Statement 1:
Bob said something that I disagree with. This is why I think he's wrong.
Statement 2:
Bob is an idiot. This is why I think he's an idiot.
I hope it's pretty clear that the first statement is at least vaguely productive, while the second is not.
Which isn't to say I restrict myself to being productive all the time. This is my blog, and what's the point of self-publishing if you can't be self-indulgent and insulting when you feel like it?
What's annoying is when you try quite hard to write a type-1 post, and someone comes in and writes a type-2 comment. Any work you did to stick to the facts is immediately undermined: however balanced your post may or may not have been, the presence of the comment skews any perception of the original post.
What do you do? If you leave the comment un-challenged, you look like you're providing a supportive environment for random flamers. If you try to interject, you're getting into an argument that's really between the commenter and Bob, that you really have no personal interest in being a part of. Ultimately, you don't care, and any time spent debating the matter is time that could be better spent drinking tea and watching documentaries about just how many maggots can legally be contained within a can of tomatoes according to the US FDA1.
And, of course, if you delete the comment then you feel like you're silencing dissent, which is totally counter to the reason you opened up comments in the first place.
1 Two, I think.
Whew, just fruit fly maggots. I was picturing 2-3cm, not 2-3mm.
Oh, what to do? Minor flaming I ignore, which to me isn't supportive, it's a hint that you probably did something wrong, major flaming I tear into a savagely as possible, not in any way mentioning the subject, just the delivery, hoping that it will make appropriate behavior clear to the next few people.
First, a convenient rationalisation: a type-2 comment on a type-1 post is an off-topic comment. When you delete an off-topic comment, you are not silencing dissent, but providing focus to the discussion.
Frankly, there are any number of forums for slanderous rants, and I don't see why you feel obliged to provide another.
I have seen some bloggers add a comment saying, "I deleted a comment from so-and-so because it was of XXX." That's kind of polite and can mitigate the offense taken.
Your "real names please" policy provides the basis for a reasonable compromise: if someone makes a type-2 comment and signs their name to it, leave it for all to see. Most readers should be bright enough to recognize the ad hominem for what it is, so the comment says more about the poor judgment of the commenter than it does about your posting.
I think that it can easily be argued that anonymous ad hominem attacks have zero value, and thus they can safely be deleted.
did you perchance mean the Alex in your Why no mac malware post? http://fishbowl.pastiche.org/2004/06/05/why_no_mac_malware
I just don't read comments, and receive all of your opines completely as you intended.
You are an idiot. I think you are an idiot becouse of this post.