I've wondered off and on if anybody gives a crap about what I write here. After careful internal consideration of the issue, I have decided that:
- A. I don't really care
- B. I wish I could hire Ms. Tek
- C. I lied in A, I do care...but I said it because it makes me sound tougher and more 'together'. And most important of all:
- D. I am not leaving Blogcritics
Many controversial issues have been spoken about here: sex, drugs, presidential politics, racism, religion and Jimi Hendrix.
Oh yes, the comments have flown fast n' furious. Hot, steaming chunks 'o poo have met with many a shiney face. Yet, I will stay on to tough it out.
Heck, maybe the reason that I'm staying is that Mac Diva has never called me a racist. Not that it matters (I know that I'm not). I mean, my ex brother-in-law was black. He was very cool but was still a dickhead for several reasons not worth mentioning here. I still loved him though, mostly because he was the father of my ultracool niece and introduced me to Parliament, Stroh's beer and Savory Soul Sauce (you Clevelander's may know what I'm talking about).
Oh yea, I could almost always beat him at bowling, which was a plus.
In conclusion, I would like to say that I am not any more knowledgeable than any of you about the following topics of importance: Indian cooking, NASCAR, Cobol programming, cosmetics, civil engineering, antique hatpin collecting, law.
And so my friends...
(First posted on Mark Is Cranky)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Mac Diva
Mac Diva has never called most people racist. And, when I do . . . I am usually right.
Anyway, remain your level-headed self, Mark.
2 - Eric Olsen
What a lot of people - including me - often forget is that we've only been in existence for about 18 months. We are still becoming whatever it is that we will eventually become. I know that we get better all the time in every way: quality, quantity, visibility, traffic, sophistication.
Although it is at the very core of our constant low-grade (sometimes flaring to solar-grade) conflict, as PC and cliched as it sounds, our diversity is our strength.
Thanks Mark, you are a total core member and a joy to have around.
3 - Eric Olsen
And I would love to be able to hire our sweet Tek as well - I hope we can get to that point sooner rather than later.
4 - Jim Carruthers
mmmm, curried NASCAR Cobol ...
5 - Jim Carruthers
Obviously today is Lesley Gore tribute day, so let's all join hands and sing along:
It's my party, and I'll cry if I want to ...
6 - Eric Olsen
Yes, in a final act of spineless acquiescence, I have closed the comments here as demanded by the dear departed. I think it appropriate that the final comment - repeated no less - stand in testament to our divergent path.
The fundamental philosophical difference becomes clear: "this is my post ..."
Actually, once the post in on Blogcritics, it becomes a part of Blogcritics and becomes OUR - as in all of us who are members' - post.
I've only run into one other member who failed to see this, and he too is long gone, making demands about deleting posts and the comments of others, and seeking to dictate the operations of 433 people. Very strange and odd, but I imagine statistically inevitable.
7 - Jim Carruthers
But why shouldn't the self-involved and self-important stamp their feet in a hissy-fit on their rights on a site they don't own or contribute anything to?
Since if you really want a venue, you can just set up your own blog and ... oh, wait.
Somebody please remind me why we need to like lawyers in the first place?
8 - Dirtgrain
Eric, your spine is intact. It was a compassionate act. We need a song to fit the occasion--something along the lines of "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald."
What the hell was Carruthers saying about pubes and flames?
P.S. My posts function well as tissues--the cheap generic kind--put as much snotty goo on them as you like.
9 - CW Fisher
KILL THE PIGGY DRINK ITS BLOOD!
--from Lord of the Flies
10 - TDavid
Marc - Speaking for myself, I give a crap about what you write. I realize you are poking a bit of fun at another post with this entry but I just thought I'd throw this out.
Here's an idea: why don't you list some of your personal favorite blog entries that you felt were overlooked in spite of more dramatical posts?
This way then maybe some of us who actually enjoy reading your work can go and read it and perhaps leave a comment for you on those older pieces posted here?
Even though I run an RSS reader, I don't see, nor do I visit, every entry and am often surprised when I hit the search to find stuff that I missed that was worthwhile here.
I don't leave comments for every piece I've read here, either, but I try to leave them on most of them because I know how much feedback is useful to writers.
I would also add that the number of comments are rarely representative of the quality or usefulness of a piece from what I've read around here. Some of the best pieces I've read had no comments or very few comments at all.
Happy writing to you! :)
11 - TDavid
And then I went and mispelled your name, sorry. I meant "Mark", my bad.
12 - Mark Saleski
obviously, i wasn't really looking for any pats on the back....the point was to make light of 'the bix exit'.
i mean, gees....can't anybody take a little flack? so what if it got a little hot & heavy with the diva? big deal!
hey, sometimes barger calls me a stupid liberal commie...then i call him a stupid conservative fuckwit...and then we get back to elvis costello and weird jazz posts. that's what's fun about this place.
yea, take your toys and go home. whatever.
