Pixiq

I’m not sure accusing someone falsely of several crimes publically is protected by the first amendment – is it?

“bomb-throwing, anthrax-mailing, ”

That’s the part that Random Pixels will probably lose the case on. Considering the fact that Babalu can point to quite a few citations in credible news sources they probably have a pretty good case for defamation. What I’m sure they want is the post edited. Babalu has never shied away from criticism but the accusation of mailing anthrax crosses the line.

Carlos you’re a stand up dude. Hope the 1d Mark II yielded you some good pics.

“Got to wonder about the far leftist, liberal, yellow bellied, stuck up, elitist, God Hating, atheist, constipated, ill mannered, Gitmo detainee loving, lefty blog reading, fan of women’s tennis & the LPGA, politically correct, che shirt wearing, lover of Chavez, Ortega, and Morales, contributor to Rep. Conyers and Maxine Waters, pot smoking, tofu eating, chardonnay sipping, madonna listening, Danny Glover loving, fifo loving, butt licking, anti Semite, pro Hamas, anti Israel, dyspeptic, dumbass, Putzes out there…”

That was Babalu’s Mike Pancier last December.

I don’t listen to Madonna.

Where do I sue????

.

Carlos-Again I find myself agreeing with you on a very salient point (I actually have no opinion on the Babalu/RP thing-couldn’t care less), and that is, blogging under one’s own name. I gave up posting anonymously a decade ago, and still find it silly that people who post anonymously often are treated to the same respect as those who use their real name. I’m not saying that everyone MUST post under their own name; but why should some anonymous pot-shot get treated the same way as a signed comment? Just saying it seems less than gallant to take shots at someone if you won’t take them in your own name.
Cheers,
Danny Brody

Hey Ricki, that was one of my best ad lib rants. I wasn’t talking about you specifically, but you seem to have a guilty conscience for some reason.

That distinction always seemed silly to me Danny. I know of some respected people who don’t sign their name for whatever reasons and other that take cheap potshots with their full name. Besides, I don’t know if your name really is Danny Brody nor do I care to find out. We should judge opinions on their merit whether they are signed or not.

Carlos: taking a side in a dispute like this doesn’t mean you are turning your back on somebody. Did your lobbying for “post of the year” on SFDB affected your friendship with Pancier? I don’t think so. You can disagree with people and especially if you consider them friends.

Personally, I’m with RP on principle: I think legal bullying is a no no among bloggers. Val Prieto himself has been the target of legal intimidation. It was wrong when he was threatened to be sued and decided to take down a post and it is wrong for him to claim libel where there obviously wasn’t one.

Danny….as I’ve said before, every blogger is anonymous to some degree. Do we all share our home addresses? Do we all post our phone numbers? How about the restaurant we’re eating at tonight and the time we’ll be there? And the list can go on.

Carlos has met me, as have numerous other bloggers in South Florida. What would using my last name add to the discussion? Great, so you could Google me. Considering some of the people that I lock horns with on the web it would only put me and the ones I love in jeopardy of being retaliated against. I’m not sure if you are aware of it or not, but today Henry Gomez claims he can’t wait to meet me in person and “have words with me.” With guys of this mentality running around Miami, why would I ever give out my last name?

Being anonymous doesn’t invalidate an opinion any more than being short disqualifies someone from playing basketball.

.

Carlos…all due respect, but the fact that Babalu has been nice to you and Random Pixels apparently hasn’t is a helluva reason to take sides with Babalu on this issue.

Just sayin’.

.

Rick,

I’m not taking any side on this. This has nothing to do with me and it has nothing to do with First Amendment violations.

It’s funny how you never give Val an ounce of credibility, but then he threatens to sue and all of a sudden you and everybody else is acting as if a lawsuit has been filed and a judge has ordered RP’s blog shut down.

Let’s be realistic about this. Val was just blowing smoke, just as RP was doing.

When I worked for the newspapers, we would always get tips about somebody threatening to sue somebody else and it was never a story until an actual lawsuit was filed.

And I’ve personally been threatened with lawsuits over my writing several times and nothing ever came about them. My editors would laugh at the threats.

People who are serious about filing lawsuits never threaten. They just do it.

And I don’t hold the personal animosity against Babalua as you do, and I don’t hold the personal animosity against you as they do.

So why should I be forced to pick a side? I got my own blog battles I’m fighting on a national level.

