[pogo101]

This is NOT to John but to whomever -- presumably someone more on the Schwarzenegger side of things -- is adding the ridiculous "gag" Keywords. As of 12:12 pm PDT, I see BUSTMANTEPROPAGANDA; CALGOV2002; MISINFORMATION; SPIN.

Whoever you are, cut it out. And bear in mind that additions of keywords are logged; the admins can see who you are. If you think the article is bad, post something saying so, but lay off the keyword crud.

[John Jorsett]

I routinely put CALGOV2002 in the postings. We got into that habit during the last election to make the CA political threads easier to index and find. The other ones are from somebody else.

[Sabertooth]

This is NOT to John but to whomever -- presumably someone more on the Schwarzenegger side of things -- is adding the ridiculous "gag" Keywords. As of 12:12 pm PDT, I see BUSTMANTEPROPAGANDA; CALGOV2002; MISINFORMATION; SPIN.

Seen this one?

POST7WAAAH

Whoever you are, cut it out. And bear in mind that additions of keywords are logged; the admins can see who you are. If you think the article is bad, post something saying so, but lay off the keyword crud.

I was under the impression that, as with abuse reports, Mods can't see who's posted the keywords.

[southernnorthcarolina]

This is NOT to John but to whomever -- presumably someone more on the Schwarzenegger side of things -- is adding the ridiculous "gag" Keywords.

Pogo, I'm on the "Schwarzenegger side of things," but I agree with you on the keyword business. Anyone who has something worthwhile to say should say it, and at least have the courage to post his/her screen name. Screen names are themselves anonymous, of course, but at least a comment can be responded to. Additions to keyword lists are nothing more than hit-and-run cyber-graffiti.

I'd like to suggest to Jim or the Admin Monitors that keyword lists, if they're retained at all (they seem to me of dubious utility), be accessible only to the poster of the article; he or she should decide what words in the article are "key."