Tuesday, March 10, 2009

SHUT UP! County Blocks Gone Mild? - Day 92 of the Jackson County Ethics Blackout

A funny thing happened with my hit counter yesterday. I had my highest count in a month, thanks to links from Tony's Kansas City and the Prime Buzz Blog Watch, but there were no hits at all from the Jackson County Courthouse. It seems I've been blocked!

I've always had my fans at the Jackson County Courthouse, and I have never NOT had hits from there on a workday since - heck, I don't know. 2005?

I must have gotten under somebody's skin, I suppose. Fortunately, they haven't blocked me from access to their site, so I can still get access to their agendas and keep an eye on who's lying about what committee he's not chairing. For the moment, they are free of local ethical oversight, and heaven knows the Star refuses to do an adequate job of covering County issues, but others are starting to pay attention.

Personally, I think it's a waste of time to block websites. When City Hall blocked Tony's site, they used the excuse of his penchant for pictures of scantily clad women as an excuse, but everyone knows it was a ham-handed and failed attempt to reduce his influence. I don't know what excuse the County may be using to block Gone Mild, but it can't be bikini models . . .

Labels: , , ,


Anonymous Paco said...

Keep at 'em Dan! Someone in Lubbock, TX is agreeing with the pressure you are giving them. Obviously, they are feeling it.

3/10/2009 8:06 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

WOW - that was quick. You're back in! I heard that all it took was a phone call from a legislative aide to get you shut down, and then a phone call from someone higher up to get it reversed.

The courthouse is a fascinating place to work . . .

3/10/2009 10:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

3/10/2009 10:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Put that removed comment in your pocket, it's the truth.

3/10/2009 11:13 AM  
Anonymous inafunkaboutthefunk said...

Why so sensitive about being blocked? You do it to those who post opinions that you don't like?

I know what excuses you make to justify this conduct. I wonder what the Jackson County legislators reasoning is?

I would agree that your behavior and the behavior of those who would block access to your blog is reprehensible.

3/10/2009 2:29 PM  
Anonymous 1L said...

Blocking this in the Jackson County offices is no different from Dan deleting comments that he doesn't like.

3/10/2009 2:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You have a ringside seat at the
OK Corral.
The first amendment never started any battles it couldn't finish.

3/10/2009 2:46 PM  
Anonymous Lance said...

Awesome work, Dan. Your efforts are very much appreciated by me and my family. Thanks.

Ina and 1L, Dan's blog is a private enterprise but the County's operation is a public concern. Dan has every right to run his blog like a dictatorship. The County, not so much.

By the way, here are some interesting pictures of Tindall:

Pic 1
Pic 2

I didn't know he was a man of the cloth. I found these at the site for the Metropolitan Spiritual Churches of Christ, Inc.

3/10/2009 2:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I saw the comment before Dan deleted it, and I'm pretty sure that Dan would agree with most of it - but there was an accusation of marital infidelity toward one of the County legislators that probably made him delete it. If so, I agree with Dan - accusations like that are easy to make without support. The attack was made against one of the legislators Dan has been railing against, so I doubt the comment was deleted because he disagreed with it. I think the comment also said something nice about Theresa Garza, and it seems Dan would agree with that, too.

If my memory is correct, and I'm pretty sure it is, then Dan just deleted a comment he agrees with on most points, but had slime in it, too. Seems like the right thing to do.

3/10/2009 3:05 PM  
Anonymous Paco said...

Anon 3:05pm
Thanks. I guess Anon 10:49am (and most likely Anon 11:13am) doesn't understand the concept of slander.

Dan always makes his comments bite hard, but within the boundaries.

3/10/2009 4:51 PM  
Anonymous 1L said...

"Dan's blog is a private enterprise but the County's operation is a public concern. Dan has every right to run his blog like a dictatorship. The County, not so much."

Blocking Gone Mild from Jackson County offices is not government censorship. Jackson County is an employer and as a tax payer I don't want employees wasting time on a blog that trashes the people in charge. Employees are still free to read Dan's misguided opinions when they are at home - even at a home in Jackson County.

By Lance's logic, Jackson County offices should not block internet porn or facebook either...
nice try but as an employer they can block what they want.

3/10/2009 5:59 PM  
Blogger Dan said...

You guys crack me up. If I deleted every comment I don't approve of, there would be a whole lot less commentary here, and the blog would suffer as a result. Anonymous 10:49 is correct - I approved of the bulk of the comment I deleted, but it included an unsubstantiated accusation of adultery against someone I've been criticizing. Legally, I could keep it up there, but morally, it didn't seem like the right thing to do.

If you're sincerely interested in what I deleted, here's an edited version"Legislators and their aides may have all discovered that the your site contains more than just rumors and innuendos.
The comment yesterday . . . probably rocked the boat. They also fear that making a martyr out of Garza is dangerous territory."

If I ever delete one of your comments, please feel free to repost it with the offensive material deleted, if the whole comment wasn't offensive.

Truly, I love a free-flowing conversation, even when the bulk of it disagrees with me. But I've grown weary of anonymous accusations of serious misconduct without any evidence.

3/10/2009 7:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

1L -

I am afraid you just might remain a 1L.

3/10/2009 8:40 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Tarwarter high on a bluff.

3/11/2009 3:45 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home