Thursday, June 11, 2009

Did I Upset Felix Salmon?

UPDATE 10:13 AM 6/11/09
My comment has, finally, appeared on Felix's site, so perhaps I didn't upset him.

ORIGINAL 1:47 AM 6/11/09

In my last post, I discussed a post that Felix Salmon put on his blog at Reuters and included a comment that I had submitted in relation to that post, which, I noted, was awaiting moderation.

I moderate comments on this blog, so I have no problem with that approach, particularly when it involves a blog published by a large news organization like Thomson Reuters.

Interestingly, to me anyways, my post has not been posted yet. I wrote the comment at 7:19 PM EST (23:19 GMT) and two comments posted after mine have been posted, including this one, which I think would be rejected before mine (given that it's simply an insult):

June 11th, 2009
2:55 am GMT[permalink]
Hey Reuters,

How much are you paying Felix Salmon to post idiotic remarks on your website?
- Posted by Felix' Mom
There are rules for comments on the blog, discussing the criteria by which comments are judged worthy. These are the rules (unedited) from Felix Salmon's blog page:

Post Your Comment

House Rules:

  • We moderate all comments and will publish everything that advances the post directly or with relevant tangential

  • We try not to publish comments that we think are offensive or appear to pass you off as another person, and we will be conservative if comments may be considered libelous.information.

I'm curious as to what in my post may have violated these rules.

In my opinion (which is certainly biased), my comments were relevant to the post and, I believe, advanced the discussion by pointing out some facts Mr. Salmon seemed unaware of.

Given the volume of information about the Chrysler bankruptcy, both on the docket and in the news, it is easy to understand how these things could be missed. The Bankruptcy Code are also not always consistent with general intuition.

Having followed, and blogged about, the Chrysler case since the beginning I am very familiar with the specific facts that I cited.

I've also taken classes on bankruptcy law and have consulted with lawyers who specialize in bankruptcy (including Steven Jakubowski who practices bankruptcy law at The Coleman Law Firm and maintains The Bankruptcy Litigation Blog and Professor David Skeel, the S. Samuel Arsht Professor of Corporate Law at the University of Pennsylvania, who teaches bankruptcy law also maintains a the Less than the Least blog). I have also consulted with friends in the restructuring and distressed investing space (I believe they would prefer to remain anonymous). I also benefit greatly from the occasional counsel of one of my former business school professors, Ed Altman (the Max L. Heine Professor of Finance at the Stern School of Business, New York University). This has assisted me in becoming very familiar with the legal aspects that I pointed out.

Offensive, Libelous, and/or Passing as Someone Else
I submitted the entry under my own name (and posted it on this blog).

I don't believe anything I wrote was libelous or offensive (particularly when considered next to the comment that I referenced above).

Now, it's possible that short comments can be approved by junior staff at Reuters but longer posts require the approval of Felix Salmon, himself. On the other hand, he submitted two posts to his blog between 12:03 AM EST and 12:26 AM EST (04:03 and 04:26 GMT).

Why do you think Felix Salmon is holding my comments?

Sphere: Related Content
Digg this
Delicious Bookmark this on Delicious

Subscribe in a reader

No comments: