Some of my earliest, happiest memories of computing involve the fine folks over at ZDNet. From the mega-cool PCMag utilities to the excellent informative journalism that is found in their print publications, my overall impression of this publishing house is a very favorable one.
Alas, it's not a perfect impression, though. Witness one Ed Bott.
Bott is a microsoft apologist who produces online columns for ZDNet. He was once editor of the U.S. edition of PC Computing and managing editor of PC World. So he is definitely one sharp cookie.
But his defense of all things Microsoft is puzzling, to say the least. Note this quote:
For years, Microsoft has occasionally updated its Windows Update client software automatically on systems that are configured to check for updates. This has been true even when Windows Update is set to simply check for (and optionally, download) updates but not to install them.(snip, snip)
Unlike previous Windows Update updates, this one isn’t sneaking in under anyone’s radar. In addition to the Microsoft Update blog, this update will be documented in an updated version of Knowledge Base article 946928 (“Information for network administrators about how to obtain the latest Windows Update Agent”) and will be available for download there.
Gee, that's nice of Microsoft, isn't it? To actually TELL you before it forces an update on your system (unless you completely opt out of Windows update alltogether)? Of course, Bott's take on this is that it is necessary, polite, and overall, just peachy-keen.
I guess we're all allowed our favorite operating systems. I guess that if threats of operating system shutdowns, taking away of functionality, and possible legal prosecution if you can't prove your software is legitimate is your thing, then Microsoft is for you.
But that's not what makes me bad-crazy about Bott's style. No, it's the difficulty in responding with an opposing viewpoint at his blog that really gets my dander up.
Note my experience in attempting to comment at this blog entry.
I was attempting to come to the defense of reader martin23, who expressed his disappointment in the article, pointing out that it seemed to contradict a stand that Bott had earlier taken.
Of course, these are all opinions here, no clear right or wrong. Bott responded with a retort, then was joined by his minion of fellow Windows fans who frequent his blog.
I basically told martin23 that he was wasting his time here with his opposing views, neither Bott nor Windows could do any wrong at this particular forum.
My comment was promptly deleted.
I posted again, wondering why.
That comment was yanked within minutes as well.
Bott then posted the following:
About Talkback moderation This is reposted from an earlier thread:If you've posted a comment here recently and found that it was deleted, this message is for you.
As I've said repeatedly, I am not a moderator here. I do not have access to the tools that manage TalkBack message boards. I cannot delete a single TalkBack comment, and I can only edit my own posts. If your comment is deleted, that action was taken by a ZDNet moderator.
Posts get deleted for a variety of reasons. The most common are that they engage in name-calling and abusive behavior. The second most common is that they are off-topic.
Readers have made it very clear they are tired of off-topic posts and of flame wars, and the moderators are responding to that request. If you want the world to read a news article about something you find interesting, start your own blog and post it there. Or find a blog post or news article that is relevant to that topic and post it in the discussion under that post. But don't post that off-topic link or comment here: The moderators are taking a firmer line on these posts, in the interests of improving the TalkBack section for everyone.
Comments that are directly relevant to the content of a post are always welcome. Contrary points of view are welcome and even encouraged, as long as they are relevant to the topic of the current post and don't violate other terms of service.
The full terms of use are here:
http://www.cnetnetworks.com/editorial/terms.html
Meanwhile, if you have a problem with this policy, please don't complain about it here. That's not the point of this Talkback thread, and your comment will probably be deleted as off-topic. To contact the editors of ZDNet about this or any other policy, use this form:
http://zdnet.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/zdnet.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php
So I responded a final time, saying that my comment WAS on-topic, that I was attempting to support an opposing view that was getting badly spanked by Bott and his fans.
That one lasted about a minute before being yanked.
Fair enough. I made this post:
Completely off-topic. Absolutely, positively against the stated comments policy. In case it DOES get deleted, here it is:
Commenting weirdness
Is anyone else having any problems posting opposing viewpoint comments at Ed Bott's blog without having them swiftly deleted?
Posted by: bbbaldie_z Posted on: 07/03/08 (Edited: 07/03/2008 @ 09:21)
Twenty-four hours later, still there.
So apparently, you can get away with posting comments that are all over the map, discussion-wise, at ZDNet as long as you pick your spots.
Try an opposing comment at Bott's blog, or defend someone else with one, and see how long THAT takes.
Comments (1)
I think he's shooting himself in the foot with that kind of policy -- seeing only 14 comments makes it look like nobody visits.
Posted by Roland | July 14, 2008 2:52 PM
Posted on July 14, 2008 14:52