Whatever you do, don’t mention the unmensch:
Mensch (Yiddish: מענטש mentsh, from German: Mensch “human being”) means “a person of integrity and honor.” The opposite of a “mensch” is an “unmensch” (meaning: an utterly unlikeable or unfriendly person).
The former – well, you know who we mean. The latter – that’s everyone else. Allow them to speak – as long as they only speak about what you want them to (the bold is ours):
Working with Luke Bozier, a former aide to Tony Blair who defected to the Tories in January, Mrs Mensch today unveiled Menshn (pronounced “mention”), a social media service for “talking on topic”.
The service is initially only available in the United States and aiming attract online discussion about the upcoming presidential election. It is scheduled to open to British members in time for the Olympics.
Menshn owes much to Twitter in its design and concept, with members invited to post short messages and links. The main difference is that it restricts discussions to pre-approved topics, with the aim of avoiding the spam messages that popular hashtags attract on Twitter.
And this is as good as it gets? In the midst of a social media revolution, and from the heart of our green and pleasant land, the very brightest idea someone can come up with right now is to create a “new” type of online constitution for political debate – a constitution and debate where hackneyed politicos decide they may not only get to moderate the comments but also set the agenda?
So is the 21st century or a throwback to the 19th?
Where is this really supposed to be taking us?
A virtual space where a Tory MP and an ex-Labour Party member acquire the right to decide who can converse and how in cyberspace?
Are they actually living in the real world? Or does this mainly serve to explain why we’re all on the edge of a precipice?
Can anyone explain how this isn’t a nightmare of monumental proportions?