Thursday, October 28, 2010

Disqus Sucks

Disqus Sucks.
It chokes discussion.  It doesn't promote discussion.  There's no rhyme or reason to it.  Some comments get in.  Others don't.  There's no one to talk to there to clear things up.  

Disqus is judge, jury, and executioner. 
If it doesn't like what you say, your comments don't get posted.  No appeal, no argument, no reason.

That phenomenon causes skewed discussion.  
One wants to respond to something outrageous and offensive someone has posted ... but when you try to post it, you may get the silly, inexplicable message, the death knell to open discussion: "Your comment must be moderated first before being published, and is pending review" or some such nonsense. 

That stifling has a chilling effect on open discussion.  Who knows what agenda lies behind the blocking of commentary, and the approval of others.?!

Disqus also sucks because it gloms on to your other online-posting accounts like Twitter.  What's the point of being able to post comments via Twitter, for example, when it still has to "interact" -- read, be approved by -- some corporate goons at Disqus? 

Online forums, especially newspapers, have abdicated  their responsibility to promote free and open discussion, and handed the keys to the kingdom over to Disqus.

Here's just one recent example:

The Miami Herald recently 'added' -- read, got crippled by -- Disqus.  Of course, one can 'also' log on using Miami Herald, FB or Twitter accounts, BUT that's pointless because any commentary must go through Disqus in order to be published.  Absurd.

I'll go ahead and exercise some freedom of expression by posting here what Disqus would not allow on the Miami Herald page.

It relates to the following column by Jackie Bueno Sousa, one of the more extreme right-wing anti-government anti-labor columnists (calumnists?) at the MH:
"Recall key: Are county salaries out of line?", .

And right now I'll publish what Disqus in its infinite caprice wouldn't, thankyouverymuch:

Try reviewing the research, instead of making personal attacks. Example: "Comparing Public and Private Sector Compensation over 20 Years", by 2 independent university professors of economics, Center for State and Local Government Excellence, "Public jobs earn less than private sector, study says,",

And “Pay Differences between State Government and Private Sector Employees, by State, Race, and Gender”, A National Analysis of Public/Private Wage Differentials at the State and Local Levels by Race and Gender, By Gregory B. Lewis, Chester S. Galloway, Department of Public Management and Policy, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University,

The data show that public sector workers are not overpaid. Indeed, the facts from the first study listed -- which also reviews a host of other studies -- show that public sector workers, e.g., state and local government workers, earn about 12% less than private sector counterparts.

NOTE TO OTHERS: Just because in some categories public sector workers earn more does NOT mean they are overpaid. That difference just reflects on their higher qualifications and specialized skills, as well as the negation of private-sector discrimination.

And from the second professional study:
"A higher percentage of public sector than private sector employees holds bachelor’s, masters’, professional and doctoral degrees." Id.

"The SLG pay disadvantage is stronger for those with higher expected earnings.
In analysis on the 2005-06 ACS, the expected pay disadvantage is 11.7% in occupations where a college degree is expected, but there is a 1.8% expected pay advantage in the other occupations.

When the regressions are separately by educational level, Method 1 finds an expected pay disadvantage of 8.5% for college graduates, 14.5% for those with master’s degrees, 15.8% for those with doctorates, and 20.7% for those with professional degrees – all far higher than for any less-educated group.

When sector is interacted with education and experience, SLG pay drops relative to private sector pay with both." Id.
And the public sector often negates the prejudicial effects of employment discrimination rampant in the workplace. There public sector compensation more accurately reflects fair compensation and market value:
"[P]erceived overcompensation of postal workers results from women and minorities being paid as much as comparable white males in the public sector and significantly less than comparable white males in the private sector. They conclude that white males are paid the market rate in both sectors and that minorities and women are paid the market rate only in the public sector." Id.

"Much of the public wage premium appears due to human capital advantages enjoyed by public-sector employees, again duplicating other findings. (Llorens, 2008a)." Id.

"Thus, when accounting for human-capital differences between private and public-sector employees, there appears to be a public-sector wage disadvantage for white males and a slight advantage for black males and women among statistically comparable workers." Id.

Care to comment with anything other than personal attacks? How about some hard data instead? You can't. I know.

And it was taxpayer money the Marlins defrauded. We all got ripped off. The money didn't belong to our elected representatives. Isn't that what all the anti-government types are clamoring about?

A Yahoo Sports writer called it a fraud by the Marlins. ("The swindlers who run the Florida Marlins got exposed Monday. They are as bad as anyone on Wall Street, scheming, misleading and ultimately sticking taxpayers with a multibillion-dollar tab. Corporate fraud is alive and well in Major League Baseball.".

That's what it was, a fraud and crime, plain and simple. Misrepresenting one's financials is a crime."

That's all for now.  The MH can take its ridiculously overbroad and overgrasping adhesion "Terms of Service" and stick it where fair use and criticism reign supreme.  And Disqus Sucks.