13 - TDavid
Ok, fuck you then, I don't care about what you write.
:)
14 - Mark Saleski
now that's more like it!
15 - Al Barger
In the classic words of Winston Wolf, "Let's not start sucking each other's dicks just yet."
Let me say a few words on BB's "why not" side. I'd prefer he stayed, but Lord knows he's largely correct in his criticisms.
Since this post is already here and we lack any other internal communication forum among Blogcritics, I'll bury some badly needed frank words of criticism for the troops down here in the comments, hoping for minimal notice from the general public.
I don't mind a few elbows being thrown like what come from Mr. Saleski. He a bit on the pinko side, but hey. That's mostly a moderately civil disagreement.
On the other hand, Mac Diva singlehandedly drags this entire site down. I try to be nice and extend her love and compliments where I can- not that it does any good, and I don't even care about her dumb personal attacks on me per se. Obviously, I can take a punch.
However, I'd like for this to be something like a professional quality site, and it simply cannot be that with her around. We're trying to attract advertisers, and look like we're players. We're attempting to get a book deal, as well.
How are we supposed to do that with the constant ridiculous flame wars and necessity of internecine posts like the Re: Mac Diva? She constantly defecates all over the site with her malicious nonsense.
What's a publisher supposed to think if they are seriously considering investing thousands of dollars in us, or an advertiser, and comes over to find wide swaths of her utter hysterical nonsense and the waves of animosity rippling out from it? Looks like children fighting, not serious adult writers.
Eric has clearly decided, however, that he will tolerate Diva no matter what unfounded, malicious libels she commits. His fuzzy warm feelings of niceness for being tolerant of the mentally disturbed angry black woman and her thesaurus make him willing to accept the continuing damage done by her presence on the site. This is unfortunate, but totally his decision to make.
Diva's obviously the worst of it, but not the only offender. The Tekwh0re does not help with her ridiculous displays of vulgar hostility, for one. "Sweet" might describe her cheesecake web cam photos, but not her frequently hateful, thoughtless, malicious and frankly inferior writing.
It would appear that her ONE thing to write about is how she can't get an IT job to suit her, and it's all that big dumb Bush's fault. That's dumb and boring and self-serving enough the first time she writes it, so I don't know what to call it other than just excruciating whining by the dozenth time. I know I wouldn't hire her to bus tables with her attitude.
I have a possible explanation for her employment problem. Perhaps her ideas of IT work resemble her writing. Thus, when the computer doesn't respond just how she wants, maybe she just screams that it's bigoted and not worthy of her respect, then curses it and wishes it a painful death. It takes more than jiggling your big breasts at a computer to make it work, and I've seen precious little evidence based on her writing that she has other skills.
Now, my people are from Kentucky, so I don't claim to know a lot about fancy computer stuff. However, I suspect that this strategy would prove unsuccessful in getting the computers up, or keeping bosses willing to keep her on payroll. But hey, they're all just stupid bigots too.
One more name has jumped out at me recently for specific criticism: Mr. Larkin didn't impress me with the "pissing on some rabbis" comments, or the ridiculous "America's not worth saving" crap, among other things.
What I'm after here are not merely the examples of sub-par writing or things that don't particularly interest me, but the things that actively discredit the site. These three people significantly do. I could come up with a few more examples (notably including the anti-Semitic commenter "Shaun"), but these look like about the worst offenders. Others of you may look to see if the shoe fits.
Really, what are serious adults and professionals supposed to make of a lot of this stuff?
I, too, celebrate our diversity. I'm all for having liberals and conservatives and libertarians, Christians and atheists and the Religion of Peace, Rebels and Yanks, cats and dogs, opera and Grand Ol' Opry fans- even misguided Sabbath fans. We just don't need a bunch of childish, irrational hostility and libelous nonsense.
One more thing, and one where I am perhaps not without some blame. We should try to clean up our language a bit. We're all adults (theoretically), and we can talk as we wish. But why would you wish to be dropping the F-bomb every other word? Are you under the mistaken impression that it makes you look clever or sophisticated? It does not. It more suggests that you're lazy or lacking vocabulary.
Now, I anticipate the obvious automatic negative responses to this little appeal for Geometry and Theology. Rather than actually consider the merits of these criticisms, some will simply childishly lash out with insults and abuse towards me- as if that will prove me wrong or at least hurt my feelings. It won't. But knock yourselves out.
I urge the adults in attendance, however, to consider how we can improve our performance and appearance.
Thanks for your consideration.
[Edited because Al Barger is sometimes a jackass]
16 - Mark Saleski
many good points Al.
i see the discourse (or lack of) that goes on here to be a microcosm of the same arguments that go on everywhere else on our society.
is it worse here. i don't think so.
so i guess the question is, what (if anything) do we really want to do about it?
