• Home
  • News
  • No MORE ‘Ellen Barshevsky’ and OTHER Comment Policy Notes

Editor's Note

No MORE ‘Ellen Barshevsky’ and OTHER Comment Policy Notes

Posted Nov 17, 2008 12:36 PM CST
By Molly McDonough

Dear Readers,

After reviewing our last week of comments, we have decided to become more assertive with our comment moderating.

We will more readily exercise our authority to remove inappropriate comments, those that are particularly off-topic and those that generally flout the rules of civil discourse and persistently disrupt the comment stream.

Specifically, we have tolerated for some time, often to the delight, but increasingly more often to the dismay of our regular readers, what we can only assume is the fictional “Ellen Barshevsky” and her various personas.

As of this morning, “Ellen” has formally been banned from commenting on the site. As is our practice, we generally attempt to warn commenters if they are crossing a line or abusing comments before we institute a ban. But because “Ellen” doesn’t attach a real e-mail address to “her” comments, this has been impossible.

Our comments and traffic to ABAJournal.com continue to increase. We get thousands of comments per month, and welcome robust discussion.

As a reminder, here is our comment policy. It remains fairly open, but has boundaries. We expect there to be debate and disagreement, but without personal attacks and name-calling.

ABA Journal Comment Policy:

Comments are a place for our readers to debate—sometimes quite vigorously—the issues we cover. Please respect our readers’ diversity of opinion and look for ways to further the discussion.

But there are also limits to that debate. Don’t use profanity or resort to name-calling, threats or personal attacks. Don’t spam the site with advertising. And don’t masquerade as someone you’re not. We reserve the right to delete comments that are inappropriate and block users who consistently violate our policies.

By posting a comment on this site, you are agreeing to allow the ABA Journal to reprint your comment in all forms of media at any time.

If you believe a commenter has violated our rules or if you spot an error in a post, please let us know.

Also, because of the increase in comments, we are especially appreciative of those who spot abuses before we do. Please don’t hesitate to report abuses using this form.

Happy reading,

Molly McDonough

Assistant Managing Editor/Online

ABA Journal

Comments

1.

B. McLeod
Nov 17, 2008 12:55 PM CST

A regrettable pass of events, but apparently, the associated traffic was an excessive burden on the moderator.  I will not reiterate my commentary on the phrase “now defunct.”

I have put aside two shiny pennies, for the event that they may be needed at the wake.

Flag this comment

2.

Joe Whisler
Nov 17, 2008 3:52 PM CST

Ellen is about the only reason I open the email.  What is it like to have no sense of humor?

Flag this comment

3.

gene sands
Nov 17, 2008 4:01 PM CST

ms. mcdonough, count me in with mr. whisler vis-a-vis your seeming lack of a sense of humor, but count me out as a reader of your future weekly postings.

Flag this comment

4.

Joe G.
Nov 17, 2008 4:05 PM CST

Echoing what Joe Whisler said.  It’s the Ellen comments that got my eyes on your advertisements several times a day.  I can get legal news from a lot of places but only this place provided that kind of chuckle. 

By the way, I think you have completely misread the “dismay of [your] regular readers.”  The reactions provoked by Ellen’s witless commentary were all part of the fun and offered with a light heart. 

In parting, thanks for snuffing a little sparkler of fun.  Off to other websites.

Flag this comment

5.

QJC
Nov 17, 2008 5:08 PM CST

Thank you so much for doing away with the endless stream of mind-numbing Barshevsky comments!  To whoever was making those Ellen posts in the first place: it was funny for the first few months, but it quickly became a tired schtick.  Grow up.

Flag this comment

6.

JD
Nov 17, 2008 9:40 PM CST

I agree with QJC, for a little while Ellen’s comments were hilarious. But that joke got old a while ago. Thank you moderators for taking this step!

Flag this comment

7.

Is this for real?
Nov 17, 2008 10:16 PM CST

http://ellenbarshevsky.blogspot.com/

Flag this comment

8.

BB
Nov 18, 2008 8:45 AM CST

Agree with the first four commenters.  From now on I will just delete your emails without ever opening them.  I think you are underestimating how many people read your articles for the humorous comments.

Flag this comment

9.

G.O.
Nov 18, 2008 8:54 AM CST

Things are going to be a lot more boring around here.

Flag this comment

10.

TSH
Nov 21, 2008 8:29 AM CST

I too read the comments ALMOST ALWAYS for the humor of Ms. Barshevsky’s views. You will find me perusing them much LESS now.

Flag this comment

11.

Lost reader
Nov 21, 2008 8:46 AM CST

I only open this for Ellen. 

Please revise your policy; a little satire goes a long way in these dismal times

Flag this comment

12.

jdsquared
Nov 21, 2008 9:28 AM CST

Ellen, I will miss you: your comments were often the only reason to open these posts.

Flag this comment

13.

professional
Nov 21, 2008 9:32 AM CST

Thank you. I found the Ellen posts demeaning to women and insulting to the profession. Despite its online format and often silly articles, I expect that the online journal of the largest bar association in the world would attract worthwhile contributions, rather than high school antics and often overtly sexist and racist language and ideas. While I’m a huge fan of the First Amendment, I’d like to request that other commentators please respect yourselves and other practitioners when posting comments or move to trashier websites where your brand of humor is more welcome.

