Whose blog is it, anyway?
One of the anonymous posters at another blog has seen fit to define for himself what this blog should be and how it should be administered. His arguments might carry more weight if he had chosen accuracy over condescension.
He (she?) wrote:
On a blog.
There's no point in my trying to convince the writer that she (he?) has not only misunderstood my position on the issue in question, but has also misstated it. There's no incentive for him (her?) to get it right, choosing as she (he?) does to post anonymously in order to avoid taking any personal responsibility for his (her?) words. I'm sorry I ever allowed myself to rise to the bait of the original posters (who share this same strategy of anonymous blogging) in trying to defend against their attacks on the religious convictions of some of our elected officials. I should have seen where that path led. My bad; it won't happen again.
I would, however, extend an invitation to the anonymous blogger (heck...let's just assume it's a "he," for ease of reference) to do some research about what a blog is, and is not. He seems outraged that I would cut off discussion on -- of all places! -- a blog.
I'll not dwell on the fact that what I really did was tell a specific commenter that I wasn't going to continue to debate the issue with him, because we had each made our positions clear and neither was going to be swayed by additional debate. If that's "causing cessation of discussion," then I submit that someone needs get a clue.
Here's a clue. This blog is not a community message board. I have no obligation to allow comments, much less reply to them. I do, in fact, welcome and encourage comments about anything that's written here, and I'm pretty diligent about responding in some fashion to the vast majority of them. But that's not an obligation on my part, just as visitors are not obligated to leave comments.
Further, once a line of discussion has reached a point of staleness or stalemate, it's my right to end it, or at least my part in it. That's what I've chosen to do in this instance.
But, you know what? None of this is relevant to why I blog or why this blog exists. Most people don't come here to see debates about political issues, or hissy fits about who wrote what on whose blog. I apologize to those who have come here expecting better and have been disappointed. I shall endeavor to avoid future topics that are likely to deteriorate the way this one has.
And one step I've taken to avoid the future temptation of fruitless arguments with anonymous bloggers is by making certain adjustments in my blogroll.
I feel better already.
Where the post was made is unimportant.
The comparison of a blog to a message board is relevant in that the only reason a message board exists is to facilitate discussion among people. The issue of HOW it's administered isn't relevant to the point I'm making, which is that while a blog MAY have as its major goal the stimulation of message-board-like discussions and debate, most don't, and this one doesn't.
Your last sentence sums up precisely the right of every blog owner. But, you knew that.
Posted by: Eric at May 16, 2004 03:56 PMRighteous indignation is great aint it?
Posted by: Doc at May 16, 2004 06:38 PMNo...not really.
Posted by: Eric at May 16, 2004 07:02 PMI fear more spam. I have an email account where I work and I get several hundred spams a day. I have an account my ISP provides and I get 50 spam a day. I have an account on Yahoo that I have used to post on comments in places like this. I get 400 spams a day on that account. I have been forced to add spam blockers. Now I do not know how much legitimate mail is being thrown out with the crap. So I can never be sure I am getting what people send me.
Every day I have to deal with over 500 spam messages. At work I may get twenty valid ones. At home I may get from 3 to 5 valid emails in a day.
There is no protection when you post your address in a very public place like a blog. And spammers have spiders created for the sole purpose of collection email addresses from places like this on right here.
I never leave a valid email address because I do not want another 20 or 2,000 email spams a day just because I wanted to respond to some one. It isn't worth it.
All spammers should be taken out and shot. Anyone who buys any of the crap offered through spam should be defenstrated from the Washington monument.
Sorry about being anonymous. But until spammers can no longer hide then I will be forced to continue to hide. I don't like it. Who would?
I want a switch on my email program that will examine the displayable 'From' address and see if it is in fact in the routing part of the header and if it is not then the email should be rejected.
Posted by: Bruce at May 17, 2004 12:38 PMBruce, I share your disgust with the practice of spamming. And anyone who wishes to leave a comment here should understand that a valid email address is NOT required.
Some of the best minds in the industry are working on solutions to spam...and the spammers are staying a half-step in front, or reacting to every new move in such a way as to render it useless. Even what you propose is surely spoofable.
At some point, we'll get so sick of spam that we'll be open to the possibility of paying to send email.
Posted by: Eric at May 17, 2004 12:43 PMWhat...No, hissy fits?? Bit I had come over here from the the Thinklings hoping to find just that.
Darn!! I guess I'll just have to be content with your well written articles. :-)
Posted by: Rong at May 19, 2004 06:53 AMWhat...No, hissy fits??
And if you believe that, I've got some Midland lakefront property I'd like to sell you! ;-)
Posted by: Eric at May 19, 2004 06:58 AMAbout the publisher
Random Abbye photos...
Random Thursday: The Thanksgiving Edition
A Matter of Perception
Reason #21 to wear shoes in West Texas
From my rooftop, I can see my own mortality
The USPS: We're now 27% more efficient at mangling your mail!
My Favorite Yard Work
Review: The Amazon Kindle
Personal Library Exploration Continues
Tech Support That's Out of This World
Flower and Butterfly
The Season's First Roundup
Recording History
Want a Healthier Mind? Fuggedaboutit!
Redefining a Bust
The Neighborhood:
West Texas Blogs:
[Midland unless otherwise indicated]
Other Texas Blogs:
The Business:
The Church:
The World:
Ummm... on what other blog was that comment posted?
It's worth pointing out that your observations also apply to nearly every message board out there as well!
Contrary to popular belief, the discsussion on message boards is far more restricted than on individual blogs.
The board owners (or their appointed moderators) routinely disallow certain comments or subjects and not just in the interests of keeping a "clean and civil" board, either!
It's their board, it's their rules, and they apply those rules in whatever manner they see fit, even to the extent of selectively applying them to the benefit of a single member.
Posted by: Mr. Freen at May 16, 2004 03:30 PM