Open Letter to Wes Stites (NWAPolitics.com)

[Hogeye]

Dear Wes,

This is about your recent decision to drop me as a columnist for the NWAPolitics.com blog. This is an open letter; I invite you to publish it on the blog.

I am not happy to do this, but we are going to cut your privileges to post. This has nothing to do with your politics...

I find this hard to believe. While the proximate excuse was my expression of hope that a serial kidnapper immune to legal prosecution get his just deserts, the real reason is that some participants can't handle my opinions about the Iraq occupation, drug prohibition, and electoral politics, and don't like my brutally honest terminology (USEmpire, milfare recipients, flaghumpers, warmongers, etc.)

Somehow I don't think you'd ban someone for expressing hope that, e.g. the US shoot (more) rockets into neighborhoods in Fallujah, or that Anwar Jaber be executed. At most, they'd get a mild warning.

Of course, you can do whatever you want with your blog - that is your right. But I suggest that you are being unduly influenced by certain partisan warmongers who want me to shut up, and who can't handle open rough-and-tumble political debate. And if you "really do want to get a range of opinion up there," you will rethink this. After all, who else would put up a column quoting Bush reneging on his WMD claim? Who else has challenged the "war" on drug users? Who else has pointed out that neoconservatism is not traditional conservatism? Who else pointed out that the Hiroshima bomb was unnecessary? Who else has made the case against the brutal occupation of Iraq?

NWAPolitics showed promise as a political forum, but your decision would seem to revert it back to a partisan right-wing warmonger site, with "conservative" yes-men slapping each other on the back. I don't think this is what you have in mind.

Carpe Libertatem,
Hogeye Bill

[Betsy]

I can't say I'm surprised at their decision. What you said is true; they really cannot stand opposing viewpoints. And rather than debate them, they just insult your sexuality or your morals or whatever other low-blow they can think of to get you to go away. Which they've succeeded in doing -- chasing everyone away except the three or four people who want to hang out there and talk about how great George Bush and Ann Coulter are. Who cares? Let them have it.

[Savonarola]

I just wanted to point out, because it's mildly ironic:

Somehow I don't think you'd ban someone for expressing hope that, e.g. the US shoot (more) rockets into neighborhoods in Fallujah, or that [Arwah] Jaber be executed. At most, they'd get a mild warning.

Stites knows A.J. personally, as do I. While the nutjobs on his blog were going bonkers, Stites said nothing, despite knowing what a good guy A.J. really is.

NWAPolitics showed promise as a political forum, but your decision would seem to revert it back to a partisan right-wing warmonger site, with "conservative" yes-men slapping each other on the back. I don't think this is what you have in mind.

It may not be what he originally had in mind, but he has let it spiral down to that status. I emailed him twice regarding the violations of his own (as the blog owner) policies and received no response, either via email or in the form of revived policy enforcement. I was left to wonder whether Stites actually paid attention to the blog at all.


Here at FFForums, we don't censor people for disagreeing. We don't allow thread-starters to declare martial law over their threads, either, and I think that's why the NWAPians don't want to play here.

[Doug]

Here at FFForums, we don't censor people for disagreeing. We don't allow thread-starters to declare martial law over their threads, either, and I think that's why the NWAPians don't want to play here.

DOUG
Well, they remember that we kicked their butts on EVERY topic we decided to roast them on. They are too chicken to come here. They DO want a bunch of back-slapping, feel-good conservative lies. The last thing they want is informed opposition.

[Guest]

Hogeye,
Sorry to see you go from NWAP. It was, after the great liberal exodus, finally starting to get interesting again over there with your involvement. It has been a great while since I posted anything of substance there. Too much like walking into a burned out chicken house with a flyswatter. There is no point, really, in trying to argue politics with those guys, so I gave up trying. It was fun, however, to watch you do it.

[RickBaber]

I know. It's because I keep forgetting to log in. (I never claimed to be smart)
That's me, up there, again.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

I would be happy to see some of the saner folks from NWAP come over here. While we never agreed on national politics (or at least so seldom as to seem like never), we had some good discussions on education, sometimes economics, and even occasionally environment and economy. As far as I can tell, the saner folks have left NWAP, too. Maybe they'd like a place to speak their minds again.