Obviously, you are trying to build a coalition against Babalu to prove you have more clout in the blogosphere than they do, and that’s fine.

This has more to do with egos than anything else. That is why I compare it to the old tabloid wars.

It’s brutal, hard-hitting, condescending, insulting, mocking, personal and vicious.

But it’s only a war of words, nothing more and nothing less.

Carlitos,

You forgot to include me among the list of haters that you’ve accumulated. Geez, I gotta keep churning out vitriol or you’ll forget about me.

That whole thing with the “bomb throwing” and “anthrax mailing” is a bit over the top. Would you have allowed that to be posted here? I recall that when you and I were going back and forth on the legal nuances of photography there was another guy who started putting some racist filth in there and you deleted those posts because they were racially insulting. In this case, that whole thing about the bombs is a clear reference to the allegations of Cuban hard liners being terrorists and blowing people up. Frankly, I’d be offended if I were Val Prieto and Random Pixels, at least from what you posted, actually accused Prieto of such conduct.

So how did you come to suspect Random Pixels of being the same guy that was posting under those aliases? Did the guy forget to refresh his ip address after each post?

This post is that 1% where I actually agree with you Carlos.

By the way, I saw the pics of A-Rod. Were you the guy in the jersey taking pictures and calling himself a “paparazzi” and stating that the pics would be in magazines all over the country by this week?

I never give Val an ounce of credibility? Really, Carlos? Have you looked at the SFDB archives? Have you seen where I note some of Val’s writings and Pancier’s photos…on a consistent basis. Yeah, I bang ‘em hard when I think it’s warranted [which is a lot], but I also give them credit where credit is due which is much, much more than they have ever done for me. Not that I need it, but I want to make sure that while you do your darnedest “not to take sides,” which I might add is so unlike you, you make sure that you don’t let Henry’s midnight vigil and Mike’s pats on the back compromise the principles that many of us admire in you.

Not that it ever would. You know.

.

Wait. What’s wrong with being a “pot smoking, tofu eating, chardonnay sipping, …” Ok the pot thing causes testicular cancer and it’s illegal – sort of but chardonnay and tofu? Chardonnay get’s such a bad rap. There are some great vintages right here in the US – one inparticular in Sonoma that I love. Madrona Vinyards.

I maintain that Random Pixels needs to edit out the criminal accusations and offer a tepid apology and end this – fun and distracting though it is for a county with the highest unemployment numbers in the country and bad things rolling in on a rancid economic tide.

Just my two cents. Not that anyone cares. I’ve been sued. I’ve received death threats. I’ve seen way worse blog wars.

MH,

I pretty much let most things get posted here without deleting so I probably would let those comments stay, especially if they are part of an ongoing debate.

I deleted those racist comments because they were clearly meant to distract from the debate. And it was continual. Not just one comment.

But now that you mention it, what if a blogger would have said those same words to a Muslim blogger?

It would probably open up a whole new debate on racial stereotypes.

No, that guy in the jersey wasn’t me. I wasn’t shooting the event. I only stalked him Tuesday through Thursday.

There are several reasons why I suspect RP. Maybe one day I’ll get into it.

Rick,

How is not choosing sides “compromising my principles”?

All that happened is one guy insulted a secondn guy, and the second guy threatened to sue for libel.

Where is the crime here?

For me to take sides would mean that I am saying that Val doesn’t have the right to threaten to sue.

We all not only have the right to threaten to sue, we have the right to actually sue. To take away that right would be unconstitutional.

So me not taking sides means that I am taking the side of free speech, including insults and lawsuit threats.

Do we actually believe that RP has the right to insult without Val responding in the manner he feels appropriate?

As long as Val is not breaking the law, he has the right to respond anyway he wants, even if it’s just an empty threat.

Where have I said that there’s a crime, Carlos? I have no earthly idea what you’re talking about.

Of course Val can respond anyway he wants. And so can I except that my response is characterized by you as some type of power trip and Val’s declaration to sue RP [there was no "threat"...he said he was going to do it] is, well, just something he’s entitled to do. Which is absolutely true, but it’s silly and it reeks of oppression. Those are things that you have taken stands on right here, Carlos…and now, well, it’s Val’s right to do it and that’s it.

It’s just extremely out of character for you.

.

Ferfel: And I have a case against Pancier? I mean, you can’t have it both ways. Hyperbole is hyperbole is hyperbole.

.

