Welcome
For best results please use compatibility view...
Thank you for stopping by my blog. There is no particular theme or topic and no posting schedule either. This is just something I do for my own occasional enjoyment/interest as well as for friends and family, but others are welcome (although I don't go out of my way to self-promote—almost the opposite, in fact).
I urge potential first-time commenters to take the time to read the guidelines on the commenting form. Regardless of whether you comment or not I hope you find something of interest or enjoyable here...
Earl Pomerantz, blogger
Just a quickie post to note that I've added a link to
Earl Pomerantz's blog on the sidebar. I particular enjoyed his post for today about
"The Greatest Hockey Story Ever."Ken Levine introduced Mr. Pomerantz's blog back on
January 17th, noting that...
There’s a new kid on the blogosphere. Earl Pomerantz, writer of TAXI, CHEERS,THE MARY TYLER MOORE SHOW, creator of MAJOR DAD, BEST OF THE WEST, and one of the original producers of COSBY, now has a blog. He’s very funny.
I recommend you at least give it a try. For what it's worth he doesn't seem to be as prolific a blogger as Mr. Levine, but very few are.
Anyway, I hope you enjoy it as I have so far.
Feedburner
12 comments:
Hey Dim Skip. Appreciate the update on your "hard drive", cause there is nothing like having an internet friend go MIA.
I did check Earl out and I loved the post. Any friend of Ken Levine... :-)
Thanks, Angel. Yeah, when cyber friends disappear, it can be troubling, wondering if everything is OK, but there's usually no way to really know. They usually turn up again eventually, but until they do you never really know what's going on in other peoples' lives that could cause a disruption in contact.
I've been reading Mr. Pomerantz's blog ever since Mr. Levine introduced it, but I gave him some time to build up a few posts before I added him to the sidebar. Today's post put him over the top for me. Having been a hockey fan in past years, I knew exactly what he was talking about and could picture it happening.
I also remember the days when female Flyers fans around here were smitten with Rick Tocchet or Eric Lindros even though they might not know a puck from a croissant. So I can easily envision the same scenario.
So now it's come to this? How DARE you censor other people's comments while retaining the right to post your own thoughts. Ever heard of something called freedom of speech? In case you have forgotten, wars have been fought and good people have laid down their lives to preserve this right. If you have a problem with this maybe you need to move to Iran or China. Perhaps then you will appreciate what freedom really means
First of all, thank you for signing a name, John, and thank you also for keeping your comment vulgarity-free (although simply keeping it vulgarity-free does not necessarily equate to being polite and respectful).
Though I could be wrong, I will assume for the time being that you are the person who has become "infatuated" with my blog of late. (If you are not, then I apologize on that point.)
In the interest of openness and fairness I will state here for the record that certain recent comments which I have not allowed to be published here were also all free of vulgarity (which again, I do appreciate, really). However, they were in my estimation overly confrontational and served no useful or relevant purpose.
It's perhaps against my better judgement, but I permitted your comment this time—despite its obviously belligerent tone—because I want to specifically address the points you raise...
1. I too am proud to be an American. As far as I know there is no ongoing contest (unless you count democrats vs. republicans) to determine if certain Americans are more proud than others so I'll take the liberty of calling it a tie on that point between us.
2. Yes, it has come to this, and yes, I dare. My blog is just something I dabble in for fun and other personal reasons. I try not to get overtly political or delve into other potentially controversial topics because A) it's not my nature, and B) I really don't want to be courting irate and nasty commenters in general. (I've seen some blogs really spiral out of control and it just takes all the fun out of things for a while until equilibrium is re-established.)
3. Sir, you seem to have mistaken me for the United States federal government which guarantees Americans the freedom of speech which you (and I) so value. However, I am not the federal government. I consider this blog an extension of my home and if an anonymous stranger were to burst into my home and begin berating me for, uh... well, I'm not exactly sure what, I would find some means to remove that person from my premises. And I'd be perfectly within my rights to do so.
4. Why do you think that Blogger.com allows bloggers the option of moderating comments? They allow it, so therefore I am within my rights (even as an American) to use it. If you don't like it, that's fine, but all I can say is "oh well...." You've expressed your disagreement with my policies and now I've published it and responded to it.
