Tag Archive for Comments

JFK Facts 2.0: make comments editable

Asked how to improve JFK Facts, JSA responded: Read more

JFK Facts 2.0: ISO Comments editor

I will be publishing your suggestions about how to improve JFK Facts over the next few days. One suggestion, a sidebar guide to JFK Facts podcasts, will be implemented as soon as possible. Others will follow.

Read more

A note on the comments section

Tom Scully is doing a good job running the comments section, a demanding and sometimes thankless task. If you disagree

Read more

Introducing our new Comments Editor

Meet Tom S. the new JFK Facts Comments Editor. After several decades in manufacturing management, Tom has worked as an editor of consumer guides published by Reader’s Digest and as an internet forum developer and administrator. He has a deep knowledge of the JFK case based on his own reading and research.  Read more

‘Where the hell is the moderation???’

I hear the reader’s plaintive cry. After several years of heroic duty as JFK Facts Comment editor, Peter Voskamp is moving on to new responsibilities at the Web site. What does that mean?

Read more

Got a JFK question? Editor@jfkfacts has answers

Our email address has changed.

If you have a questions about the JFK story, we’ve got answers. Just email the editor.

If you want to share comments, compliments, article suggestions, or interesting links, we are always glad to heard from readers. LIke I said, just email the editor.

‘Onward through the fog’

A faithful reader writes about one name dominating the “What Readers Are Saying” box.

“I am aware of the site’s policy and did notice the discrepancy this morning. Frankly, I didn’t really mind, but I know you try to be consistent. Photon’s posts, while frequently irritating, at the same time can stimulate me to dig deeper into my own modest studies, and Photon is furiously trying to make a case. As Oat Willie used to say, “Onward! Through the fog!”

Read more

Keep those comments coming (just not all at once)

I just took down some of Photon’s comments policy and since I don’t have a working email address for him. I thought I would explain why. It has
nothing to do with his opinions. It was required by the site’s comment policy.

Read more

JFK Facts Top 5: Oswald’s wallet fascinates

The runaway winner of the best-read JFK Facts story for the second week in a row is Bill Simpich’s investigation of Oswald’s wallet.

The Top 5: Read more

Editor@jfkfacts.org: ‘Why do you publish comments from people who are wrong and obnoxious?’

A couple of people wrote this week, asking why we allow anti-conspiratorial writers to comment on the site.

Answer: Because of a certain philosophical premise we embrace: Read more

The bi-annual comment letter

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. Read more

New comment policy: sharper discussion, more contributors

As I noted on April 14, I have been dissatisfied with the comment sections of JFK Facts. After considering reader reaction, reflecting and consulting, I am implementing a new comments policy as of Wednesday, May 8. The goal is to have a better conversation on the site, one that more effectively advances the site’s mission of being the premier destination on the Web for quality information and reasoned debate about JFK’s assassination.

Read more

JFK Facts comment policy is under reconstruction

Reader John Kirsch says I should have asked for his permission before publishing his email about the comments of “common sense.” He is right. My apologies to him.

Kirsch’s note crystallized my dissastisfaction with the quality of the discussion on the site. Read more

‘Common sense’ and comments

John Kirsch writes:

“I want to complain about the person who posts under “common sense.” His/her comments are generally ill-informed and contemptuous in tone. I get the sense that he/she is simply trying to be provocative. I don’t think he/she adds anything to the discussion. i don’t know if i have the ability to make this request but i will go ahead and ask if he/she can be banned or at least cautioned to be respectful.”

Read more