“there was no ‘threat’…he said he was going to do it”

Until he files a lawsuit, it remains a threat.

And don’t you think that this whole talk of “oppression” is giving Val a little too much credit?

So he doesn’t allow you to link to his blog. Has that stopped you from accessing his site?

So he deletes your comments. Has that stopped you from opining about him on your blog?

So he threatens RP with a lawsuit. Has that stopped RP from continuing to blog about him?

You are on a power trip, Rick. And so is Babalu. And so is Random Pixels. And so am I along with every other blogger for that matter.

We blog because we have an opinion and we think it’s important enough to share it with the world. If that is not ego, then what is?

In my case, the power of the written word was really all I had to stand up for what I believe in.

I didn’t have money or power or even a huge media corporation backing me. All I had were my words.

And despite a certain judge who was critical of my blog and who punished me for it, I continue to blog because even he didn’t have the authority to make me stop.

And despite the fact that I was thrown in jail for 16 hours for photographing cops, I will continue to photograph cops because their oppressive behavior was not enough for me to voluntarily give up my rights.

And despite the fact that I have been criticized, insulted, defamed and even threatened by commenters from the moment I started this blog – including from you, Rick – I have continued to state my opinion because after having been thrown in jail for doing something that is protected by the First Amendment, I’m sure as hell not going to let any faceless, nameless commenter “oppress” me from speaking my mind.

So forgive me, Rick, if I find this conflict between you and Babalu petty.

Miami Danny, Alex and Rick,

I believe a blogger who uses their real name has more credibility than those who blog anonymously because they stand more to lose by what they write.

We might not agree with what Babalu writes but you can’t blame them for not standing by their words.

This is the reason why most newspapers use anonymous sources as little as possible, if at all.

Most times, if a source says they don’t want the quote attributed to them, then that quote is not used.

In the blogging world, it always seems that those who are more critical of you are the ones who remain anonymous.

Everybody grows a huge set of balls behind an anonymous name.

Ferfe,

When are you going to tell us about the time you got sued?

[cue the "Rocky" music]

“And despite the fact that I have been criticized, insulted, defamed and even threatened by commenters from the moment I started this blog – including from you, Rick – I have continued to state my opinion because after having been thrown in jail for doing something that is protected by the First Amendment, I’m sure as hell not going to let any faceless, nameless commenter “oppress” me from speaking my mind.

So forgive me, Rick, if I find this conflict between you and Babalu petty.”

It’s too bad that you went through the things you did, Carlos. I’ve expressed my opinion on the matter both online and in person, so there shouldn’t be any misunderstanding of that position.

I could care less if you think this whole thing is petty. I’m not even sure why you’re making that an issue.

Anyway, speak for yourself about the reasons you blog. You may do it for “power.” I do it as a way to vent and express myself.

.

I’m making it an issue because I was called out on your blog by one of your anonymous commenters

Carlos,

I didn’t think the guy in the jersey fit your MO, but when I saw the pics and put two and two together… needless to say, I am reassured by your denial. Don’t follow in your subject’s footsteps and make sure that Random Pixels wasn’t also there unbeknownst to you snapping “random pixels” of you in a jersey showing off Cigar Mike’s Canon and claiming to be the big “Papi Razzi”.

anonymous=coward

Let me get this straight.

One guy said that the other guy throws bombs and mails anthrax. Other guy takes offense and sues.

Maybe if the claim wasn’t so obviously over the top (hyperbole… I believe is the word) perhaps the argument would be stronger and there would be a case.

I am neutral on this… unless the blog guy suing is a lawyer and using their education to try to stifle the free (albeit nutty) expression of us non-lawyer types. Then I would like to kick him in the nuts. Oddly, if he is not a lawyer I am once again neutral.

I agree with Carlos. This seems overblown and silly.

Thanks, Danny.

Just to prove I’m not a coward and that I, indeed, have a “huge set of balls,” as Carlos so intellectually puts it, my name is Rick Smith. You heard it here first.

Isn’t it great that I’m so brave and my opinions now have so much weight? Maybe I won’t be so critical anymore now that I have used my last name.

Sheesh. Sometimes the blogosphere and those who muddle through it make me laugh.

.

Rick,

I was mostly referring to people like “Seve”, and “Hank” and “Spanky” and “Slim Picken” and a host of others who have shown up on this blog and on your blog who talk a big game, only to never show up again under the same username.

