It is good to see him blogging & it makes a change not to read his robust opinions about chavs that he mostly seems to come into contact with in the Speccy.

Their comments rules seem rather draconian however:

"Comments Notice
This comments facility is the property of the Social Affairs Unit.
We reserve the right to edit, amend or remove comments for legal reasons, policy reasons or any other reasons we judge fit.

By posting comments here you accept and acknowledge the Social Affairs Unit absolute and unfettered right to edit your comments as set out above."

Does that give them the right to replace benign comments with offensive ones? Shome mishtake shurely?

Ian, if people don't like the rules, they do not have to post. What is 'draconian' about that?

I feared that Dalrymple's retirement from practice and impending move to France would portend a lessening of his output. Looks like he's not planning to shut up anytime soon!

Well, JackieD, no-one is compelled to comment certainly, but draconian doesn't just apply to enforced action by the state, our nearby golf club has draconian dress codes in the club house.

In my view it depends what you mean by edit. If it refers to the removal of words for brevity or to remove offensivenes, then fine. If it means replacement of words to paraphrase or re-emphasise, not so good, especially giving someone absolute and unfettered right.

I was about to add a comment, read the rules and then thought bollocks to that, I won't bother. I don't sign unfair contracts or indeed blank sheets of paper.

The Samizdata rules are much more robust in their what & why.

If the SAU materially changed a comment beyond 'reasonable editing' then they could in fact open themselves to legal action by a person claiming they have been misrepresented (not a BIG risk of legal action, but if they changed you remark from "capitalism sucks" to "I am a child molester"...) so clearly all they really doing is making it clear they will either 'bleep' words they find offensive or just not publish the comment. Unlike a 'private' blogger, a company or institution has to be more careful, so it does not seem all that draconian to me, just a bit of prudent ass covering

But if they did change your words, you probably wouldn't have an audit trail of what you posted originally, unless you made the effort to save the page straight after the comment. So proving misrepresentation would be tricky. I suppose you could hit them for a Tenners worth of DPA search but I doubt that would show up an edit.

It is all academic and somewhat off-topic from the original theme which was TD becoming a blogger. I wonder how much he gets a piece?

I wonder how much he gets a piece?

I doubt he gets anything other than the satisfaction of supporting a think-tank he likes