Whale Oil has claimed for some time that they have cleaned up their comments and that they don’t allow anything nasty.
From their usually strictly enforced ‘commenting and moderation’ rules:
- Do not threaten to kill, harm or otherwise injure anyone, even in jest. Don’t think that you can get away with clever language like “I propose a lead injection”, or similar.
- If you see someone else troll DO NOT REPLY. If you reply, you risk being seen as part of the problem (no, we don’t care “who started it”).
From their General Debate comments today:
That’s three blog owners and moderators making despicable comments about someone who clearly has severe mental health problems.
Whale Oil claim they have cleaned up their comments but this makes it clear that doesn’t apply to the site censors.
It is very unlikely the target of these disgraceful comments will read them, but this sends a clear signal to Whale Oil readers and commenters that nasty is back, big time.
SB, you are welcome to explain here. It wasn’t you making the comments but you have claimed your comments are clean and criticised other blog comments for being disgraceful in the past.
Slater’s suggestions he would get dirtier this year seems to be already evident. Back to the worst of Whale Oil?
Your NZ 
Col
/ 4th January 2017Slimeoil has one rule for them and one for the mugs that blindly support them
Conspiratoor
/ 4th January 2017Always enjoyed your contribution on the whale Col. A man who knew how to balance work and play. Cheers,c
Conspiratoor
/ 4th January 2017Cheers, RoG
Conspiratoor
/ 4th January 2017I’ve defended them in the past but I think I’ll need to put my PR guy onto this one
Pete George
/ 4th January 2017Same old to the fore – immense potential defeated by self inflicted stupidity.
NOEL
/ 4th January 2017At first glance one would think the obvious solution would be deportation for breach of refugee status. But then the mental health rears its head.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/dominion-post/news/73475936/Family-of-refugee-judged-a-danger-to-women-struggle-to-get-him-deported
duperez
/ 4th January 2017Trying for attention … got it.
Pete George
/ 4th January 2017He tries for attention in posts.
He lets things slip in comments.
Klik Bate
/ 4th January 2017I actually don’t find Whales Oil’s comments ‘disgraceful’ at all. Nor would the vast majority of people I know, tbh. They’re right on the mark if you ask me…..
Pete George
/ 4th January 2017I didn’t need to ask you.
For someone who claims to want some sort of credibility as a media outlet it’s disgraceful – and if those sorts of comments were in different circumstances at the likes of TS or TDB then WO would likely be strongly critical.
And they threaten to ban anyone who posts comments like that.
Klik Bate
/ 4th January 2017“I didn’t need to ask you.”
[Looks like you forgot the XD at the end there, Pete]
Kitty Catkin
/ 4th January 2017You must know some damned odd people or be grossly misrepresenting them. I know nobody (I hope) who thinks like that.
Klik Bate
/ 4th January 2017Far be it from me to correct someone with a degree in English Lit. like yourself Kitty, but surely it should be, “I don’t know anybody……” ❓
Conspiratoor
/ 4th January 2017A mirror might help…
https://yournz.org/2017/01/03/open-forum-tuesday-112/#comment-153432
Kitty Catkin
/ 4th January 2017Hardly, when I don’t think in that bizarre way. Looking in a mirror wouldn’t change this.
Kitty Catkin
/ 4th January 2017No. ‘I know nobody who…’ is an alternative usage and perfectly correct, as well as being more euphonious. It’s like saying ‘There’s nobody…’ rather than ‘there isn’t anybody …’ .
I have two degrees; BA & MA (Hons)
Gezza
/ 4th January 2017Gezza
/ 4th January 2017The last 2 notes are excellent.
Klik Bate
/ 4th January 2017Conspiratoor
/ 4th January 2017and both as useless as tits on a bull
Gezza
/ 4th January 2017The trouble with you is you’re anti-semantic c.
Kitty Catkin
/ 4th January 2017I don’t how you would convey the fact that you know nobody who thinks thus or don’t know anybody who does without saying one or other of these. It would be possible to say it in a longer and more convoluted manner, but I see little point in doing so.
Among the people with whom I am acquainted, there are-as far as I am aware-none whose thinking is in this category. ?
Blazer
/ 4th January 2017I have Spark.
Kitty Catkin
/ 4th January 2017I have Orcon.
Gezza
/ 4th January 2017I have a feckin iPad.
Kitty Catkin
/ 5th January 2017I have a phone that makes and receives calls and can send texts 😀 It has a lovely picture of a damselfly on the screen. V. high-tech, no ?
Gezza
/ 5th January 2017If it doesn’t connect to the internet and then get all your browsing tracked & your browsing preferences stored online by private operators & made available to advertisers it sounds like it might be a smart phone.
Kitty Catkin
/ 5th January 2017Well, it has a pretty little pink quilted bag to live in-this is quite chic. My phone is a Little Black Phone, neat and compact, very slimline, pared down and minimalist.
Blazer
/ 5th January 2017I thought you had….2 degrees.
Conspiratoor
/ 5th January 2017too early …but very good. The crew will catch up later
Gezza
/ 5th January 2017His first upvote was from me. I was onto it like a robber’s dog.
Conspiratoor
/ 5th January 2017Nice try G but I staked the claim. Put your teeth in and specs on before you go near the feckster
Gezza
/ 5th January 2017Rude letter from my lawyer on the way.
Kitty Catkin
/ 5th January 2017I have.
Kitty Catkin
/ 5th January 2017Orcon is my landline & ISP.
John Schmidt
/ 4th January 2017Do as I say not as I do applies. Learnt this some time ago so this should not be a shock.
Maggy Wassilieff
/ 4th January 2017Under the NZ Crimes Act it is illegal to encourage or incite another person to commit suicide.
Col
/ 5th January 2017Oh No!!!! Slater doesn’t care, he has a bunch of mugs who all contribute to his legal costs.
Blazer
/ 5th January 2017just push the big red button…..donate to….donut.