Carlos,

While I agree that you and I dont agree on 99% of the issues, I appreciate your recognizing Mike and Henry as the kind of people they are and I appreciate your take on this “issue.”

For the record, I had no intention of suing Bill in actuality, I merely took great umbrage to that “bomb throwing and anthrax mailing” statement as it is defamatory, false and libelous, regardless of his claims of “satire” and “hyperbole.” I suppose I could have taken him to court, but then, if I took everyone to court who had taken pot shots at me and thrown about derogatory and misleading and libelous comments about me on the net, I would probably have to spend all of my time at the courthouse. They’d have to have a cot for me somewhere in the building.

In my last comment at RP, I thought by adding the “dude” in “See you in court, dude” that the implication was there that I was taking the whole “matter” with a grain of salt. I had already made my thoughts clear in a previous post and was ready to leave it at that.

Having been on the receiving end of much written flak from Mr. Smith all of these years, Ive learned that the best way to deal with people like that is to do your best to ignore it no matter how angry their diatribe might make you. Obviously, I haven’t always been successful, but I, for the most part, chose to ignore Rick and now Bill altogether. This is because, quite frankly, I realize that it just isnt worth it to “debate” with some people and I dont really care what they have to say about me in the first place. Any time spent on same is just time I could be spending on issues that are much much more important to me.

Twenty years from now, if Babalu is still around, I dont want the archives filled with rants about petty blog shoving matches. For the most part, the goal of my blog to is bring to light the realities of Cuba and I would hope that – again twenty years from now – someone reading its archives could say that perhaps, maybe, the blog did do something to help effectuate change in Cuba, even if playing only a very very small part.

Whether we do play a part or not remains to be seen, but I for one will no longer waste any more time on these mountains out of molehills and petty blog “controversies.”

What?! Now you’re not going to sue?!

But this story is just getting good!

Sorry to disappoint. We’re not suing anyone. You can make write the checks that were going to go to the Random Pixels legal defense fund to the George W. Bush Presidential Library. You can find their website by clicking on any Babalu Blog link at SFDB.

Hey Rick I was also really referring to completely anonymous people who lob bombs form behind the protection of anonymity-not you, man. When did everyone get so sensitive, bro?

That’s your opinion, Carlos. Personally, if you were to sign your blog posts as Just Carlos, I wouldn’t care. I wouldn’t certainly go into full investigative mode to “expose” somebody who is balancing between a private and a public persona.

The whole anonymity equals cowardice statement is total bullshit. Again, how do you know Joe Blow the Blogger is really a Joe Blow? You know my full name. Were my opinions any less or more valid?

It’s easy for a blog like Babalu to use their full names in Miami where nobody has ever been harrassed for having a hardliner opinion on Cuba or being a Republican extremist. Very brave.

Alex,

You don’t know the email I get or whether or not I’m being surveilled by people who don’t like what I write. I’ve had some freaky things happen to me at night that may have been innocent or may have been attempts at criminal activity that have nothing to do with my blogging but you can’t say for sure that I don’t risk something by putting myself out there. Besides it’s my opinion that some people wouldn’t dare be so brash if they had to stand by what they write. They would be ashamed if people they knew in their real lives saw what they wrote. I think Rick is one of those miserable sons of bitches.

Though hurtful comments have been made be nearly everyone here (it seems) at one time or another, this is a very respectful, thoughtful and still sincere discussion.

Alex,

There is a difference between somebody who consistently uses the same username whether it be “Rick” or “Alex” or “nonee moose” or “Ms Calabaza” or “Blind Mind” than those who simply post under “anonymous” or who create new usernames each time they want to hurl an insult.

It is the latter group I have an issue with, and maybe it’s because these are the people who consistently pop up and trash me.

When I first come across a blog, I give more credibility to the person using their first and last name than to someone who just uses only their first name or a nickname, but that is probably just the journalist in me.

And yes, anybody could just make up a name, but most of the time people use their first and last names, their blogs are accompanied by photos. And this is just a first impression.

Once you’ve gotten to know the blogosphere, you get to know the characters and their usernames and their personalities and the credibility factor goes beyond the byline.

And I’ve met several of you guys in person so when I end up in a heated debate with somebody I’ve met, I feel we are saying things that we would say to each other’s face.

I’ve argued countless times with Henry and Mike and would do it person without fear that they’re going to beat me up or “oppress” me or whatever it is most people are afraid of them doing.

You should know as well as I do that they are mostly talk.

