a node at the edge  

June 16, 2002
MetabloggingWrap up

I found out this morning that one can still have ADSL without having phone service. My phone is disconnected but the ADSL is still active.

Once the internet has you, it doesn't want to let you go.

This posting was previously titled The Untouchables. However, I removed the previous contents because I realized this morning that the writing was unfair. I was writing about another author in a context that didn't necessarily give her a comfortable forum with which to respond. And that's not right. My apologies to Meg for criticizing her work in a way that didn't allow her to respond. Sorry, Meg. You deserved better.

I still don't agree with what Meg wrote in this one instance, even with Jeff's lovely entry into the discussion - but we'll leave it at that and close the subject. I left the skeleton of the pulled posting because of the comments. In particular Ruzz has a nice comment and Stavros has a link to a nice posting - I didn't want to pull these.

I did pull another post, though I know that Mike Sanders has written on it. However, he has pulled out those components of the posting he finds to be relevant to his writing. I should apologize to Mike, but at this time, I'm just too tired to issue yet more apologies.

What's that you say? Weblogging means never having to say you're sorry?

I will finish the Thread the Needle application as quickly as possible. Once started, this app should take on a life of its own and grow beyond any one person's control - that's how I'm designing it.

Though Needle isn't necessary for dialogs to continue (dialogs have been occurring successfully without the technology). hopefully, it will provide a way for new voices to enter the dialog and be heard. Those at the center of a discussion don't need Thread the Needle; it's being built for those at the edge.

Update: U Blog Senior Lecturer in Tionian Area Studies and Chaplain AKMA and PorridgeBoy's good twin, Gary Turner (the one who doesn't put salt in his porridge) have stepped up to gather requirements from the weblogging community for Thread the Needle. Thanks, guys.

Posted by Bb at June 16, 2002 01:33 PM


Scott: "The weblogging "community" would do well to learn some humility as they go forward into this bright Utopian future he describes."

BB: "Humility? We need to learn humility? Humility. Wow. The day I believe that those who use technology should be appreciative of and humble before said technology and its creators is the same day I quit working in this field, marry an asshole who believes women should be pregnant, barefoot, and in the kitchen, and start voting for Bush."

Sentiment and anger understood, BB, but I think you may have missed Scott's point: humility to/with _people_, not technology. 'Respect' might have been a better word - the two-way respect of peers, not the one-way demanded-'respect' of the 'get-out-of-criticism-free card', as you put it.

I didn't comment on this thread before because I know I don't have the technical background, and I'm not active enough as a blogger. I did think Meg's article was relevant, though, and the comments about the format _as an enabler_ - much like David McCusker's piece about Haiku some time back - are definitely relevant. Sure, the format is only a minor part of the whole, sure: but it _is_ relevant to weblogging both as a medium/model of communication and as a community of peers.

So why the anger, BB? I don't see the reason for the heat here...

Posted by: Tom Graves on June 16, 2002 02:55 PM

Tom, I wasn't angry. If anything, I thought my response to the humility thing was funny. Was meant to be funny. And passionate, because that's how I write.

As for heat - let's face it, if my style was cool and calm, I'd be called Snowbird, and would live in Florida in the winter...


Posted by: Bb aka Shelley aka Weblog Bosswoman on June 16, 2002 03:09 PM

Actually, I prefer Stavros' response to the humility comment:

"Fuck humility. Let's dance."

Now of all times and here of all places we must all be a little arrogant - or how can we dare post anything online?

Still - Scott or anyone that comes along, I'm not angry. Honest. Really, really.

Posted by: Bb aka Shelley aka Weblog Bosswoman on June 16, 2002 03:13 PM

I think it would be wise to ask the same question of anything we get upset about. I've read a lot of talk about this thing with meg and my personal opinion is we are free to say what we please.

There are certain bloggers with pull that work at keeping a tight clique of people together and the rest of the people out. My experiences with meg in past (and Ive had several) are that shes not one of those people.

And I disagree with Dorthea completely about Meg's evolution as a writer. Its short sighted the way parents who never let their kids do anything is short sighted. We evolve by taking the good and the bad. All good leads to problems faster than bad and good mixed together.

Needless to say its all rhetoric anyways. Weblogging is what it is. I disagree that either easy to use tools, or prominent well written blogs encourage new bloggers. I think you either have a base need to blog (write) or you dont. If you do you will seek out ways to do so regardless of all the banter thats occupying so many peoples minds about blogging.

Posted by: ruzz on June 16, 2002 03:13 PM

Well said, ruzz. I've been circling around that last point, trying to figure out a way to say it, since yesterday.

*smack self in forehead*

Posted by: stavrosthewonderchicken on June 16, 2002 07:55 PM

I think things are getting interesting now, thanks to some Very Smart Ideas from Jeff at Visible Darkness...

Posted by: stavrosthewonderchicken on June 17, 2002 04:22 AM

Post a comment


Email Address:



Remember info?