But I can’t tell. Maybe it was another post in which I dissed the Singularity and pointed out that the Singularity University isn’t a real university.

I marvel at how I could get banned there, when I post critical, but certainly legitimate comments. I always post under my own known blogger’s name which is easily linked to a RL name.

I see loads of anonymous vindictive types posting the most outrageously hateful stuff — and it stands. So what’s up?

I think it’s truly outrageous that a highly influential blog like this, which, for better or worse, is one of the blogs coming to take the place of newspapers, can arbitrarily ban people on whims, when they don’t even have a moderator, or a moderation policy indicated on their site.

That this was a deliberate, personal real-time ban and not some automatic key word sort of thing was clear.
http://secondthoughts.typepad.com/second_thoughts/2009/07/banned-from-techcrunch.html

I also have a static IP, never use alts, and don’t plan to evade this ban somehow. I *want* to post under the same name everywhere. But I will protest this and publicize it. It’s wrong. And it becomes a reason why government should regulate blogs if only to restore the First Amendment’s protections as applicable to them.

I don’t believe that Arrington is “totally within his rights” to remove comments that expose *his* conflicts of interests. Not when his blog is as big, as influential, as reprinted as his. It becomes an institution like the newspaper once was, with certain obligations to the public interest and the public’s right to know.

1) First trying to find out if I can do a 10x based drama-oriented content. On this one, I think I am failing. I think I did not have a big enough echo chambers. Seasoned drama-bloggers tend to create controversy between two popular entities which create an a big echo chambers and end-up by multiplying the audiences. In my case, I was alone with my little catchy title. HN helped a LOT, but was not enough.

2) Second, was to get an answer about the potential conflict of interest about Seesmic, Arrington, and Techcrunch. There might be something very unfair for Techcrunch’ sponsors and even employees. I think it is not fair that Michael Arrington keeps lecturing the tech world about journalism integrity when he might be far from being clean. So, if there is a good explanation, then, great, incident close, otherwise, he should avoid lecturing all of us about integrity.

So, for #2, I would agree with your point that I hoped that my experiment would have pushed Arrington to give an explanation. But, not surprisingly (given the impact of this blog), it did not.

Btw, you should use your real name & url. No need to hide, I am a very small blogger, and I do not intend to make drama my profession. So, I am definitely not intimidating.

You did a good comment, just assume it.

And you’re complaining that he lacks moral integrity?!?

The real thing I wanted is an answer from Michael about the potential conflict of interest with Seesmic. He is lecturing everybody about integrity (i.e. attacking NY Times on integrity) but cannot even come clean.

Seesmic might have been benefiting of an huge free exposure on TechCrunch for months and months (compared to many TC sponsors that paid big bucks for it). Given the fact that virtually nobody in TC is using the Seesmic gadget, Michael needs to explain why them, and prove that it is not stimulated by his personal investment. I would love to hear a explanation about this before hearing about other Arrington’s lectures on integrity.

Did you see Arrington’s nutty post yesterday attacking the NY Times for its journalistic integrity? I think he needs another vacation…

In my years following Leo (all the way back to ZDTV in 1998) – he has remained an impartial and genuine tech journalist that I know I can trust.

For Arrington – I’m sorry I can’t say the same. I will probably read Techcrunch less and value their opinion with the same level of integrity as Perez Hilton.

Now, at the end of the day, given Michael Arrington’s influence in this market, everybody, even his biggest contenders, tend to smooth things out. Who wants to be in bad term with the most influential blogger in the tech industry?…. dumb me.

1) It will give a huge exposure to a little blog article.

2) He sees himself as the paladin of integrity, so, he won’t accept this post as a valid criticism.