But then there are those other assholes. The ones who don’t even bother creating a persona online. It’s like they are ever lurking and only pop in to talk their shit.

These are the people I know damn well won’t say anything to my face. These are the pussies Danny and I are talking about.

Gomez: Plenty of people I know in my “real life” know what I write and are supportive. They do warn me, however, about being vocal when expressing my opinion about Cuban-American hardliner issues because of that group’s history of violence and intimidation.

Speaking of standing by one’s opinion…is George Moneo still using IP masking software when he comments on other blogs? Just wondering.

Danny: I read what you wrote. I can’t read minds, man.

.

Carlos,

This is exactly why I try desperately hard to not get into these petty blog fights.

First, we have the South Florida Blog CDR Comandante, Rick, taking my response to you here and posting it on his blog with his own little self-important spin to it. The guy actually believes that it was he who spearheaded some imaginary campaign to prevent me from suing Bill. Nothing could be further from the truth, of course, but reality has nothing to do with anything Rick posts in the first place. Stirring the shit stirs Ricks overinflated ego.

Second, let’s talk about Alex – assuming this commenter Alex above is the same Alex that was Rick’s blogging pardner. My assumption being correct, his comment above is absolute proof of his hypocrisy and his promulgating a stereotype. Alex happens to be very good friends with one Henry Gomez – the very same Henry Gomez that’s the managing editor of the vile, evil, extremist ” bomb throwing and anthrax mailing” babalu blog. They hang out together, visit each other’s home, go out to dinner, etc… Now, Alex could make it clear that while he may have been harrassed for his opinions vis a vis Cuba, that not all right leaning Cubans in Miami are the same, as proven by his very very god friendship with Henry. But you see, that doesnt jibe with the “all right wing cubans are “bomb throwing, anthrax mailing”‘ mantra that those who disagree with our opinions want to purvey.

That is why, despite the fact that I could really give a rat’s ass what a “Bill the famous photojournalist for 25 years in Miami” thinks, spews, rights or otherwise opines, I take umbrage to his reckless and libelous statements. Not just because theyre defamatory, but because they promote an image of my community that is stereotypical and not entirely accurate.

Are you afraid of me? of course not. Im pretty sure youd stand toe to toe with me and argue whatever topic without fear of having a “bomb” thrown at you or an “anthrax” laden envelope shoved into your shirt pocket.

Are Rick or Bill afraid of me? Probably not, but that wouldnt be in keeping with the stereotype they push and thus, chances are, they would never stand toe to toe with me regardless.

Of course, I could be wrong. Maybe they are scared shitless of me and thus prefer attack me from behind their blog booboo blankets.

Oh, and BTW, on more than one occasion, I have woken to find dead chickens and coconuts on my front yard- Santeria rituals. I have been threatened, harassed and on several occasions followed.

My wife has received phone calls stating that they were going to kidnap her or her family. My parents have received similar phone calls.

So, to Rick, Alex and Bill, etal: gimme a fucking break with all this bullshit already.

Val: the only one saying “All the Cubans” is you. In all these discussions, you are the one who keeps trying to say that what you write represents the opinions of all Cubans or that a criticism of you or Babalu is an insult to the whole “community”. It isn’t. What is an insult is to presume every Cuban thinks and acts in lockstep and those who don’t are “traitors”. What is an insult is to pretend there have never been intolerant acts from street-corner insults all the way to bombs thrown and to whitewash those acts.

Yes, I’m friends with Henry and with many other people and family that doesn’t think like me. The difference between you and me, Val, is that I’m not afraid or reluctant to argue different points of view, online or in person. I don’t shout down, bully, threaten or ban anybody like you do Val, like you and Moneo did to me back when I commented in Babalu. Who is the hypocrite here? You love to end these arguments with some “go find me mission”. Well, go find me a place anywhere where I said ALL Cubans or all hardliners are bomb throwers and anthrax mailers or even think alike. If you can’t, then give yourself the fucking break you are always asking for.

For me it sucks because Val has become one of my closest friends and you Alex are also one of my closest friends. We used to argue like cats and dogs but at some point I just learned to listen to what you say in the hopes of learning how to strengthen my own arguments. What many people don’t realize is the help you have given me over the years particularly with BUCL.

Can’t we all just get along?

