JFK Facts welcomes comments. We seek to provide a forum for all sides in this important historical issue to air their views. But we do have some guidelines we endeavor to adhere to, especially in the realms of length and content. We feel the need to remind readers from time to time.
Length: comments exceeding 500 words will not be approved (even those very engrossing ones).
Decorum: it’s likely no surprise that comment sections have become the bane of many a website, even for the most innocuous of subjects. Many publishers have decided to forgo them altogether rather than try to police the invective that invariably arises. JFK Facts certainly has had issues with this phenomenon, especially given the subject matter.
We’ve said it before and we’ll say it again: we have little patience for rude, condescending or patronizing language, and reserve the right to refuse service to any commenter on that score. That said, moderating is a highly subjective exercise, so things may get by one day that won’t get by the next, etc. We are only human — not algorithms.
The idea is to keep the conversation going, and sometimes we err on the side of allowing that conversation even if it crosses other lines. Truth be told, comment approval comes largely from the gut: that is, we know it when we see it, whether it be tone, language, straying far off topic or simply beating a dead horse. Even then we probably err on allowing too much.
Both sides in this debate have demonstrated that civil discourse is possible. (Jean Davison is a shining example of someone who, even in the face of fierce disagreement, always rises above and just addresses the issues; she doesn’t let it get personal.) Both sides have also shown how petty and, frankly, juvenile the discourse can get.
If your comment isn’t approved immediately, please be patient. Also, for the handful of you who have the moderators’ email addresses, please refrain from contacting us if you don’t like how we’ve handled something. (You can always talk to us via the comment section.) As we’ve said, this is about continuing the conversation; and while we have our own strong ideas about the subject we make an effort not to take sides when it comes to comments. We see it partly as an exercise in crowd sourcing: we all get to watch while the readers hash it out. And ultimately we have hopefully learned something. But it’s not always a pretty process.
A final observation: we can guess why the majority of readers are here: because they were never comfortable with the official version of how and why the 35th president of the United States was killed. But, we’ve been curious about what motivates the defenders of the official story. A few of them are ever ready to pounce on and smother even the slightest spark of doubt or question of the official story. Are you here to set what you consider to be the record straight? Because of an animus towards people who question the government? What motivates you?