Wednesday, February 25, 2009

The field needs anonymous comments

Greg has questionned anonymous commenting on my blog. I say that the field of stuttering desperatedly needs anonymous commenting. Some angry minds are abusing this, but the benefits overweight the downside. If my blog were a physics or math blog, there would be no need to do so because debate and putting forward good counter arguments adds prestige and rarely damages your career.

I have often encountered reluctancy from clinicians and scientists to speak up and criticize other people's work. The comment section provides opportunity to do so in the safe way.

I agree that some people are attacking too harshly, and attacks on the person itself it not really acceptable. Maybe I should delete more comments like this that add no arguments per se. Of course, this involves more time spent on reviewing comments.... On the other hand, it is good to know what some people think even if it is bad, so we get a better representation of reality.

Some of you might have noticed that I had the comments moderated for some time. Someone wrote nasty comments about me, which were completely unacceptable and did not add to the topics in any way. But after sending 10s of comments over several weeks, he finally stopped wasting his time and I de-moderated the comments section again.

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

Ok Tom, I'll click the anonymous button too :)

When in Rome...

In all honesty, I hear what you're saying--I also just wonder if people need to be held accountable for their beliefs (for better or worse).

That--and you do seem to have a few angry regulars who continue to miss the forest from the trees second to their own emotions. I see such things as impediments toward progress...

Anonymous.
http://anonymous.me

James said...

Tom, I would be interested in:

Someone wrote nasty comments about me, which were completely unacceptable and did not add to the topics in any way.

What were some of the nasty comments...let the readers of your blog be the judge.

Are you still getting donations from readers? Don't disappoint us!

There is no money for stuttering research and research money for the SpeechEasy is good.

The issue is finding out why the SpeechEasy help some PWS but not others and how do you make it last (w/ or w/o therapy). That is research.

Also: what happens when normal population wear the SpeechEasy. It is about comparisons.

If you are so good, you should seriously consider doing Stuttering research yourself. I will match any donation you get for your stuttering research/education

Anonymous said...

In every soap, there needs a few major players/essential roles.

There is Tom = PWS, PhD in Physics....appeared on stuttertalk.com. Self-conscious about his blog

There is Greg: PWS, stuttering professor and researcher. stuttering.me

George = who is much older and calmer

NSA members....

PWS who did not receive good therapy and angry.

Observers like me....

Tom Weidig said...

Tom, I would be interested in:

Someone wrote nasty comments about me, which were completely unacceptable and did not add to the topics in any way.

>>What were some of the nasty comments...let the readers of your blog be the judge.

Not worth talking about. Me-being an idiot, alluding to me being gay (which I am not) and making fun of my stuttering. He stopped by saying that he heard me stuttering so severely on StutterTalk that he felt sorry for me and will stop sending stupid comments! :-)

>> Are you still getting donations from readers? Don't disappoint us!

From time to time, but not a lot. Still waiting for my millionaire to finance the whole stuff.

>>> If you are so good, you should seriously consider doing Stuttering research yourself. I will match any donation you get for your stuttering research/education

So if some gives me 1000 dollar, you match it? Re stuttering research, I guess I could only do meta-research giving experiments take ressources i do not have.

Anonymous said...

Dear Tom:

You can be a volunteer guest researcher and work for FREE. In Larry Molt's lab.

Because: Meta-research has already been done....

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6T8H-44GD9W1-3&_user=741313&_coverDate=10%2F01%2F2001&_fmt=full&_orig=search&_cdi=5087&view=c&_acct=C000041138&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=741313&md5=c6f46f1b9fb54e6c471dcf75e5b1c23f&ref=full

Ingham & Bothe, 2002. R.J. Ingham and A.K. Bothe, Thomas and Howell (2001): Yet another “exercise in mega-silliness”?. Journal of Fluency Disorders 27 (2002), pp. 169–174.

Anonymous said...

Now, why would someone write nasty comments about you for no reason? (what is his/her motivation)

I can imagine a kid teasing you for no reason, but we are all adults here.

One of the researchers that you criticized (down in Aussie...)

Who read your blogs? (any SLP professors???)