Flag this comment

14.

Hadley V. Baxendale
Nov 21, 2008 9:52 AM CST

I agree with professional.  I enjoy the comments here and find them a survey of opinion and attitude.  Ellen’s diversion was irritating but fun for a while, but went overboard when the fake replies overwhelmed the traffic, rather than being occasional comic relief (e.g. Edwin Barmaidsky—I wonder who that was). But her moronic character, initially a satire of hysterical female whiners, embarassed all lawyers in general and particularly female lawyers who make a serious and balanced attempt to address gender issues in our business, an important and complicated topic.

Flag this comment

15.

JWS
Nov 21, 2008 10:04 AM CST

Thank you.  The “Ellen Barshevsky” posts were never funny, but always annoying.

Flag this comment

16.

Who cares?
Nov 21, 2008 10:18 AM CST

Ellen’s post never bothered me.  And I never read the Journal to read her comments.  In fact her comments were never that funny, but people’s reactions were hilarious.  With that being said, I am shocked at the readers who only read the Journal for her comments.  They weren’t funny enough to be the sole reason for reading the journal.

Flag this comment

17.

Deyseeme T. Rollin
Nov 21, 2008 10:22 AM CST

@professional:  Which is more insulting to our profession:  Ellen’s parody, or the snide and arrogant replies of people who believed they were morally and intellectually superior to Ellen since they believe in cause X or work at firm Y?

Ellen held a looking glass up to the ABA Journal’s readership.  If you don’t like what you saw, that’s not Ellen’s fault.

Flag this comment

18.

sanja
Nov 21, 2008 10:22 AM CST

What a pity. Now I will have to resort to reading h/is/er actual blogg—or blawg as s/he calls it.  Ellen is a male who has created the supportive boyfriend from heaven, the one women know does not exist - unless you have given birth to him, and that only for the few pre-school years…

The boyfriend who thinks his mate is a goddess.  I will PAY for a male of the sort.  It’s a statement I will never have to own up to, given my deep knowledge that the species has never been created.—it is not extinct. It never actually existed.  But Ellen brought that figment to life through h/er/is postings… Good buy Allen, ideal boyfriend.

Flag this comment

19.

Level 70 Prot. Warrior
Nov 21, 2008 10:37 AM CST

Further proof that too many attorneys take themselves too damn seriously.

Flag this comment

20.

Andy the Lawyer
Nov 21, 2008 10:39 AM CST

I look forward to the appearance of commentary by Ellen’s sister, Helen Barashevsky.

Flag this comment

21.

Anon
Nov 21, 2008 11:24 AM CST

Before Ellen, I only read the articles with interesting titles. Apres Ellen, I read every single article and comments to find her posts. I figured she was an ABA ringer. Guess not.

Flag this comment

22.

B. McLeod
Nov 21, 2008 11:38 AM CST

@ 18, See Robert Burns lyrics to “Bonnie Wee Thing.”  Sadly, you missed him by a few hundred years.

Flag this comment

23.

what a joke of a policy
Nov 21, 2008 11:43 AM CST

Are you serious? What a load this policy is. Ellen got the boot because she used a fake persona and didn’t use a real email address. Who actually puts their real name or email address? I’m looking through the posts, and I cannot see a good candidate for honesty in publishing accurate personal info.

As for wanting to create or maintain intellectual discourse….come on, be real. Those bothered by the Ellen persona, could find a ton of other posts not even acknowledging her and responding purely to the article. What a group of obtuse and intellectual whimps.  Dd you all even stop to think that maybe the effect of Ellen’s post was to create the real discussion. Her posts often struck a nerve and highlighted the divide there is in the lawyer community (those with superior attitudes and those who could give a flyin’ leap). And each week, everyone took the bait. Every chance people got, they tried to stick it to her.  No joke “pleeding” is spelled “pleading”. ah duh….why would people want to take their time away from the intellectual discourse of the article, but to serve their own self-interest and self-promoting interest. That was pathetic to sensor her. 

Well I am going to tell my BOYFRIEND to print out this site’s POLICY and burn it in F-O-GEE. Also, I will ask my managing PARTNER to ask the PREZ-O-DENT to take the CONSTITUSHUN and CLIP out the FURST AMENDMENT.

Flag this comment

24.

CJ
Nov 21, 2008 12:02 PM CST

Thank you.

Flag this comment

25.

B. McLeod
Nov 21, 2008 12:13 PM CST

@ 23, must be blind.

Flag this comment

26.

what a joke of a policy
Nov 21, 2008 1:11 PM CST

25….huh?

Flag this comment

27.

Deyseeme T. Rollin
Nov 21, 2008 2:36 PM CST

@23, 26—
Her posts often struck a nerve and highlighted the divide there is in the lawyer community (those with superior attitudes and those who could give a flyin’ leap). And each week, everyone took the bait. Every chance people got, they tried to stick it to her.

