.
Bill (1a1297) — 2/13/2007 @ 7:09 amAn action like this certainly should give one pause about engaging those with whom one disagrees.
That’s the idea.
Patterico (a8fa4a) — 2/13/2007 @ 7:19 amHoly crap…
Leviticus (b987b0) — 2/13/2007 @ 7:32 amSadly, no surprise.
Jim Treacher (15574e) — 2/13/2007 @ 7:56 amHonestly, is anyone that surprised?
This is just a physical manifestation of how liberals handle a difference of opinion.
They do everything to turn you into the bad guy, the animal, the monster. Allahpundit’s being targeted as a racist/whatever is the exact same thing. I should note that I have no idea what the MSM is saying about him. They start talking, and all I can hear is the “Charlie Brown Adult” sound of trombones…
Liberals, being without actual facts and truth, use persoanl attacks, and when they have to they invent words for you to have said. It’s how they have operated since Billy-Boy was in office.
It’s sad, disgusting, lacking in any humor or decency, and it’s EXACTLY what I expect of them…
Scott (90eabe) — 2/13/2007 @ 7:57 amWow. I’ve never see anyone do something like this before.
Dwilkers (4f4ebf) — 2/13/2007 @ 7:57 amBy the way, isn’t Marcotte now saying that all that stuff wasn’t satire? I can’t keep the story straight.
[It could technically have been satire without being meant ironically. But she wanted people to believe it was irony/parody. Though I have to admit, when she posted about the death of Rehnquist heralding the end of “choice,” that would have been a brilliant parody of feminists who fly off the handle every time a Justice retires or dies. But it wasn’t a parody, which is the really weird part. — P]
Jim Treacher (15574e) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:04 amI don’t see nothing wrong with the comment, I had the same problem with me and my mom…..
Duke (4ba8d4) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:09 amLA is now hinting that Patterico edited those comments. What a prick. Here is a link to a screencap that I took when I saw what they did to my comment. It’s a clearer image than Patterico’s, but doesn’t have the whole intro part.
carlitos (b38ae1) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:19 amI feel your pain and outrage, Patty.
Add those hosts who delete comments which are embarassing, or appear to slice up the notion
semanticleo (ec1279) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:20 amthat the host has some writing ability. Goldstein?
LA says “I’m closing this thread to commenting. Patterico – shame on you!”
Yes… For shame… How dare you… Ummm… Point out facts…
Bad bad man!
Scott (90eabe) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:22 am(apologies if this posts twice)
LA is now claiming that Patterico edited the comments himself (or photoshopped the screencap). What a prick. Here is a screencap that I took myself when I saw what LA did to my comment. It’s clearer than Patterico’s.
carlitos (b38ae1) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:23 am#
Sorry, was over at LA’s blog…
1. Patterico is notorious for editing comments (He is? You must mean deleting trash, or adding his own comments.)
2. Patterico manipulated an image of a screenshot of this thread (This isn’t some government trial, saying a screen capture is manipulating an image is crap, Patterico, using pdf always works for me)
3. Patterico has a motive for doing this and stirring up trouble (just as LA has a motive for covering up and running and hiding.)
Don’t believe everything you read, kids. (good to know)
I’m closing this thread to commenting. Patterico – shame on you! (Free speech, unless you have a point! then shut up!
G (722480) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:24 am#10
Has it right. LA says Patterico is making this up.
You know, its amazing. I’ve been reading Patterico for, I dunno, I want to say over three years and I haven’t seen him doing what LA just accused him of doing yet.
Dwilkers (4f4ebf) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:40 amI’ve been reading Patterico for over a year now I think. I’ve seen him edit posts (via removing it, and stating why he did so, and with his addition of comments) I see that as the editting he’s being accused of (which is nothing to hide from).
Now as far as the image being doctored, its possible. Note that LA doesn’t say “doctored” only manipulated. (which would be an accurate but misleading discription). Technically it is manipulated.
Sorry, I don’t buy it. LA, you are the webmaster are you not? You should be able to locate any deleted post, or know who has access to edit another’s post. You run and hide from this, you instantly become a joke, a laughing matter. Its a lot easier to make peace on this one than fight a war.
Oh, does anybody have a pdf of LA’s site with carlitos comment altered? I’d love that.
G (722480) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:10 amWow.
I just read the thread linked in the body of this post, and “carlitos” was treated significantly worse than Patterico suggests.
— His serious arguments were treated unseriously.
— He was subjected to a torrent of abuse and obscenity.
