As I’ve written before, the purpose of this blog is naval gazing, not navel gazing, so I always feel funny about making posts about CAAFlog.  Nevertheless, in light of the fairly recent overhauls of our comment policy, I thought it would be appropriate to take a moment to assess how things are going.

As our regular readers may recall, until fairly recently, we allowed open comments with no moderation, with the exception of attempting to block posts by three specific commenters who had been repeatedly over-the-top inappropriate in previous comments.  Due to repeated scurrilous anonymous drive-by comments, we shifted very briefly to a period where comments could be posted only under the commenter’s actual name.  After my CAAFlog colleagues beat me into submission, we adopted our current policy of allowing comments to be made under the individual’s actual name or a “registered pseudonym.”

Two of the effects of the changed policy were anticipated.  First, in the wake of the new policy, comments dropped off sharply.  The number of comments seems to have increased somewhat, though to nowhere near the volume during the period when comments were almost entirely unregulated.  Second, the ratio of civil to uncivil posts has improved markedly since the new policy was put in place.  What surprises me is that our other metrics appear to be basically unchanged.  We’re getting about the same number of hits, unique readers, and page views that we got before the change in policy.  In fact, this last Wednesday, we had a huge spike in readership, which I assume resulted from interest in the Kabul Klipper’s analysis of CAAF’s Prather opinion and the comments to that analysis.  So it’s gratifying to see that our readers seem to think our site still has something to offer even with the reduced flow of comments.

Even before the recent comment brouhaha, I had been considering retiring from blogging.  But I’ve decided that with several major military justice cases on the horizon — including the Hasan and Manning courts-martial — I’d like to continue for the time being.  So after the hiatus that I mentioned in today’s This Week in Military Justice, I’ll be tickling the keyboard once again.  As always, I’m sincerely grateful to those who spend a precious finite resource — time — reading what I have to write.

In view of the thoughts of some of our esteemed readers and a general consensus among the blog administrators, we will continue to prohibit anonymous comments but will permit commenters to register under a pseudonym. If you want to use a pseudonym, when you fill out the information for your first comment in the New comment section you need to pick a unique “Name” and send us a real email address. We’ll confirm pseudonyms with an email the first time you comment under the new pseudonym. Each subsequent comment will need to use the same “Name” and email identity or you’ll be put back into moderation.

NOTE: We retain the right to reject pseudonyms for email addresses that we can’t identify with real persons or we identify with real persons that we believe will abuse our non-abusive comment policies. So if we don’t know you and you want to comment pseudo-nonymously I’d suggest you do something to allay those fears in an email. If we end up accepting and then unapproving serial pseudonyms we’ll probably either scale the policy back to requiring real names or . . .

Is it honorable for a judge advocate to go onto a military justice blog and post an anonymous attack on another counsel practicing in the military justice system?  Is it professionally acceptable for a member of a court’s bar to post anonymous personal attacks against a judge on that court?

These questions call to mind Professor Stanley Fish’s recent opinion piece Anonymity and the Dark Side of the Internet.  Professor Fish wrote:

The practice of withholding the identity of the speaker is strategic, and one purpose of the strategy (this is the second problem with anonymity) is to avoid responsibility and accountability for what one is saying. Anonymity, Martha Nussbaum, a professor of law and philosophy at the University of Chicago observes, allows Internet bloggers “to create for themselves a shame-free zone in which they can inflict shame on others.” The power of the bloggers, she continues, “depends on their ability to insulate their Internet selves from responsibility in the real world, while ensuring real-world consequences” for those they injure.

That is an apt description of some comments we’ve seen recently on CAAFlog, none better demonstrating this phenomenon that anonymous attacks launched against Charlie Gittins during a discussion of CAPT Honor’s detachment for cause.  A poster appeared to be attempting to harm Mr. Gittins’ business from behind a veil of anonymity, insulating himself or herself from responsibility in the real world while attempting to inflict real-world damage on Mr. Gittins.  Those comments answer the question I started with; they were dishonorable.  And it angers me that a blog that I help administer was used for that dishonorable purpose.