Seriously, we’ve lost sight of the real issue here. This all started when I decided to redirect SFDB’s links back to him. It was meant to put a burr under his saddle and it did. In typical Rick cocksucker fashion, he blew it up into a censorship issue to which I say bullshit. He and his readers can read Babalu all day and all night. Where in the first amendment does it protect your “right to have working links”?

Bill jumped in and used the lame old “you guys are just like fidel” argument and then went off the deep end. Since then, I think Bill and Babalu have achieved a cease fire, much to Rick the cocksucker’s chagrin.

What drives Rick mad is how much time he spends obsessing about us and how we don’t reciprocate.

Eventually Rick makes a total ass of himself, even with people that are sympathetic to him. Ask Alesh, Bob Norman, etc.

Let me ask the readers here a serious question. Do any of you think that we at Babalu (who took two years to figure out how to migrate from Movable Type to WordPress) have the technical wherewithal to penetrate the Blogger (Google) servers just to screw with Rick? Please. The guy is either delusional or more likely the type of guy who uses any situation to attack his perceived enemies regardless of how ridiculous these machinations are.

So Alex, I respect you though I disagree with you. Carlos, I respect you though I disagree with you. But Rick the cocksucker doesn’t merit an ounce of respect from me because he’s incapable of any himself.

Alex,

Bullshit, dude. Nowhere will you find, in any of my writings where I have stated that I “represent” the entire Cuban American community. I represent myself and those who support Babalu, readers and contributors alike. I also dont recall calling you or any Cuban-American that doesnt think like I do a “traitor.” You, specifically, a hypocrite? Absolutely.

I, too, am not afraid to argue any point with you or anyone else who sees things differently than I do. I do so on a daily basis and will continue to do so until the day that I stop feeling like it. The reason you were banned at Babalu is not because Moneo or I think your a traitor or because your opinion doesnt jibe with mine, but because I think youre a hypocritical asshole. And I certainly wouldnt open the front door of my home to someone I personally cant stand and let them in. And I most certainly wouldnt allow you in my home after youve been all around town bad mouthing me.

Henry might not have an issue – being as he’s your friend – with you aligning yourself with the likes of Rick, Bill etal… and jumping on the bash Val bandwagon, ad nauseum, ad infinitum, even when you know that your cohorts are dead wrong and are purposely being misleading and disingenuous, but I do. Ive had more than enough of you and your self righteous little clique.

Is that “dude” supposed to mean again that you don’t believe what you are writing? Because right in this thread you wrote:

“because they promote an image of my community that is stereotypical and not entirely accurate.”

referring to RP saying something like “the bomb throwers at Babalu”. He was talking about you and only you. As always, you take it to mean the “community”. Ooops, Valentin Prieto put his fat foot in his big mouth again. Didn’t even have to look far.

You banned me from Babalu because you couldn’t stand somebody challenging you on your turf. Politely and with arguments, not with name calling and ridiculing. The threads are right there on your archives and anybody can see them. As far as being tired of me, the feeling is mutual, you arrogant fat asswipe. I didn’t talk about you in this thread, you talked about me. Not going to let it pass.

Alex,

This is what Random Pixels wrote:

Years ago the same kinds of people who write at Babalu, tried to kill Castro by hitting him where he lives, right here in Miami.

How?

They blew up lots of stuff, including a WQBA talk show host who disagreed with the hard line extremists.

Now the hardliners have a blog and they’re out to silence anyone who disagrees with them.

Now that’s a personal shot at Val, which I suppose is fair game. We don’t think everyone is going to love us but it was also an attempt to generalize about a larger group of ‘Hard-liners” as if we are all going around with c-4 in the trunks of our cars. It’s the kind of anti-exile bullshit that the Herald has been printing for years.

As for who gets to comment at Babalu and who doesn’t, I’m never going to bust anyone’s balls for comment moderation. I do bust rick the cocksucker’s balls because he’s so deeply offended that I delete his comments that I just throw it right back in his face. I really could care less. How he handles the comments at his blog are his business just like how we handle ours are our business.

I have created our own criteria for moderating and banning commenters. I’ve posted that criteria on the blog. I also will ban or allow our writers to ban commenters that get overly personal in their attacks.

I think I was banned from Babalu before you were a writer. Not sure. But in any case, I don’t argue you can have a comment policy. Of course you can and it’s your choice. My opinion is that if I have a blog, when I had a blog, is to elicit comments. Some I argued, some I just let pass. I think you guys should allow other opinions. I think it would make for a more interesting blog like Penultimos Dias for example. But that’s just my opinion.