Okay, that part is just what happens when you lie down with dogs over in Amanda’s part of town.
— Carlitos was spoofed by sock puppets behaving as the host’s sycophants.
— Then somebody with host privileges altered a comment to put obscene and incestuous words in Carlitos’ mouth.
— When this character assassination got a bit much, Liberal Avenger wiped the board. No acknowlegement and no apology.
— Most damning is the final comment left by host “Liberal Avenger” (LA, February 13th, 2007 at 11:03 am). Before he comes to his senses and erases again, here it is.
Liberal Avenger or one of his co-hosts stepped way over the line that demarcates despicable conduct. His only response is a tu quoque against Patterico.
Liberal Avenger: I have been a reader and commenter here for a number of years. Your charge against Patterico is a lie (paragraph above, beginning ‘Usually,’). He has never altered a contributor’s comment so that a reader could conceivably be misled into mistaking anybody else’s words for the commenter’s words. That is what a host at your site did to a guest.
Prove your accusation or retract it.
PS to Patterico–Beware ‘pissing contests.’ Liberal Avenger has fouled his own nest. Pointing it out should be enough.
AMac (c822c9) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:20 amActually, he’s been a joke for a long time now.
Pablo (cb50c5) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:20 amUh, typo immediately prior (9:20am).
Liberal Avenger’s charge is contained in his paragraph beginning, “Further, Patterico edits peoples’ comments all of the time.”
AMac (c822c9) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:23 amI believe Patterico. LA is FOS. I don’t know how far Carlitos wants to take it but what they did to him is a federal crime punishable by up to two years in prison under Section 502 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
nk (f58916) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:25 amP.S. And libel per se in a civil action.
nk (f58916) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:28 amUh, uh, another mistake in my prior comment (9:20am). I should have included the following italicized words:
– When this character assassination got a bit much, Liberal Avenger or another liberalavenger.com host wiped the board. No acknowlegement and no apology.
AMac (c822c9) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:29 amP.P.S. And if someone destroyed evidence of a federal crime by wiping the comment think Martha Stewart.
nk (f58916) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:30 amHmmmm, you’re “notorious” for editing people’s comments, Patterico? That’s news to me. As a liberal commenter, you’d think that I’d be a primary target, too.
What kind of bullshit is that, seriously?
Give the people some credit: if Patterico were changing people’s comments, adding (defamatory) things that they hadn’t written, THEY’D PROBABLY NOTICE, and THEY’D PROBABLY SAY SOMETHING.
And they haven’t.
Leviticus (b987b0) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:31 amnk,
I thought that blog-stuff wasn’t legally subject to libel law. Has that changed or am I misinformed?
Leviticus (b987b0) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:33 amI was wondering how long it would take one of them to bring up Goldstein. As I recall, he did alter a comment from a troll, but immediately afterward, admitted it, posted the original comment, and apologized. It seems to me that what LA’s poster did was in a different league, but it still gives them the opening for the “Nyah, nyah, you guys do it, too” non-argument.
CraigC (aa6a7c) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:42 amIt’s tough to libel an internet nickname.
Pablo (cb50c5) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:52 amYeah, I’m not too concerned about carlitos suing me because of something Patterico made up.
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:05 amI had the same experience on another blog. In fact, not only did they edit my comments but one of their admins started posting as me; I finally put an end to it by threatening litigation.
Robert O'Brien (79fb89) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:13 amLeviticus #25,
The IP is immunized. The site host is immunized if he, himself, did not write the libel. The actual libeler is not immunized. So for example, if I were to accuse LA of having committed a federal crime on this site, neither Patterico nor his hosting service would be liable, but LA could sue me and I would have to rely on other defenses.
nk (5e5670) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:14 amSee, now that’s funny. I mean, just admit it and say, “Can’t you take a joke?”. It was obviously a little attempt at humor, I actually think it was semi-amusing and would have been funny to funnier if not for the insulting tone of the comment and if it had been accompanied by a comment that it had been altered. Denying the obvious just makes you look stupid.
I will say that I’ve seen it done on conservative blogs. IMAO has done it, Hog On Ice is relatively conservative and claims to do it, I have no idea if he really does, but he certainly says he does.
The major differences being that they are not “debate sites”, they are humor and vanity sites respectively, and they both warn(ed) against specific behavior and told posters that they would alter any comments that didn’t heed the warning.
So at first I thought, “Yawn.”, but after seeing it being denied, it just makes me laugh.
One of the few times since about 2002 a lefty-blogger has made me laugh on purpose and he denies it.
