We welcome further explanation from the Heritage Foundation about comments being withheld over the weekend

If you are arriving here for the first time today, see this post on Sunday to catch up.

We see that when the Heritage Foundation Editor’s note: Thanks to everyone who has commented on this post. Some of those comments were initially not visible due to a delay in our system. We value your opinion and apologize for any confusion.

They have also corrected one commenter with this:

Screenshot (1194)

 

In order to alleviate any further confusion we invite someone from Heritage’s IT staff to explain how it was that over 100 comments initially were visible only to the commenter, making them believe they were accepted, while others were visible to everyone.

We understand holding comments for moderation, we do it all the time, but the difference is that the commenter isn’t seeing his or her comment (as if it had posted) visible to them, but to no one else!

Please write to me, I am at refugeewatcher@gmail.com and I will be happy to post verbatim whatever the tech explanation is.

And, by the way, some who were posted early-on (visible to all) were not all people Heritage tech people might have recognized as previous commenters.

Nor is it a reasonable explanation to say that the forum was only for members of Heritage (although many who commented are obviously members) because otherwise that should have been made clear at Heritage’s website page.  We would have honored a notice that said: Member forum only.

And, it is not sufficient to use a holiday weekend screw-up as a reason since Heritage put out the appeal for comments on Friday, the day after Thanksgiving (we didn’t post about it until the 25th, Saturday), on a long holiday weekend, so clearly they expected people to send in comments over the weekend and should have been ready, especially on such a hot topic.

Of course Heritage doesn’t owe any of us an explanation, but it would be to the Heritage Foundation’s advantage to fully explain what happened and thus regain its squeaky clean reputation. 

But, we mustn’t lose site of the fact that the ‘reform’ plan itself should be withdrawn and re-written taking in to consideration, first and foremost, the enormous economic and societal costs to local US citizens.

Go here and see what we said about the report in July.



Click here to read the full article on its original website.