[RickBaber]

OK Barb. I admit it. I'm insane.

[Betsy]

I agree, Barbara -- in fact, I even thought they might miss us over there at NWAP after we all left, because it's not really that much fun to just agree on everything - where's the discussion?! Why would you want to chase away people who inspired healthy and worthwhile debate? I learned a LOT from some of the debates you and Darrel and Doug and others had on there. So I would welcome more opposing viewpoints here, that would be fun, interesting and everyone could learn from them.

[Dardedar]

They are certainly welcome here, if they can handle the freedom.

And remember, we have a whole host of benefits over their site. Sav put this truly impressive list together.

Perhaps someone should invite them.

D.

[Barbara Fitzpatrick]

Baber, it's good to have you here. I hope you enjoy yourself in a free speech forum.

[Betsy]

I actually did check their site to see if Baber had any new posts, and he did, and it's about how he's been confused for a right wingnut simply because his name is across the top. To which, someone asked, well isn't everyone here right wingnuts? and McClave said something about how, NOOo, it's a totally equal open debate, which of course is nonsense. Then someone said something about how "we used to have Betsy but she left" and in my response I suggested they come here if they want a worthwhile discussion. I haven't gone back to see how many insults to my personal character were posted after that....

[RickBaber]

So, Wes Stites is a real guy?
I thought that was just another nom de plume for Maddox.

[Savonarola]

So, Wes Stites is a real guy?

Yep.

[Betsy]

You know, it's not only stupid of them from a personal enjoyment of the blog standpoint to run everyone off, it's also stupid from a business standpoint. Blog sites like NWAP aren't just there so people have a place to chat --- some blog site owners have become very wealthy by attracting lots of participants and therefore being able to sell major advertising on their sites. Surely this was Maddox's (and Stites') intent when they created the thing - yet by allowing LV Ash and others to run everyone off and act like juvenile morons, they've cost themselves a lot of potential money.

[Savonarola]

Blog sites like NWAP aren't just there so people have a place to chat --- some blog site owners have become very wealthy by attracting lots of participants and therefore being able to sell major advertising on their sites. Surely this was Maddox's (and Stites') intent when they created the thing - yet by allowing LV Ash and others to run everyone off and act like juvenile morons, they've cost themselves a lot of potential money.

I actually doubt that Dr. Stites' real intention was to make money. I believe that he thought this would be enjoyable and educational for multiple people.
On the other hand, I don't think Dr. Stites' real intention was really to get and maintain a genuinely bipartisan membership, either...

[Guest]

Check this out:

Blogging for Big Bucks
Business 2.0 on CNNMoney.com
By Paul Sloan and Paul Kaihla

It's not just a hobby -- some small sites are making big money. Here's how to turn your passion into an online empire.

Michael Arrington is a partying kind of guy. While showing off his home in Atherton, Calif., he boasts about how he crammed 500 people into his one-acre backyard at a bash in February. Then there are the official parties, like the one he threw last Friday at August Capital, a nearby venture firm. Weeks ago, Arrington posted an open invitation on his website at 3 a.m. By sunrise, all 500 spots were taken; the onslaught of traffic crashed his site.

Arrington, a 36-year-old entrepreneur behind a long list of unrecognizable startups, has suddenly become one of the rising stars of Silicon Valley. Why? The answer lies in TechCrunch, Arrington's blog about new technologies and companies. In the year since he launched the site, he's become a go-to person for VCs and tech execs looking to leak corporate tidbits or announce news. More than 1.5 million readers regularly check out his site.

But here's what gives Arrington real distinction: He's pulling in $60,000 in ad revenue every month. That's 10 times what the site was making earlier this year, which was when Arrington, convinced of the potentially monstrous riches ahead, quit his day job as president of a startup to blog full-time. Real businesses, real money

the rest of the article at http://biz.yahoo.com/weekend/blog_1.html

[Betsy]

that was me up there - apparently my computer forgot to automatically log me in this time...