I think RP’s comment specifically singles the blog, but even if he was generalizing to include all hardliners who agree with Babalu, it would still not be the “community” as Val’s larger generalization implies. (For the record, I think his comment, hyperbolic as it was, was also ridiculous and beyond the line. But it was still hyperbole and I don’t think it deserved to be responded with a lawsuit).

What I don’t get about Val getting so worked up is that he is putting a blog out there, a popular one -I have said before it is a seminal blog about Cuba- and as such it is open to criticism among other things. It comes with the territory. Some criticism is going to sting. He is free to ignore it or respond, but he gets worked up solely by the existence of criticism. I’m not in the business of Val-bashing anymore than I’m in the Limbaugh-bashing business or you guys are in the Herald or NYT bashing business and you mention those two a lot more often than I (I’m talking for myself now) ever mentioned Babalu either at SotP or my own blog. Neither I’m going to refrain from saying what I find right and what I find wrong.

I do agree with Alex that the fact that Babalu doesn’t allow comments from those who don’t agree with them makes the blog less credible.

Because all you end up doing is preaching to the choir.

I’ve had several cases on this blog where people initially don’t agree with my stance on photographers’ rights but I’ve allowed them to comment and I’ve engaged in discussion with them and a few months later, they come around and see my point.

Some of those people are probably reading this thread right now, if not commenting on it.

If I would have banned them from the beginning, they would have never seen my point.

We average 3,000 visitors and 5,000 page views a day. Not everyone that reads our blog is interested in having an honest debate on a topic. Some are interested in copying and pasting propaganda talking points from the regime. Some are interested in getting under our skin. Some are interested disrupting.

Is a newspaper less credible because it doesn’t run every letter to its editors? What we write on the blog must stand on its own.

The most widely read blogs in America require registration and many only have certain windows each year in which they allow registration.

Look, whatever, you think we lose credibility for our comment moderation policies and I think Rick loses it for being an anonymous cocksucker. To each his own. But Rick can’t let it rest like that. He has to be the self appointed pope of South Florida bloggers. If you don’t do it his way then you are doing it wrong. Well the world doesn’t work that way.

Henry,

I am not even talking about Rick. That feud is between you and him.

I’m just stating my opinion on comment moderation.

You have every right to set the policy on your blog, so I’m not even calling it censorship or First Amendment violation because if it meant that much to me, I would dedicate this blog to criticizing your blog, so nobody is stifling my free speech.

The truth is, the Cuba issue is not one-sided. You can be against the embargo and against Castro.

You can be against banning Vamos a Cuba in Miami and be against Fidel Castro.

You can support Joe Garcia and not be a communist.

These are just some of the issues I would debate on your blog but I know I would probably get banned, so I don’t bother.

Just because someone has a different opinion doesn’t mean they are disrupting.

And a blog is different from a newspaper in that it is interactive with its readers.

One of the reasons newspapers are failing is because they take on that attitude of we tell you what is news and you listen to us.

But a successful blog allows different opinions and encourages debate.

Obviously, your blog is successful without following these standards but I have no doubt it would be even more successful if you did allow this to happen.

But that’s the difference between a liberal and a conservative.

A liberal is willing to change things to make it better. A conservative does his best not to change things.

The truth is, the Cuba issue is not one-sided. You can be against the embargo and against Castro.

You can be against banning Vamos a Cuba in Miami and be against Fidel Castro.

You can support Joe Garcia and not be a communist.

Agreed on all counts. But we have contrary opinions all of these issues.

We believe that lifting the embargo strengthens the regime.

We believe that Vamos a Cuba wasn’t banned. It was removed from the shelves of public school libraries after a parent followed the protocol for complaining about such matters and the school board ruled in favor of the parent. Nobody censored the author and the book is still widely available as noted in the appeals court ruling.

A lot of people supported Joe Garcia. The vast majority of them were not communist. But it is a FACT that the known communists in our community like Francisco Aruca, Edmundo Garcia, and Max Lesnik were all rooting for Joe.

These are just some of the issues I would debate on your blog but I know I would probably get banned, so I don’t bother.

Well that’s your assumption. When I posted about your case you wrote: “I never thought I would register to comment on Babalu, but I just had to say that you nailed it.”

You can stick with your assumption or you can test it.

Just because someone has a different opinion doesn’t mean they are disrupting.

