Comments by kcooper
Page 1 of 9 | Next
Posted on November 16 at 3:15 p.m.
youneverknow and Dissident:
Correct. It is their comment and they are welcome to it. I was simply sharing my own comment.
That doesn't make me right and others wrong. We merely have differing opinions and outlooks. :)
To Dissident (directly):
We've never removed a comment simply because we don't agree with someone's opinion. If I did that, we'd take off every comment that takes a shot at the newspaper.
We do, however, take off comments that are flagged by readers for being violations of our terms of use agreement. Most of those fall in one of three categories:
1). Use of foul language.
2). Unfounded accusations.
3). Hate-filled language/threats.
Despite what you imply, Dissident, we do not flaunt the fact that we can disable comments when things get out of hand.
Different opinions (even the ones that seem almost constantly negative) are fine; it's only when a user steps over the line and the comment is brought to our attention do we have to make a judgment on whether or not to remove a comment.
Thanks.
Kevin.
Posted on November 16 at 10:34 a.m.
My apologies for my delayed replies here. I was having an early Thanksgiving with my nephew and family who is on temporary leave from duty in Iraq so I was away from a computer most of Sunday.
Luzichick: The Mims listing was a typo created when we input the gift certificate into the database. It's been fixed now. Mims is offering three separate $250 gift certificates for merchandise in their store. The opening bid for each is $125 each (50 percent of the face value). For the first three bidders, they can get $250 of merchandise credit for $125.
mslugirl: Please shoot me an e-mail with your e-mail address and I'll see if we can figure out the problem so that you can register and bid if you'd like.
For the others who are complaining about the values, the bids start at 50 percent of the retail value. That seems like a good deal to me. If you think it's too high, simply don't bid. There's no need to bad mouth the auction, the newspaper and the businesses who are participating. :)
Thanks.
Kevin.
Posted on October 13 at 4:03 p.m.
southernbelle: The funds (along with membership dues and funds from a few other smaller fundraisers produced throughout the year) go into the chamber's operation budget which would include everything from salaries to postage to rent on their offices.
Thanks.
Kevin.
Posted on September 26 at 8:46 p.m.
All, apparently our reporter made a huge error in saying this was a NHS' homecoming game.
Obviously, it wasn't.
I'm not sure how he managed to make that mistake. We've fixed it in the above copy and will correct it in tomorrow's print edition.
thanks.
Kevin.
Posted on September 21 at 1:16 p.m.
@mojo: Your last two paragraphs are what we must do to make the conversations more than just back and forth banter. Thanks.
@reader: No problem on the response. I usually try to check the comments on my personal columns to see if anyone directly asks me something, but I don't always remember to check. ... if you ever seek to ask me something directly, feel free to shoot me an e-mail (the address is kevin.cooper@natchezdemocrat.com.
In answer to your question, if you see a comment that you feel is offensive, false or otherwise violates our terms of use policy, please hit the "suggest removal" link that appears next to each comment.
If you feel you need to share more information about why something that should be removed (in case it's not evident from the content of the comment) please suggest it for removal and then drop us a note to webmaster@natchezdemocrat.com
Thanks.
Kevin.
Posted on September 21 at 11:02 a.m.
@reader: I hear what you are saying. My thought is that while some of the comments are made by people who are trying to be funny at the expense of others or by people who are just spewing their own negative views of the world, some actual good can come out of the debate.
I think it's wrong to (as I've heard several people say) just dismiss "the commenters" (as if they are some kind of sub-human class) outright. A number of people have requested that we just "turn off the comments outright" as if silencing the people whose opinions differ from their own will make those opposing opinions go away.
Regardless of whether or not we agree or even like what others have to say, seeking to understand how and why others feel the way they do is vitally important -- to this community and to others.
Even if 70 percent of the comments are junk and 30 percent are good, constructive ones, that's 30 percent more constructive communication than we have without the comments.
Those who fear "how it looks to outsiders" to have a comment thread that is on a touchy subject or taking a negative view would be, IMHO, better served not by worrying about what others think.
But rather worrying about how to understand why friends and neighbors feel that way.
Only when we start talking about the things that divide us can we ultimately see how insignificant most of those are. In time, such divisions will dissolve away, I think.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I've been wrong many times before.
thanks.
Kevin.
Posted on July 31 at 6:48 a.m.
justeinberg: I believe our reporter asked Kent Hudson to read the contract on the newspaper's behalf to provide a legal opinion unaffiliated with the city or with Natchez Enterprises.
Posted on June 22 at 7:39 p.m.
I agree that the age stats seem to defy conventional wisdom which is that print readers on average are older and online readers on average are much younger.
Interestingly, the survey results are almost identical, however, to the results we've gathered from online users who provide a year of birth when they register for full access to our Web site.
Many of our online users are in the 55+ category. It's roughly one-third for each of the categories listed above (in print and online).
The survey sought only 18+ age respondents.
Posted on June 22 at 6:04 p.m.
jlmorris,
That's essentially what they did, only instead of working from a print circulation number, they simply asked how many people read the print edition when they called them for the survey
That's actually a more accurate (and more independent) way of looking at the numbers because it takes into account important factors for which merely working from the print circulation figures cannot consider.
For example, in many cases more than one person may read a single print edition (for example an adult who reads the newspaper in the morning and passes it along to an aging parent, neighbor or other relative when they are finished reading it). That would be one printed newspaper, but two or more households.
A similar thing happens when a business gets a copy of the printed edition and multiple employees regularly read the lone copy.
For decades, newspapers (our included) have taken print circulation numbers and simply used "national" average readership numbers to derive household penetration estimates. Applying such national averages to our print circulation figures provides pretty accurate numbers, but this kind of survey takes a more direct, more local and presumably more accurate approach.
The only things that would make it inaccurate would be: 1). The company forged its data; 2). Survey respondents didn't tell the truth.
The company's only gain in providing bogus information would be the potential of repeat business. Since we've not done such a survey in 10 or more years and have no plans to do new updates of the survey routinely, that seems like a thin argument. Also, the company was paid in advance for performing the survey, so there was no money riding on the outcome of the results.
The interesting thing to consider here is that none of the people would gain anything by not telling the truth and these aren't "potential" readers like some broadcast folks may reference (as in our stations "can reach" X-number of people." These are actual, engaged readers who said, "Yes, I read that yesterday, this week, this month, etc."
Basically, the combined numbers were calculated by taking the number of people who reported reading the print edition and added it to the number of people who reported reading us online, but not in print, then working the math with the household figures.
Page 1 of 9 | Next
Posted on November 16 at 5:08 p.m.
corvett40,
If you can e-mail me your e-mail address, I'll see if I can figure out what's going on with the site (or I'll find someone who can help get things straightened out).
kevin.cooper@natchezdemocrat.com
thanks.
Kevin.
On Biddit! bidding begins today