5. If I do not permit a comment to be published, I am not censoring you or your opinion except in the very constricted sense that I am not permitting it HERE. You are free to publish your views about me or anything else anywhere else you please. You are free to set up your own blog and run it how you see fit. (If you do so, I would be curious to read it once or twice, but if it didn't suit my tastes, I simply would not re-visit.) You are free to post on any number of public forums on the web, although you might find that a few of them set up and enforce certain guidelines regarding conduct as well.
______________________
I hope that that helps clarify things for you somewhat. You are, of course, free to continue to visit, but as far as comments go, my guidelines have been posted and everyone is expected to adhere to them. Might I make a different decision than you—oh, that's right, you don't censor—or someone else regarding what gets published and what gets rejected? Yes, of course, but it's still my decision to make here in my little cyber-corner of the web.
Good day, sir...
A few more analogous points...
When you're watching TV or listening to the radio, do you ever change the channel or station? If so, you might be censoring whoever's speaking at the time, especially if there are other people in the room. (OK, I'll admit that one's quite frivolous.)
When TV stations solicit viewer emails, do they read all of them on the air? No, of course not. And even on their affiliated websites there is often (I was even tempted to say "usually") a stated guideline as to what is acceptable, what is not, and that they are the judge of what comments/emails get posted or removed.
Have you never heard a talk radio show where a caller gets cut off for some reason? Are they censoring the caller? It's not always an FCC issue of profanity, either. I've heard many instances where a caller will just be generally belligerent or have an off-topic agenda, so the host will dump the caller.
Do newspapers print every letter to the editors that they receive? Again, of course not.
Freedom of the press, freedom of speech... It seems to me it's all pretty much the same or very analogous. If they as American media can do it, so can I.
And that's not even getting into the issues of how folks are permitted or not permitted to express themselves in certain ways or on certain topics in private workplaces...
There's a flip side to freedom of speech too... People are free for the most part—with a few notable exceptions like the oft-quoted falsely yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater or perhaps blatant hate speech/threats—to express their views in public on any subject matter. However, others are equally free to choose not to listen.
And lastly, even with comment moderation, I am not actually censoring your views at all. If you're addressing something I've posted, then I'll get your comment and possibly even read it all (I make no guarantees, though). There is a dialogue there. I am simply deciding, as newspapers do and as TV and radio stations do, not to permit OTHERS to read the comment HERE. And I've even stated up front now that that is the way things work. It's really no different.
Until a week or two ago, this was never an issue and all comments were directly published. Now comments which I deem to violate my simple guidelines will not be published, much like when people commit criminal acts thus losing their right to freedom and are incarcerated. Freedoms and rights are not infinite and restrictions vary according to setting, even in America. It so happens that here I determine where the line is drawn regarding comments.
I assure you, though, that if I were to suddenly start posting, say, racist or terroristic material here, blogger.com would be alerted and they would waste no time in removing my blogging privileges. As a reasonable person, I would expect nothing less. (Though of course I will never post anything which could possibly lead to that extreme response because I am, as I say, a reasonable person—at least I think so, but you may disagree).
O.K. Now were getting somewhere. At least, now, I know I'm being heard. Points well made regarding consitution. Having said that ,do you see my point? Since I'm taking the time to read what you have to say and leave a comment. I don't think expecting an acknowledgement is being to unreasonable. To write something, however trivial it may seem to you, and then have it tossed aside like yesterdays newspaper, because you won't deem it worthy makes the conversation a tad one sided. I was not and never will be given to vulgarity. If I seem belligerent, so be it. I guess that's just because " I calls them like I sees them" .
First of all, to sort of get this comment train a little more back on track, I just want to say that it looks as if Mr. Pomerantz, now that he's returned from a trip, has gotten back to more regular blogging. So maybe he will end up being nearly as prolific as Mr. Levine's blogging ways.
I've enjoyed Mr. P's most recent entries as well and still highly recommend that folks looking for humorous content and possibly insider stories about the Hollywood humor biz check him out.
___________________
Now, John...
I didn't realize that there were any doubts about anyone's comments being read. Actually comment moderation ENSURES that comments ARE read by me (or at least as far as I choose to read them depending on the content) in a usually timely manner. Obviously the one major exceptional circumstance is if for some reason I am unable to access the internet for an extended period, such as if I end up having PC issues. But if that happens, then I will have bigger issues to deal with than worrying about whether visitors are commenting here.
