I fully understand and agree with the paper’s decision to make commenters be identifiable when placing comments on the electronic/Web editions. The comments had become more and more offensive, with more very personal attacks on others, and less constructive content and “accountability.” The number of false-name, brain-dead commenters seemed to be growing with each edition.
However, the method the paper chose to identify commenters appears to be a poor choice to me. I have always used my real name and have nothing but scorn for those who hide behind fake names. However, I will never join Facebook, Twitter or any of the other, in my opinion, time-wasting, spam-generating, “selfie”-posting, social media “Crapsites.”
Why did you choose to limit the comments to only those who will sign up for Facebook? Why could you not simply assign those of us who wish to comment, a PIN number that would allow access, and require those persons to use their real names? No pin number, no real name, no access.
And what’s up with the new “Comments are off for this post” after some of the articles? These new policies, along with your choice to run a “column” by that, in my opinion, blathering fool Gene Altshuler, are making me reconsider my 25-year subscription to this newspaper.
In his diatribe this day, against Conservative legislators, Altshuler wrote: “How can a legislator hold his or her head high, having sworn an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, when using every sneaky and underhanded method to undo it?” Oh, come on. Why doesn’t he ask his President that question? I was going to comment on that, but the Mountain Democrat has effectively blocked me from commenting since I will never be a Facebook user.
Frankly I consider this a slap in the face of longtime subscribers. Lastly, if you continue to demand commenters join Facebook, how about giving me a discount and just “lock me out” of the electronic version. Without being able to comment, I have no interest in it. I wonder, how many other subscribers feel the same way.