Comments please

Until yesterday I apparently had the feature allowing you to comment disengaged. I have righted things error and you may now feel free to post whatever comments you so desire. Of course, I'll try to keep track of them. I am always severely disappointed when I read through a series of comments that eventually lose all application to the original thing open to comment. For example:

After a real article entitled "Thousands rally for, against Iranian government", put online not even an hour ago, there have been roughly 70 comments made so far. The best examples of digressing from the topic at hand include definitions of the term "neo-con-nazi" and phrases such as "Same smack all of you leftist commi's always come up with." I kid you not, that was a direct quote. Funny story behind this picture. I did a Google Image search for "neo-con-nazi" and this is where I ended up. Funny, I don't think my sisters did projects like this in their Girl Scout groups.

So why is it that comments tend to deviate from the original subject matter in every online instance? Allow me to suggest a few possible reasons:

It's been said that everybody is a critic. I suppose the Internet has given ease of access to all these critics. Consider how easy it is to post a comment on something online versus writing a letter to the editor, for instance. A letter to the editor, even if it's in E-mail format, requires a whole separate program being used on the computer and frankly a lot of people are too lazy for that. Actual letters to the editor using actual paper (paper can still be found in many museums and was even featured on the Antiques Roadshow seven or eight times) take a tremendous amount of time in comparison to an online post. So the vast majority of people who have no problem writing about neo-con-nazis (and believe me, their numbers are vast) would feel that an actual letter to an editor would take far too much work.

Now take a look at the amount of people who write letters to the editor on real paper anyway! Their numbers are still quite strong! To my knowledge, almost every publication has to actually refuse certain letters to the editor because too many are submitted! Now, I understand those who truly feel like they would like to make a point that has not been previously addressed or look at something from a different angle. They want to make sure the public is informed and feel it is their civic duty to so do. The Founding Fathers would be proud of them.

But so many letters to the editor are simply soap boxes for adult tantrums. Better still are the letters that don't even complain! They say thanks to the publication for this article or that picture. That's like writing a letter to your local gas station, thanking them for having gas.

Dear Sinclair Station,

I wanted to thank you for the gas you have provided to my vehicle on countless occasions. While I do not love the smell of refined petroleum, I have always felt that your station gets enough wind gusts from the nearby street to waft the unpleasant odor away. Your placement in that regard is phenomenal.

I have also noticed that you never seem to run out of gas. I think that is neat!

Finally, I would like to mention that I appreciate your dinosaur logo. It always reminds me of where this natural resource comes from. Doing so helps me appreciate Mother Earth and dinosaurs a little more with each visit I make to your station. I'm so glad that the dinosaurs and many other organisms died millions of years ago just so I could drive to work each morning. That was very considerate of them.

Sincerely,
(Leftist Commi's name here)

Pictures:
Kids writing on missiles
Paper and pen
Black gold