The Internet, of course, is a wide-open place and anyone can upload content on the Internet saying anything he or she pleases.  Heck, there’s even a website that devotes itself to, among other causes, attacking CAAFlog.  (I find it surprising that anyone cares enough about what we say in our little gabfest to go to the trouble, but the author certainly has the right to attack us.)  Anyone who wants to could set up a website to post anonymous personal attacks against military justice practitioners and judges.  But we at CAAFlog have no obligation to host such content.

There are a number of ways to try to prevent this blog from becoming a vehicle for such attacks.  In the past, from time to time contributors to this blog, including me, have posted calls for greater civility in comments.  This has generally led to more professionalism for a few weeks followed by backsliding.  Simply put, that approach has proved inadequate.  At the other extreme is the SCOTUSblog approach — comments could be disallowed entirely.  But shutting out voices other than those of authorized contributors would deprive us of a great deal of useful information and helpful perspectives.  I wouldn’t see the point of blogging without engaging in an exchange of ideas.  There are also less draconian possibilities, such as moderating comments.  But, among other problems, comment moderation is time consuming.  I’m already considering hanging up my blogging keyboard, in part because of the amount of time that I spend on it; I certainly don’t want a solution to the civility problem that results in spending more of my time on CAAFlog. 

The alternative solution I came up with is requiring posting under individuals’ real names.  I think such a policy would weed out the vast majority of inappropriate comments.  Of course, it’s also a certainty that such a policy would pull out some flowers along with the weeds; it would no doubt result in the loss of some beneficial comments that otherwise would have been posted.  Some individuals for whom I have great respect have already indicated that they’ll be reducing or eliminating their comments.  That represents a real loss.

The new policy may stifle discussion to such an extent that the comment section would become almost as arid as no comments at all.  If so, that will suggest to me that this blog has run its course.  We’ve been at this for almost 4-1/2 years now.  When the No Man, the Kabul Klipper, Super Grover, and I started this in 2006, I think we all would have bet against CAAFlog still being around in 2011.  I have very much enjoyed participating in this project, I’ve learned a great deal from my colleagues and the comments, and I’m sincerely gratified that there’s anyone out there who cares enough about what I have to say to read some of my posts.  But even before my concern about some of the recent comments on the blog, I thought it might be time to move on.  That feeling would certainly be reinforced if it proves impractical to adopt a comment system that promotes helpful and/or interesting comments while deterring abusive comments.

Here’s what I suggest.  In mid-February, I’ll be going on a DIILS trip that will result in me being completely offline for about 2-1/2 weeks.  Let’s have a test period until then.  When I get back, my colleagues and I can evaluate how the new policy has worked and determine the best COA in light of that evaluation.

We’re in the process of implementing a new comment policy and installing technological fixes to implement the new policy.  Basically, we’re requiring that those who want to post comments do so using their actual names.  Once a reader has been approved to make comments, there won’t be any comment mediation.  So we’re not seeking to control the content of comments; rather, the goal is to no longer allow anonymous or pseudononymous comments. 

I’ll be posting more about this and the reasons for the changes this weekend.  But because there are now a number of comments hung up in moderation due to our initial stabs at installing the technology to implement the new policy, I wanted to let everyone know about the policy change.

I’ll be on the road the next couple of days.  As a result, my online presence will be somewhere between diminished and non-existent.  While I’m gone, I leave you with this thought:  Go Navy!  Beat Army!

As some of our readers have noted, for posts with a large number of comments, some of the readers’ comments end up in weird places and are hard to follow.  As many of you know, I’m an unfrozen caveman lawyer and I don’t know a lot about those internets.  And our webmaster is currently deployed to Afghanistan.  So I’m not sure this is the right fix, but in an effort to bring more order to the comments, I’ve turned off the nesting feature.  I think that this will result in each new comment going to the end of the thread.  We’ll see if it actually works out that way.