Until a couple weeks ago, I had my blog settings such that comments were published immediately and directly without any email notice to inform me. I would try to visit my own page often enough just to check the "Last Five Comments" sidebar section to see if anyone had anything to say, but I also was not necessarily diligent about it and it's possible I could have failed to notice a comment or two (though I doubt it).
In conjunction with activating comment moderation I chose to have each comment emailed to me privately. That's merely as a convenience for me personally so that I don't have to make a special trip to the blogger comment moderation page, especially since as you may have noticed, pedestrian traffic through this place is quite sparse. (And I'm fine with that, BTW. I make no super effort to publicize this blog to the greater WWW and I have no illusions whatsoever that my posts are so wonderfully insightful or interesting that the world needs to take any significant notice of me. As I say, I do it just to try to have a little fun and for other personal reasons, like so friends and family can drop in occasionally if they want. When it stops being mostly fun and begins to become a chore is when I will stop blogging.)
Anyway, I think a case can be made that comment moderation actually is to your benefit in ensuring that your voice is heard by me personally. If you and others make an effort to adhere to my posted guidelines, I have no problem with publishing comments even when they express differing viewpoints. I may not publish comments that are off-topic (as they have been for this entry) unless I choose to do so in order to respond to some specific point(s). I most certainly will not publish comments which do not provide any useful information or dialogue about the original blog post and which are also presented with an accusing tone toward me personally.
Two recent anonymous comments which I declined to publish (whether they were yours or not) apparently were the result of some incorrectly drawn assumptions about me and they were expressed with a very snide tone (in my opinion) in a derogatory and confrontational manner. The comments themselves were actually on-topic, but only in the sense that they used the base post as an opportunity to launch into implying negative attributes to me—there was no useful informational content that I could see. And besides, why would I publish something that is unflattering to me, even if it's obviously just outright wrong? So I could address it and set the commenter right? I see no need to waste my time or that of my handful of readers with such stuff.
I hope you can see by these more recent examples that I will indeed permit comments with differing views and somewhat informative content, if only in the interest of having an intelligent, thoughtful dialogue and with the added bonus of further clarifying my views and practices around here.
To be perfectly honest (and to answer your most recent question) I did and do see your point—but I simply don’t agree with it, finding it to be misguided and a little naive. And I don’t agree with it for the reasons which I’ve already probably taken way too much time to explain in prior comments and in the subsequent U.S. Constitution post. I can only give you my word (for whatever that’s worth, admittedly probably squat since who am I to you?) that I will do my best to adhere to my own posted guidelines regarding what I will allow through and what I will dump.
As for your statement that your prior tone was due to the fact that you “calls them like [you] sees them” that’s fine as well, but when you boil all this down that’s really why I enabled comment moderation in the first place, so I could call’em as I see’em. After all if you’re entitled to do that, then why should I as the proprietor here not be afforded the same luxury? You speak of “taking the time to read what [I] have to say and leave a comment” as if that should afford you some special privilege. It does not (even if you disagree). If it did, then I would say to you sir that since I took the time to draft and post all the original content around here (and especially seeing as how I feel that my blog is far from controversial in nature), perhaps that should afford me the privilege of being treated courteously and respectfully by any visitors who wish to comment in my direction. Obviously (and regrettably) it does not. However, since this is in fact my place, I can exercise any amount of control I see fit, from none whatsoever up to and including the potential option of not allowing anyone at all to comment should I ever find that necessary (while I continue to post away). But as you say, that would be one-sided and what fun or use would that be?
One more point of behind-the-scenes procedural clarification… Any comments submitted here can only be either published in full as they are or not published at all. Blogger does not give me the means to alter comments on my own and then publish them as if they were submitted in that altered form by the commenter. I must point out that that is actually quite different from the way newspapers deal with letters to the editor. I know people who have written such letters and had them published and attritbuted to them even though the actual content was edited down for space and/or content and brevity considerations. Sometimes a key point is left out entirely. But again that is within the papers’ stated rights. So anyway, if I find even a part of a comment to be unworthy of publishing I may be forced to throw the whole thing out even if there happen to be other useful points made. This is why I urge folks to try to adhere to my stated specifications when commenting.
