Voices

Allowing wild accusations is dangerous and unprofessional

GUILFORD-I congratulate The Commons on presenting two views on the Acceptable Community Conduct Ordinance in a clear, well-argued format. These kinds of debates are vital to our community, and The Commons serves us well.

That is why I was surprised that you printed the letter "Concerns over software amount to thinly veiled bigotry," as it was, as it consisted largely of ad hominem attacks.

Political disagreements are fine but printing wild accusations calling a community member an "anti-American, aspiring insurgent" with an "anti-semitic agenda" who is a "proxy" of Iran in Vermont, is dangerous and unprofessional. Such language can have physical repercussions, especially in these polarized, violent times.

At the least, I expect that the editor should have asked the writer to restate his arguments without the personal attacks. If he is incapable of making a reasoned argument, which should be directed to the group, not just the one who signed the letter on its behalf, and refrain from hate speech, then it should not have been printed.


Bert Picard

Guilford


This letter to the editor was submitted to The Commons.

This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at [email protected].

Subscribe to the newsletter for weekly updates