Why Deleting Feedback is Never a Good Idea

As a parent, I frequently reference my own childhood and am constantly amazed at how different things are today. My four-year old is already playing in his fourth organized sport. By contrast, I never had the chance to play organized sports but we had a vacant lot across the street from my house that I played baseball in at every opportunity. Also, there were literally thousands of games of basketball at the hoop on the nearby telephone pole and just as many football games in the street.

Of course, there were no officials so we had to learn to police ourselves. Oddly, it never seemed to be much of a problem in football. It definitely came up in basketball. But the biggest arguments always seemed to involve baseball. Perhaps that's because that's the sport about which we were most passionate.

We used to play with this kid who was never out on a close call at first base, at least in his mind. Usually these out/safe arguments involved a lot of yelling until finally one side gave up or gave in. But this kid never gave in, even when his own teammates would tell him he was out.

Eventually, we worked out a compromise. He was allowed to remain on first and run the bases, but the out was recorded and his run wouldn't count. He would mutter something underneath his breath, but basically he accepted this. He wanted to be right, but I think he just wanted to run the bases, too.

The ultimate solution did not matter as much as the fact that kids were left to their own devices to come up with an answer to whatever problems arose. In hindsight, I believe these experiences helped me to argue and fight fair. I also believe they helped me be more tolerant of opposing points of view. Finally, it drove home the point that I wasn't always right.

These experiences came back to me last night. While the Red Sox were running away with Game One of the World Series, I was visiting AC, trying to catch up on reading some people's stuff while also checking out some new writers.

One of the things I like about AC is the comments section. For pieces I've written, I want to hear positive and negative feedback. It is always gratifying when someone leaves praise but I don't mind criticism, either. I want to learn from constructive criticism or argue the merits of my case if someone disagrees with my opinion.

When I read other people's stuff, I like to leave feedback to let them know I was there. But if a bunch of people have already replied, "Good piece!" I always feel that there's no point in saying that again, especially if it's someone's work I've already read before.

So, I'll comment on some minor part of the article, make a joke or tease the writer in some way. If I come back, it's because I've found something worthwhile in your work and I'll keep coming back until you give me a reason not to do so.

Last night, a writer that I occasionally visit gave me a reason not to come back. In his article he used a phrase that seemed misplaced, sophomoric and perhaps even made up. I left a comment for him, repeating that phrase and putting a question mark at the end of it. Perhaps it was a tad snarky, but I did not feel like it was in any way over the top or controversial, especially given that it was not the first time my path crossed with this writer.

He sent me a note back asking about it and I checked back again to the original article and he deleted my post.

AC has set things up so a writer has the ability to delete any post he wishes. Generally, this is a good feature, as it allows a writer to delete spam, ad hominen attacks and offensive material. But when a writer goes beyond those three cases and deletes any post that doesn't praise him, well in my book that's a pretty serious offense.

My name and face is attached to any comments I make; I am not hiding behind any pseudonyms or funny pictures. Deleting a comment I made marginalizes the time I spent reading your article and if that is the way a writer chooses to conduct himself, I will choose not to read said writer in the future.

This is a public forum and you have to have great confidence and a thick skin to survive here. Because if people are reading your stuff, eventually they are going to disagree and let you know about it. It comes with the territory and one needs to accept it with as much grace as possible. My opinion is that deleting posts shows that you have neither grace nor confidence.

I believe this writer had two better options than the one he chose. He could have responded directly to my post, like he did in his private email to me. Or he could have chosen to ignore it and let it stand or fall on its own merits with no editorial comment.

Instead, he took the chickenshit way out. I was going to write un-American, given First Amendment, free speech and all of that, but then I remembered that the kindler, gentler nation that we live in today does not tolerate dissent and there is no longer much room for individuals to disagree without the one in power unilaterally imposing his will on the rest.

I blame it on the disappearance of unstructured activities in our kids' lives.