Bingo.  Ellen highlighted an unfortunately large portion of the legal population that has an insatiable need to engage in intellectual oneupsmanship.  She also made me look inward, since, pre-Ellen, I often felt morally superior to those who act intellectually superior.

Ellen Barshevsky was responsible for a paradigm shift in the way I think and deal with my colleagues.  Choke on that, ABA.

Flag this comment

28.

Paul
Nov 21, 2008 7:54 PM CST

I must admit that I found other comments more offensive than those of “Ellen.”  That said, Molly is a charming and serious journalist and this is less censorship than scrubbing out grafitti.

Flag this comment

29.

B. McLeod
Nov 21, 2008 8:27 PM CST

Posters, pro and con, should be aware that the ABA staff and moderators did not really have anything against the “Ellen” posts as such.  Rather, they were driven to act to alleviate the collateral impacts generated by readers’ reactions to the posts.

I know this because, during the consideration of the “ban,” I was contacted by staff concerning the problem (and what had been my own participation in it).  Apparently, I was contacted because I was the only poster identifiable as a real person who had furnished a functional e-mail address.

I appreciate that I was afforded, by Ms. McDonough, an opportunity to be heard in defense of allowing the “Ellen” postings to continue.  It was (and remains) my opinion that “Ellen,” though irritating to some readers, was (as another poster has also stated) a relatively harmless source of good fun in a darkening and troubled time.  Further (as yet another poster has suggested), it seemed to me that lawyers so truly irritated by these posts that they would feel the need to file “abuse” complaints with the ABA staff probably need to take some time off (perhaps even get some counseling).

Left on the spot by all the “Ellen” fans who failed to supply a valid E-mail address, I made the best defense that I could, raising most of the supporting points “Ellen” advocates have made here (although in a perhaps more polite and adult fashion).  I believe I made the argument as capably and as well as I have ever made any argument before any court.  However, there were aspects of the ABA staff concerns that I could not allay.

At the center of the problem, the uncivil and at times juvenile and derogatory nature of posts made in response to the “Ellen” posts (and to some of my own posts) were tying up too much of the staff’s time.  The impact was worsened by other readers complaining and submitting “abuse” reports to the staff directly, such that they were exhausting unwarranted resources policing these posts, rather than their actual job of running this online magazine.

Because of this burden on the ABA staff, I could not carry the day, and in the long and short of it, did not prevail.  To “Ellen” fans, I apologize, but I also reiterate that the ultimate outcome seems to provide a solution for both proponents and detractors of “Ellen.”  Fans can still find the posts at “THE BLAWG,” and other readers need not trouble themselves further.

Flag this comment

30.

Anon
Nov 22, 2008 2:53 PM CST

It’s unfortunate that “Ellen” has chosen Blogspot as the place for her own blog. If “she” had registered “her” own domain name there’d be a chance of glancing at the owner’s identity on whois. Perhaps just as well we can’t.

Flag this comment

31.

Justin
Nov 23, 2008 2:19 AM CST

Like many others, I only read the articles on this blog for Ellen’s comments. I obtain my legal news from other online sources, but Ellen made this blog special. I don’t understand the complaints about her comments and the decision to ban her from the site. If a few individuals didn’t like them, why couldn’t they refrain from reading them? It seems these people are terribly fragile. Did Ellen somehow overpower them into scrolling down into the comments to find her entries? Seems a bit much, don’t you think? 

I’m sorry to say it, ABA Journal, but you’ve lost another reader and viewer of your ads with this decision.  Time previously spent on this blog will now be spent on Ellen’s new “blawg.” Her fans will be happy to know she’s busy tackling the tough issues at hand there, but she isn’t willing to discuss anti-trust or “United Nations law.” Just so you know.

Flag this comment

32.

gene sands
Nov 25, 2008 9:01 AM CST

b. mcleod’s comments @22 remind me of another of bobby burn’s immortal musings which certainly seems to fit the ellen controversy and those who find her so objectionable: 
“o wad some power the giftie gie us
to see oursels as ithers see us!”

Flag this comment

33.

L.N. Barshevsky
Nov 25, 2008 11:58 AM CST

OK, now I can go back to not reading this site.  Please ask yourselves something:  What kind of self-important goofball thinks he or she has something important to add to almost any item posted on this site?  Yes, I’m talking about you, McLeod, and you, Hadley v. Baxendale, and all the rest of you frequent posters.  Frankly, anyone who is capable of a worthwhile contribution to the “debate” is too busy to participate and too sensible to care about an exchange with anonymous participants regarding the latest gossip posted to the ABA Journal’s website.  Sheesh!  “Ellen” knew this, and her posts, in addition to being funny, were a stinging indictment of anyone posting here who thought their own opinions were worthy of serious consideration.

Flag this comment

34.

B. McLeod
Nov 25, 2008 3:23 PM CST

Such as the poster immediately above?

Really, though, I am profoundly appreciative of this important bit of insight (although I suppose my opinion on that, too, is not “worthwhile”).  I see now that I should probably reorder my entire existence to become busier, more “sensible” and less anonymous.  God bless England.

Flag this comment

Add a Comment

We welcome your comments, but please adhere to our comment policy.

Commenting has expired on this post.