That’s pretty darn funny.
Veeshir (dfa2bf) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:24 amI’m glad I pulled away from being liberal…
G (722480) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:25 amLA – Good of you to join the discussion and defend your – um – “honor”.
You’ve been accused of perfidious dishonesty on a Greenwaldian scale; yet your defense is “Patterico made [it] up.”?
Not only that, but you accuse Patterico of editing others’ comments?
Is that really the defense you want to go with – “He’s a liar, and he does it too!”?
Well, come to think of it, that’s what the Progressives have been consistently saying about the other side for so long now, I can understand that you’d not have a readily-deployable “Plan B”.
Good luck, after many moons of engaging in asinine behavior online, of convincing people you’re not guilty of asinine behavior online; especially since your entire defense rests on a resounding “Nuh-UH” when presented with a screen cap of the incident.
Abraxas (2f586f) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:29 amWhat is absolutely sick liberal avenger editing t my (now deleted, but shown above and still linked here) post is that I had a sister and she passed away young, about 9 years ago. How very “liberal” for the people at the other site to reply to my linked, factual arguments by writing first-person incest fantasy in my own name, and calling my sister names. I’m not super-sensitive as a rule, but you would think that someone , why think before you post edit commenters’ posts in a defamatory way.
I have learned my lesson though, and won’t be commenting on sites like that one. The whole thing kind of freaks me out. I guess I don’t have a sense of humor, and don’t get irony and sarcasm…
I don’t know much about writing blogs, but for LA to read all of the comments that appeared contemporaneously on that thread, and yet pretend it never happened is pretty cowardly.
carlitos (b38ae1) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:49 amSorry about grammar above… Comments just refreshed, which, seeing his/her post#28, reminds me to inform you all that Liberal Avenger is a lying prick.
carlitos (b38ae1) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:53 amLA happens to be one of my cyber-friends on the left, and I find it difficult to believe that he, personally, did something like that.
However, it wouldn’t be the first time it has happened:
As of this posting, the altered comment is still up, as is my trackback concerning it, which was also altered (though in such an obvious way that it can’t be considered a fabrication).
In a return comment on my site, sgo, LA’s tech guru, stated that he was not the one who altered my comment, but he did laugh about it:
…
I don’t believe it was LA himself, and when sgo told me that he wasn’t the one who changed my comment, I took him at his word, and still do. I do have a guess as to who has both the administrative access and the will to make such changes, but, absent proof, will keep that to myself.
One further point: our esteemed host is an attorney and a prosecutor. It’s difficult to believe that someone like Pat would fabricate something like this.
Dana (3e4784) — 2/13/2007 @ 10:54 amRaise your hand if you take yourself too seriously!
The Liberal Avenger (b8c7e2) — 2/13/2007 @ 11:07 am“Raise your hand if you take yourself too seriously!”
Jesus! Are you blogging from a prison or an asylum, LA? Making up a confession of underage incest is a joke to you? Jesus!
nk (5e5670) — 2/13/2007 @ 11:19 amLiberal Avenger, your conduct on this matter–both here and at your own site–is not conducive to respectful and intelligent discussion.
From comments on this thread, you find your site’s indecent conduct towards other people to be a matter of amusement.
It is you who must look at yourself in the mirror each day.
There just isn’t much more to say.
AMac (c822c9) — 2/13/2007 @ 11:32 amMy friend the Liberal Avenger said:
I don’t necessarily take myself too seriously, but I do take this issue seriously. You are the owner and operator of a site in which you have invited people, even right-wing trolls like me, to make public comments. This is an honesty issue, LA, a big one.
Whoever did this one has done you and your site a major disservice, and you need to fix the problem.
Dana (3e4784) — 2/13/2007 @ 11:39 amI completely believe Patrick based on long-standing experience with how he runs his blog.
What a sewer the Internet can be.
Federal Dog (9afd6c) — 2/13/2007 @ 11:44 am“Come on, it was a joke! And also, I didn’t do it.”
[But he’s embarrassed enough by it that he doesn’t want his readers to know about it; hence, he closes the comment thread. I’m not suggesting that people go to other comment threads of his to tell them — they’ll certainly be deleted as “off topic.” But if he thinks that calling me a liar is the way to get this issue to die, he’s mistaken.
