This is a comment that I allowed to be posted yesterday concerning agency employees saying they were afraid of reporting misconduct:
Doesn't make sense. The agency has an increased emphasis on catching and stopping fraud. My office has been eagerly assisting such efforts. No one is afraid. We wake up motivated each day.
To my eye that last sentence looks like something that a paid shill came up with, or, perhaps more likely, AI wrote it. I decided to post it since it wasn’t clear. There are others which are far more obvious, even humorous examples, that I quickly blocked
What do you think I ought to do about these? Allow them to post so there’s a vigorous debate? Reject them if they don’t ring true to me even though I may reject a few genuine comments? Muddle through as best I can? Allow the most ridiculous examples with some attached commentary so you can be amused or angered by them?
I take it as sarcasm.
ReplyDeleteError on side of free speech and let them through, barring potential libelous statements and restricted language. I edited that person’s language below:
ReplyDeleteDoesn't make sense [because I am not afraid]. The agency has an increased emphasis on catching and stopping fraud [unless by DOGE]. My office has been eagerly assisting such efforts [by “eagerly” I mean motivated because my office is afraid]. No one is afraid [rapid eye wink]. We wake up motivated each day [to avoid being sent to the 800 number].
your last option would be fine, You have a right to free speech, too.
ReplyDeleteYou should not censor comments just because they do not reflect your general world view.
ReplyDeleteYou should also have a comment policy.
My vote is to allow all of them and let us decide. Many of us will probably quickly recognize what is fake. At least it lets us have the debate.
ReplyDeleteFrank is a psychopath and pays people to post positive things about his career and accomplishments. Look at his Fortune 500 company which is struggling now. All anyone needs to know he is a bad guy
ReplyDeleteHappy April Fool’s Day! That said please allow all comments. The comments are half the reason many of us come to the blog and enjoy it. Even to laugh and ridicule the paid shills and brainwashed cogs.
ReplyDeleteCharles, it’s your blog and you should make the call. We live in the AI era where many things are falsely claimed as their own. I wonder if your college professor would accept a term paper that was AI generated?
ReplyDeleteHonestly Charles, while this is a decent blog, not as informative and technical as it used to be, but is it worth "paid shills" posting on it? Really? C'mon man, in benefits cases thats called self aggrandizement. A less tinfoil hat approach is that people are jerks and post jerk things because they can since we cannot see them. Lets stick to actual policy changes, strategy and work arounds for this new environment we find ourselves in. Sure you can complain about COSS because the blog has done that for the last 20 years but add back some substance. Or not, I really dont care, I retire June 2027.
ReplyDeleteThis would ordinarily make sense, but senior executives can and do read this blog, and some of them (Leland Dudek comes to mind) are thin-skinned and feel compelled to defend their honor. Some of the bizarrely defensive comments are likely trolls, but some are real.
DeleteIts your blog. You can censor if you want to, I suppose. But, ask yourself, why do you feel the need to censor? Why not just let everyone have their say? What are you afraid of?
ReplyDeleteJust let people post. We don't need your protection.
ReplyDeleteIf you do not like the manner in which the blog is managed move on to another blog.
DeleteFrankie got his hands caught in the cookie jar. 🍪
ReplyDeleteAllow them. If people disagree, they can reply
ReplyDeleteWow! The first time you’ve actually allowed comments and almost all come out in favor of speech. How much have you been censoring? The most anti-democratic thing you can do is censor points of view simply because you don’t like them. New foot forward?
ReplyDeleteRead the first amendment: Congress shall pass no law. . . . It does not apply to a private website. This is not a democracy, unless the owner wants it to be. Do you think Faux News posts all comments or allows all viewpoints? Don't be so naive. Or disingenuous.
DeleteSSA has 50K employees, there are bound to be some who see things differently than you or I do. I actually find that a useful reminder that SSA staff are not homogenous, and for that matter SSA offices are not homogenous. The fact that someone's perspective doesn't match my expectation doesn't make it false.
ReplyDeleteI have tried to post comments that were respectfully critical of SSA policy more apt to be considered Democratic policy and been blocked. Meanwhile, in the same thread there were posts critical of Republican policy that used crude and defamatory language. I don't mind differing opinions but language that is inappropriate for discussion is a big turn off for me.
ReplyDeleteLet it post!!!! Let the debates begin. They'll only find the fraud is coming from within, from their own employees. Fraud is SOOO low when it comes to Social Security....but not from the inside.... I've read this blog for YEARS, and you report on that. Let that post STAY!
ReplyDeleteIs this blog becoming FoxNews where other points of view are overlooked?
ReplyDeleteThe same thing has happened to me. I criticized O'Malley and ALJs getting telework and...BLOCKED. Then as a test I criticized Frank and Trump and comment was posted almost instantly.
ReplyDeleteLooks like Charles is STILL censoring my comments about the wonderful (some would say heroic!) Commissioner Frank Bisignano. That's okay. I'll still keep reading this garbage.
ReplyDeleteHeroic MAGA in the house. 🤡
DeleteI for one like making fun of Leland.
ReplyDeleteDid Leland get a job at the Ministry of Truth?
ReplyDeleteLeave Leland alone!
DeleteWould it be possible to flag suspicious comments?
ReplyDeleteStephen Miller taking time to comment despite his busy schedule.
Delete