Carlos, I never said that. I said there are some whose objective is to disrupt. I don’t think you can appreciate what I’m talking about. I saw a few of the hateful bullshit comments you got when your trial got media attention. Imagine that day in and day out. Nowhere in the blogger’s bylaws does it say that you have be a masochist and accept a beating in your own domain.

And a blog is different from a newspaper in that it is interactive with its readers.

Absolutely, it’s an element of a blog but there are successful blogs that accept no comments. Some accept them all. Most have a policy either expressly written or implemented ad hoc.

One of the reasons newspapers are failing is because they take on that attitude of we tell you what is news and you listen to us.

I think newspapers are failing because people are don’t want to pay for a crummy paper that’s unwieldy, stains their hands and has yesterday’s news on it when they can get fresh news delivered to their desktop or handheld device for FREE.

Also newspapers are failing because of their lack of ideologic diversity. Now our critics accuse us of ideological orthodoxy but the way see it is that our existence IS EQUAL TIME. We don’t need to promote the views of the embargo lifters, propaganda defenders and Joe supporters because all of the other media is already touting their points of view.

Your definitions of liberal and conservative are incorrect and outdated. I don’t want to get into a debate about it now but that brings me to my final point. There is not enough time in the day to refute every single commenter that leaves comments that portray things in a light that we feel is not just. And maybe it’s my personal flaw but I don’t want to leave any statement on our blog that is misleading or incorrect unchallenged.

Imagine if you had 30 comments a day telling you that you were in the wrong about your case and mischaracterizing what you said and what you meant and what really happened that night. Yeah you would pick apart their arguments for a day or two, maybe even a week. But after a while you will come to the conclusion that the person is just busting your balls because of personal animus or because he firmly believes that Cops should be able to tell you to “move along” and have their orders complied with no matter what. Either way, you’d decide that you can’t abide by the fucker taking over YOUR BLOG to spread views that are anathema to you.

And since I can’t spend ANY MORE time on the blog than I do already, I simply cut people off when they get repetitive, spewing the same old shit.

But Rick the cocksucker doesn’t have a problem with comment moderation. He has a problem with us and therefore he picks any little nit he can. Nitpickers like cocksucker Rick are banned from commenting on Babalu. Too bad.

Alex you posted at Babalu as late as last summer. Specifically on the post about Carlos Miller. I don’t know exactly when “Gansibele” got banned or why but it was obviously sometime after that. But there was a long period of time in which you were “self-exiled” from commenting at Babalu. I remember you telling me so yourself at the office when we worked together.

And here’s a tip. The vast majority of Cubans are still hard-liners. Ask the Diaz-Balarts who carried more Cuban-American votes than McCain. And Val’s point, the way I interpret it, is that regardless of what caveats you want to attribute to Bill’s diatribe the casual observer comes away with the idea that ALL Cuban-Americans are bomb-throwers.

No, I got kicked out a long time ago, even before SotP. There’s even a post dedicated to me. I simply registered again to comment about Carlos -and got banned immediately by Moneo, just on account of the bad blood I guess, with a suspicious series of emails appearing in my inbox and a very angry chain of emails afterwards.

Whatever. There have been things posted in Babalu I wish I could comment or debate. Sometimes I posted about them in SotP just to start that debate. My experience with Babalu is that it’s just not a place for debate. Either Val, Poodle, Ziva or the usual commenters would stop the debate with some insult or condescending put down. (Although to Val’s credit, he did ask somebody once to tone it down. And to your credit, you have always been fair and stuck out for me more than once). I’m not the only one. I’ve seen many people comment with a different opinion, even respectfully, then being shouted down and banned. I’m not talking about trolls, those are on every blog and you just ignore them.

I honestly wish Babalu was a more inclusive place. Like I said, Penultimos Dias is, and it’s the better blog for it. I’ve said many times there are many good things about Babalu, even when I was at SotP. Believe it or not, a couple times I even changed Rick’s mind about something you guys had written. It’s too bad things have degenerated to the current state and there’s fault on all sides. I used to think it was nothing that a couple beers couldn’t fix, but looks like it’s not.

Well I guess its all our fault then. Nobody ever comes to babalu and throws the first punch. Good thing there is penultimos dias.

And as for burying the hatchet with cocksucker rick, somewhere along the line he decided to make it personal. I don’t know why but I have my suspicions. Either way when we meet he’ll remember the occasion.