As always, we value the feedback and we welcome suggestions to make the site more user friendly.

I wish a happy Thanksgiving to all of our readers.  My thoughts go out especially to those who can’t be with their loved ones because they are in harm’s way.  Both those in harm’s way and their families have my deepest gratitude.

I plan to spend the rest of my day on the three “F”s:  family, food, and football.  Please check back tomorrow for new content.

I’ve been under the gun this week and I’ll be at the appellate advocacy symposium on Friday.  I hope to catch up on some backlogged materials–including posting the briefs from the Hutchins case–on Saturday.

Today was the first day of CAAF’s oral argument season.  (I should have worn a blaze orange tie to CAAF in honor of the occasion.)  Audio of the oral argument is already up, including in the blockbuster case of United States v. Blazier II.  We’ll be posting links shortly.

CAAF also granted review in two Army cases on Friday and one today–one with a Jones LIO issue and two with M.R.E. 412 issues.  We’ll be posting the granted issues shortly.

CAAF also issued an interesting order on Friday that we’ll post.

And finally, at least for now, the No Man notes below that LTC Lakin’s website has announced that a petition for writ of mandamus has been filed on his behalf with the Army Court of Criminal Appeals.  We’re trying to get a copy, but if anyone has a copy or link, please let us know.  As always, you can post a comment below or contact us at caaflog@caaflog.com.

Will any of our military justice wonk readers be attending the Lakin arraignment on Friday?  If so, we’d love to link to or post your coverage of the proceedings.  Please shoot us an e-mail at caaflog@caaflog.com.

Due to an unusually large number of events on my social calendar today (and, really, anything above zero is an unusually large number of events on my social calendar), I’ll be posting This Week in Military Justice tomorrow.

Happy Independence Day, everyone!

The vast majority of the comments on CAAFlog are valuable and appreciated.  But I continue to believe that comments that trash others from behind a veil of anonymity are inappropriate.  I’m reminded of what Justice Scalia wrote in his separate opinion in this week’s Doe v. Reed decision:

Requiring people to stand up in public for their political acts fosters civic courage, without which democracy is doomed.  For my part, I do not look forward to a society which, thanks to the Supreme Court, campaigns anonymously and even exercises the direct democracy of initiative and referendum hidden from public scrutiny and protected from the accountability of criticism.  This does not resemble the Home of the Brave.

I assume that most of the people who leave comments on this blog are military officers, attorneys, or both.  I hope you’ll agree that as a matter of professionalism, neither military officers nor attorneys should anonymously trash others.

If you are going to criticize others in the comment section of this blog, please post under your actual name.  If you want to post anonymously, please don’t criticize anyone.

Groundhog Day is Code 45′s unofficial holiday. 

This year we didn’t really need Punxsutawney Phil to figure out that winter will last another six weeks.  Nevertheless, happy Groundhog Day to Code 45 personnel and alumni!

CAAFlog now allows you to subscribe to comments on a particular post. Subscribing means you’ll receive an email every time a new comment is made to a post you’re subscribed to.

Just enter a valid email address and check the box when adding a comment:

You’ll receive a confirmation email to confirm that you really want to subscribe (only for the first-ever subscription):

Once you’re subscribed, you’ll have access to the subscription manager which allows you to modify your subscriptions, change your subscriber email address, or opt-out of all future subscriptions.

Every email you receive from the subscription software  (except the initial opt-in message) should include a link to the subscription manager. The blog software should also remember you after you post a comment (by using cookies) and replace the subscribe checkbox with a link to the subscription manager in posts to which you’re already subscribed.

Please let me know if you have any problems with this new feature.

I’ll be hitting the sky soon.  The No Man will complete our top-10 military justice stories of 2009 countdown while I’m away.  And I hope that all of my CAAFlog colleagues will post 2010′s military justice developments while I’m gone.  I’ll be back in the CAAFlog saddle on Friday night and I may claw my way onto the Internet once or twice before then.  Happy new year!