I hope that I have allayed some of your concerns regarding the commenting and freedom of speech issue as it applies to this place (though if I haven't I don't think there's anything more I can possibly say on the matter that will make a difference). You and others are—as has always been the case—free, indeed welcome, to visit here as often as you like and comment as you see fit. Who knows?... Perhaps at some point if I become convinced that it’s “safe” do so, I may even return to immediate and direct comment publishing. But for the time being and the foreseeable future, I’m going to err on the side of caution and leave things the way they are.
I think I actually prefer the comment moderation method anyway for the convenience it affords me as a tool to better inform me when comments have been left and as a safety net to guard against unwelcome comments. The trade-off for those benefits to me personally is that it means visitors will not have the satisfaction of seeing their comments go up on the page immediately. However, I consider that to be an acceptable consequence since I think most folks who attempt to comment will likely do so in a courteous non-confrontational manner. Please note once again (and probably for the last time) that "non-confrontational" does not necessarily equate to full or even partial agreement being expected. Though frankly, my posts will usually be so innocuous that I think most visitors would be hard-pressed to find anything with which to take issue.
And that’s pretty much all I plan to say on the subject. If you’ve continued to read this far, then I thank you for doing so. And if you stopped reading before this, well, then it doesn’t matter what I type now, does it? :-)
I feel I've already spent waaaay too much time addressing your concerns than I should have and gone to far greater extremes than 99% of other bloggers would have to do so. I'm not going to continue 'round and 'round the same general issue(s) any longer.
Bottom line is, always has been, and possibly always will be (unless I change my mind) that all visitors are free to comment or not, but it is my call as to which ones, if any, get published. You will find that to be the case on countless blogs and public internet forums available out there. And on that note I offer another hearty “Good day, sir.”
see what happens when one doesn't check the skipper's dimension due to busy busy busy workload stuff and such.
lol.
sorry it amuses me :-)
best!
(using the anonymousse thingy here but if i say rumpus you know who and what and where from, eh?)
Hey there, Rumpus! Good to see ya, well, read ya around here. The mood needed some serious lightening up, if I may get oxymoronic on ya. :-)
It amused me also for a day or maybe even two, but I'm all amused out now and moving on.
Seriously, it's stuff like this that can pull me down sometimes and force one of my occasional mini cyber vacations. Normally cyberstuff is an escape and oasis from real life, but sometimes dimensions invert and real life becomes the escape from cyberstuff.
I just hope that folks are at least checking out Mr. Pomerantz's blog and finding it enjoyable. After all, that was the point of the original post here. :-)
Of course, I have no idea as to comment publishing policies at Mr. P's blog. There they seem to go straight to being published, but I have no evidence as yet to show me if he occasionally finds the need to remove any. He's a blogging newbie, though, so I suspect he may not know how to remove'em even if he wanted to do so.
Anyway, thanks for dropping by and brightening up my morning, Rumpus! :-)
Trying to bring this comment thread back to the subject matter. Another month has passed and I am finding my footing with Earl. What a breath of fresh air he is. Almost shy at times and so very knowledgeable on the subject of writing. Also very frank, regarding the realities of how this society treats those above a certain age. How sad for Television, that they marginalize these oh so creative writers. Thanks again for creating a link that made me take a second look at Earl's blog. I am a better person for being a reader of it.
Well, I'm glad you're enjoying reading him, Angel. I should pass your thanks on to Ken Levine for without his original promotion of Mr. Pomerantz I would not have found him either.
I, like many, was a big fan of many of their shows back in the day... Mary Tyler Moore, Taxi, Cheers, Frasier, etc., and even some of their lesser-known works. I can't say I ever would check the credits on those shows and go, "oooh, a Ken Levine (or Earl Pomerantz) episode!" But I definitely recall seeing their names over and over in the through the years.
It's fascinating now to get both their histories in the biz as they occasionally recount stories of back in the day, especially Mr. Pomerantz.
I think Mr. Levine tries more to be humorous and not as often biographical whereas Mr. Pomerantz seems to be more biographical as a rule with a humorous way of telling the tales.
Yes, indeed, it's a shame that over a certain age, Holywood tends to discard such writers because they assume they can't write material which appeals to the younger crowd. I really don't think humor has changed all that much down through the ages. Their bloggings show ME that they haven't lost their funny bones, but then I'm not young so maybe I'm not a fair judge.
For me, the best thing that came out of the Writer's Strike, is that I now KNOW how VERY CREATIVE these people are. It's a privilege to hang in their virtual houses. :-)
Post a Comment