Julia Galef is one of my very most favorite people in the world, and one of the smartest I’ve had the privilege to get to know since moving to New York. Her brother Jesse is no less. Both are accomplished bloggers on science,  rationality, and related issues in their own right — Julia’s interviewed Neil deGrasse Tyson like, twice, no big deal — so it’s a very exciting thing to see them join forces on their new site, Measure of Doubt.

Take a look now and be sure to check back as their work develops. Oh, and, Julia reminded me last night that I wrote something for her a very long time ago, which will apparently run on this site sometime in the future! So crossovers? There will be crossovers.

Sure was fun though.

Of course that leaves the question of what to do with the set of crazies. Screeching about birth certificates and other such nonsense is one thing, but wishing for public figures to die is another entirely, and no part of any civil discussion. I’ve never censored commenters (the farthest I’ve gone is disemvoweling a few persistent birthers), but this particular individual, and others like her, seem to push the limits of my commitment to free speech.

Although the First Amendment doesn’t apply to private actors, no-one should silence another lightly, even on the internet. You’ll notice that any blog that does censor comments for ideology alone quickly descends into an echo chamber, useless at best, and a breeding ground for disconnected extremists at the worst (RedState, Confluence, Conservapedia).

Still, with narrowly tailored rules, that worst-case scenario can be avoided. I’ll never spam or delete comments for their political content alone; never have, never will. But I will censor comments that fall outside the lines of First Amendment-protected speech, if any emerge (they have not), and I am open to censoring the comments of those who add nothing to the site, and instead make it a less pleasant place for other readers. I say “open” only, because I remain unsure of the best course to take. Your suggestions are welcome to break my mental deadlock.

On a more pleasant note, a big “thank you!!” to Mike C., for the e-mail I received, copied below: an excellent summation of the problem posed by some pundits. “You’re welcome” for the review, but much more, thank you for reading and taking the time to write.

My father gave me a copy of the book with a very heartfelt note saying how worried he was for me and his grandchildren with the direction the country is going.  He used similar terms as Mr. Beck to describe the current administration – elitist, intellectuals, etc.  It saddened me very much that a well educated and well traveled man in his late 70s could be drawn into this propaganda – but my father’s generation, I believe, is the foundation of Mr. Beck’s (and Limbaugh’s) audience.  They truly are the Greatest Generation, but also the most exploited – mainly for the undying desire to follow self-proclaimed “patriots”.

Your review [of Beck's book - Ed.] was insightful and mirrored my own feelings while reading the book – although I think I was far more horrified at the prospect of Americans buying into this viewpoint.   Now I just need to figure out how to gently tell my father what I think about the book – but most importantly to show the love and respect he deserves for writing the letter of concern for me and my children.

Thanks for providing common sense about something that lacks it completely.

Again, thank you for reading, Mike C., and thank you to all readers.

Good luck to all, and remember: it is a good day to die! Q’apla!

NEVER, I said! Upon hearing that the domain had become available, though, I went through a domain parking service and bought the chance to use the domain at the next available opportunity for $20. And here it is!

You can now update your browsers. No more are we a subpar “.net” domain (although that one still works too, it just redirects); we’re a full-on .com domain! From now on, feel free to visit us here.
Now back to my self-imposed bar study seclusion.