L.A., I’m not alleging that you did this yourself. But I am telling you that it’s time to question your co-bloggers about this. I personally took screenshots of the comment, as did Carlitos. You can’t wiggle out of it with sophistry and blowing smoke. You need to apologize and root out the offender — or, if nobody will own up to this, then get rid of all of them. — P]
Jim Treacher (15574e) — 2/13/2007 @ 12:01 pmPatterico, what kind of blog is this?! I can’t find anywhere to post about Anna Nicole and that poor little baby… Actually, maybe this discussion will do.
[There is an Anna Nicole post, about Tim Rutten. Scroll down on the main page. — P]
nosh (ee9fe2) — 2/13/2007 @ 12:35 pmWow, Looks like LA has been taking tips from Amanda. It’s everybody’s fault but mine.
Bill (1a1297) — 2/13/2007 @ 2:29 pmMessage: don’t take TA’s site, or comments, seriously. Duly noted.
Jay (ec6ad0) — 2/13/2007 @ 2:31 pmI seem to dimply recall that the “free speech movement” and many of the early “underground comix” (before good natured obscenity by the likes of R. Crumb took over completely) had a lot to do with stories and accusations concerning Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew performing various improbably obscene acts.
So this has been the Liberal Left’s idea of reasoned political discourse for a while now…..
C. S. P. Schofield (c1cf21) — 2/13/2007 @ 3:18 pmCarlitos, I hope you have the opportunity to raise your hand at a civil trial when you sue the pants off this sick group.
gbear (18bdd8) — 2/13/2007 @ 3:31 pmOur esteemed host wrote:
At least this comment from The Commissar, is still alive, on a thread about football, and has been up for a few hours.
Dana (556f76) — 2/13/2007 @ 3:36 pmToo funny.
I just want to know which of you righties read the rewritten comedy and didn’t get that it was a prank.
I don’t what’s funnier – the rewritten post, Pat’s preening and posturing about caning (or was it caneing) all the guest bloggers or the Tort-Reform righties claiming a lawsuit should be brought over this.
Thanks, Pat, for highlighting this – you once again scored for great comedy.
[And the funniest part is that his real sister is dead! What a laugh riot, huh, Macswain? — P]
Macswain (76d8da) — 2/13/2007 @ 4:59 pmNow if they knew about his personal tragedy, I would agree with you. But you know damn well there is not a shred of evidence or even an allegation that anyone at the site had such knowledge. What’s sad is that you would seek to exploit this hidden fact to try and win an argument.
The blogs are filled with trash talk, pranks, etc. If you – as virtually everybody does – have some personal tragedy that makes you particularly sensitive to the free-wheelin’ jokes and jibes that take place, you ought to disclose it first or not partake.
I guess the real lesson is you righties only like parody when Allah does it to others but not when it comes back on you.
[This fact was not hidden from you. It was in the comment thread you admitted you read, in the same comment where you said it was a funny prank.
In other words, Macswain, you knew this guy’s sister was dead and you still thought it was funny that people joked about him doing disgusting sex acts with her.
You are a soulless ghoul. Your comments will never appear here again. Goodbye. — P]
Macswain (76d8da) — 2/13/2007 @ 5:28 pmGood.
nk (f58916) — 2/13/2007 @ 5:47 pmEverything about that comment screams evil.
The imagination needed to produce it, the assigning of responsibility for it to an innocent person, the maliciousness and lying.
Am I supposed to be surprised that a person/organization (website) that advocates abortion (parents legally killing their own children) is evil?
Christoph (a2c6b5) — 2/13/2007 @ 5:47 pmI use to circulate on the left side a bit. I found Atrios to be one of the more honest at least with the non spoofing or deleting your comments. And I gave him plenty of opportunities during the run up to the 04 election.
papertiger (a5e9bc) — 2/13/2007 @ 6:06 pmIf you are looking for honest debate with the other side – then he is my recommendation.
I can verify that Patterico edits comments, because he has done so to mine. And I can prove it, too, because he uses good grammar, announces it bold as brass every time he does it, and signs his name to it each time! Really, if he were a truly professional blogger, he would use slang and bad English, and never admit to doing anything. He truly fails to reach the standards expected of a first class blogger.
kishnevi (03a14b) — 2/13/2007 @ 7:10 pm🙂
More seriously, if LA is blaming Patterico, then I have to assume either he himself rewrote the comment, or knows exactly who did it. (He could have at least made a show of disgust and a pretense of apology.) If he really thinks P. did it, he ought to be prepared to give real evidence of that, or shut his mouth, since accusing P. that way is itself libelous. And if he doesn’t know who did it, he should be doing his best to find out who did, if only for his own protection.
