You’re potentially looking at what may be a mis-interpretation of how RK works, but it’s the same mistake most people visiting the site can make. Readers have to go out of their way to figure out exactly what’s going on at RK, who’s really “official” and who isn’t, and by doing that, RK has set themselves up for this kind of criticism.

Again, it comes down to transparancy and self policing, and not after the fact but ahead of time.

would also be willfully and badly misleading.

I agree 100%, hence my first post. This ad is stupid, unproductive, misleading, sneaky, and probably a net loser for the campaign… but accurate with the facts.

I don’t think anyone suggested that, and that’s not what occurred in the Hugo ad. The ad said that http://www.raisingkaine.com was the source, which it was. It didn’t say that Raising Kaine made the statements. There’s a difference.

That’s just being clever; it’s a distinction without difference. It would be like finding a Democrat named George Allen and running a TV ad having him endorse Mark Warner for Senate — yes, it would be entirely accurate, but it would also be willfully and badly misleading.

“Here’s what others say about Rex Simmonds” is not inaccurate. And to say others have been saying that on RK is not inaccurate either. They are statements that were made at RK and are attributed as such. Nothing sneaky, nothing out of the ordinary.

It is up to the people at Raising Kaine to not only police their commenters, but to take advantage when things like this provide them an opportunity to actually counter claims they don’t agree with, whether in direct responses to the quoted comments or in future blog posts after the ad is placed and sends traffic their way. Don’t shoot the messanger.

Also, this is yet another reason for the need of greater transparancy in the blogosphere. If commenters were required to identify themselves in some fashion so they could be held accountable for their words, the Hugo campaign would know exactly who to attribute the quote to. Instead, systems such as RK’s allow just anyone to say just anything at RK’s expense. It’s the nature of the beast and until they try and change that nature, it’s going to keep happening.

any user generated commented posted to any website can be quoted and used to represent that website’s position?

I don’t think anyone suggested that, and that’s not what occurred in the Hugo ad. The ad said that http://www.raisingkaine.com was the source, which it was. It didn’t say that Raising Kaine made the statements. There’s a difference.

Waldo, it wasn’t “anonymous comments”. It was a pseudonym blogger in a diary entry, a blogger who we know the identity of, and who was in fact a Democratic party member and a supporter of Rex’s primary opponent.

The difference between anonymous and pseudonymous is academic. “We” may know the identity of that blogger (whoever “we” are), but I certainly don’t.

Diarists are not the same as anonymous commenters.

Of course they are. Whether one’s comment is called a “diary” or a “comment” is a matter of semantics and nothing more.

At RK, they are required to register, and they can be monitored and promoted or deleted.

Registration requires only an e-mail address, the same as any comment here; it verifies only that one has a functioning e-mail address. The ability to monitor, promote and delete a “diary” is, again, functionally identical to a comment.

This one wasn’t deleted until the ad was made.

So, just to be clear, the position you’re taking here is that any user generated commented posted to any website can be quoted and used to represent that website’s position? For instance, I disagree with you in this matter. Would the prudent thing for me to do be to simply delete your comment, lest it be quoted and credited to me? Doesn’t Raising Kaine’s keeping that diary up serve as a credit to the organization, that they’re willing to tolerate expression that they disagree with?

Diarists are not the same as anonymous commenters. At RK, they are required to register, and they can be monitored and promoted or deleted. This one wasn’t deleted until the ad was made.

Now, maybe it’s stupid to quote anything from RK.

IP, someday you’ll be able to write your own stuff, too, if you study hard and maybe read a book. ;)

Despite Republican obstruction Warner and Kaine addressed the most critical problems in Virginia and made Virginia the best managed state in the nation, the best state for business, and the best place for kids to prepare for success in life.

This year, Virginia voters will have a chance to decide between the reactionary ideological past or the pragmatic, successful future. Tim Kaine needs Democratic allies in the House and Senate, and there is a blue tidal wave ready to wash over Virginia this November delivering supporting majorities in the Senate and potentially the House as well.

Meanwhile, the Republicans have put party first, and have nothing left but the same kind of Rovian tactics that failed when Kilgore and Allen used them in the past.

Tim Hugo’s failed attack is more of the same that has cost Republicans in recent years and promises to cost more. Virginia voters will choose Democrats across the Commonwealth in November, and Rex Simmons will be among a freshman class in a new Democratic majority that will help Tim Kaine lead Virginia into a brighter future.