The Sacramento Bee edited a letter I wrote to the editor once.
papertiger (734d33) — 2/13/2007 @ 8:18 pmThey changed a few words to tone down my rhetoric.
I called a woman who camped out in a redwood tree a lunatic. They changed it to just plain “woman”.
I suppose the Bee has a disclaimer on their letters page reserving the right to edit.
carlitos, get a good lawyer and sue his ass off! anybody did that to me, i’d end up owning their website, their house and their car.
assistant devil's advocate (7febf9) — 2/13/2007 @ 9:52 pmNasty.
David N. Scott (71b49c) — 2/13/2007 @ 11:46 pmI’ll be contrarion. Sort of.
Know what? I thought it was kinda funny. Not very original, but funny, in a way. If Liberal Avenger doesn’t really care about the integrity or intellectual honesty of his blog, if he wants to alter comments for his own amusement, that’s his business. I don’t fault him for it.
Ah – but lying about it? Not admitting it? Pretending it didn’t happen at all? Trying to blame someone else?
Now that’s just plain embarrassing. And I don’t think he’s either intelligent enough or self-aware enough to understand how embarrassed he ought to be.
It is, frankly, a fundamental facet of liberalism: they simply CANNOT engage in straightforward debate, and must ALWAYS use tactics like this. Liberalism is defined by this behavior.
Which is fine, although it should give them pause when they realize that, factually and logically, their positions are unsupportable. But fine if they want to live with that degree of self-delusion.
But to then deny it?
Embarrassing. And predictable.
Thanks, Liberal Avenger. You once again reminded me why most adults become conservative later in life, while intellectual children cling to liberalism.
It’s nothing but a question of maturity.
You lack it.
Someday, when you gain it, you’ll look back at this and cringe. I can guarantee it.
PP (c65bfa) — 2/14/2007 @ 5:19 amI’m sorry. Just read through the thread and realized the word I’m looking for isn’t “embarrassing.”
It’s “cowardly.”
Liberal Avenger, you are a coward. Simple as that. A coward.
No worse thing to be, in my opinion.
PP (c65bfa) — 2/14/2007 @ 5:23 am“It is, frankly, a fundamental facet of liberalism: they simply CANNOT engage in straightforward debate, and must ALWAYS use tactics like this. Liberalism is defined by this behavior.”
-PP
Really? Would you mind linking to that definition? I’d love to see it…
This has nothing to do with liberalism or conservatism. This has everything to do with ethics and maturity on a personal level.
It’s a sign of your own immaturity if you’re willing to paint any group with so broad a brush.
Leviticus (68eff1) — 2/14/2007 @ 10:07 amCan you be sued for libeling an anonymous Internet commenter?
I realize “carlitos” uses basically the same name to post each time, across multiple web sites, but unless it can be tied to a real person, how can there be any damages?
How are other people on the web supposed to know that “carlitos” and “Carlito” are the same person, but not the same as “Carlito27” on the model airplane enthusiast website and he’s not the “carlitos” at DemocraticUnderground?
How do we even know that “carlitos” is a single person, and there aren’t three people who agreed to share that name when they post here?
Do American citizens have the right to protect the integrity of our pseudonyms? So I have the right to, not just my own good name, but also to all of my good fake names?
Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c) — 2/14/2007 @ 3:31 pmDoes anyone know if a Google cache of the unwiped post from Liberal Avenger still exists? That tool has been very handy in the past in recovering shameful tid-bits from totally disappearing down the memory hole.
pbares (d22937) — 2/14/2007 @ 8:41 pmWhen this first came up, I tried running a cache search, but its last grab was two days beforehand.
Either you trust our screenshots or you don’t. LA isn’t really denying them any longer, so there’s no reason not to.
Patterico (a8fa4a) — 2/14/2007 @ 8:48 pm[…] Her gets caught and Patterico publishes the evidence. […]
The Liberal Avenger… a full on idiot at Herd Watching (1d0ae5) — 2/16/2007 @ 12:59 amNIP AND TUCK…
The limitations of blogger prevent me from ever trying this, but some blog software allows people to alter comments that others have left. The administrator (the one in charge of the blog) can edit other peoples’ comments, either deleting some or all …
Word Around the Net (a65349) — 2/23/2007 @ 10:11 am[…] only one time before — from a blogger calling himself the “Liberal Avenger.” I wrote about it at the time, and Cathy Young had this to say about the corrosive aspect of changing other people’s words: […]
Patterico's Pontifications » Protein Wisdom Alters Commenters’ Words to Mock Them (e4ab32) — 12/20/2009 @ 2:16 pm