17 - Al Barger
The main thing is self-discipline. Try to be better each of us in our own behavior. Do the best writing we can, trying to give voice to reason and civility. Try to raise the bar on our own performance, and what we (politely) demand of others.
Again, I'm not perfect. I might occasionally deserve to get called for unnecessary roughness on the playing field perhaps. I will re-double my efforts at professionalism.
I would prefer getting harsher criticisms privately, in email, rather than blared here. It's also not nearly so bad to just VENT privately as publicly. Feel free to cuss me out like I deserve- privately.
You can't even criticize through email, however, with some of our people. Ms Pitt in particular has been known to make aggravated public complaints against people who have sent her criticism privately, as has Ms Davis. You risk being labeled a "stalker," as Natalie once did for responding on my own public thread to a comment made about my own article.
Therefore, I don't know how else to deal with them other than make any criticisms utterly directly and publicly.
Then there is The Mac Diva Problem. Nothing really seems to motivate her to civility. She can go off at any time for no reason at all, and does. The relentless but scrupulously good-humored criticisms from Shark seem to be very marginally effective in ever so slightly moderating her foolishness. That's not much, but it at least salves the public wounds with the healing balm of humor.
18 - BB
#6: Ok Olsen now you've gone too far. For the record sir, your reference "this is my post ..." was made in response to the fact that you and/or Phillip overrode MY personal settings for... yes, MY post so that your hacks could do a hatchet job with their stupid, vapid comments. You had no damn right to do that! So much for your rhetoric about non-interference.
The only "spineless" thing that I can see was your lame excuse "I didn't know anything about open or closed comments - ALL posts have open comments, even the few we have closed in the past are quietly reopened later. I didn't open them, maybe they were opened when the post was rebuilt - I don't know."
Sorry for the French Eric, but... BULLSHIT!!! You expect anybody to believe that crapola! You own the site sir so please don't tell me you aren't aware of the capabilities of your own software! If you didn't want it then it why the hell did you put it there in the first place? Oh, let me guess... you didn't know. :-(
I'm extremely disappointed in you Eric. Talk about unprofessional. And by the way sir, I'm still waiting for you to remove those comments. Now I know why I quit BC and good riddance bro.
19 - TDavid
This thread goes from tongue-in-cheek to serious to tongue-in-cheek to serious. Make up yer minds what is the focus here ;)
so i guess the question is, what (if anything) do we really want to do about it?
Eric has spoken publicly on this several times and the answer at this time anyway seems to be in the immortal words of the Beatles: let it be
He doesn't want to introduce moderators to the comment area or censor the material beyond the really extreme (like the softcore porn image ad and the eagle landing). All the things that Al mentioned -- and more -- do not pass the *extreme* test.
And Al, somehow conveniently you left out your involvement with the fallen eagle, which is a foul stain that you are not going to be able to distance yourself from anytime soon (if ever).
I digress.
This is the same at sites like Slashdot though. Just surf there with comments at 0 or -1 and you'll see all sorts of garbage that's sometimes on par with what you can read in the comment section here. One major difference is that their program puts "Anonymous Coward" next to those who choose this plane of existence and there is a clear ability for users to filter the wheat from the chaff. This functionality is something that I've already publically and privately expressed a desire to see changed as being an overall improvement to the site in the long run.
Slashdot doesn't have any trouble with professionalism or ad sponsorships (to my knowledge anyway), so Eric's idea of "let the people police themselves" isn't all that much different and appears to be on the right track, despite those who dislike this policy when it doesn't suit them.
Two different sites, content-wise, but I believe a similarly effective way of dealing with the issue of community commenting where anons are allowed.
In fact, while I am tooting Slashdot's horn, check out their way of dealing with comments and moderation. It's technical, creative and an interesting way of handling with the every day issues that come up here and at every other site really with any significant traffic that allows commenting from the masses.
Therefore, I think the whole "let's try to keep it professional" spiel has about 1% relevance in reality.
Fortunately, there will always be technical solutions ;)
20 - BB
Remember this Olsen?
"I am a participant, not a referee, and I am very wary of being forced into that (referee) role. Think of the differences: participants are inside and equal, and even if I am the "most equal of equals," that is still very different from referee, whose role is not participant, but supervisor of the participants."
For somebody who claims not to take sides and pleads ignorance of how his own site's software works, you sure knew how to kick me out of my account quick enough didn't you? Hardly a few minutes after I had made my post you locked me out, cleaned my desk and rifled my files. Don't try to deny it because I can provide all of the emails and time-line to prove it.
If only you would listen to yourself more often and practiced what you preach. And to add insult to injury you have the balls to jerk me around and in the same breath defend an abomination like Mac Diva. Behind that fancy thesaurus you keep handy your words are seriously lacking substance. Blogcritics beware.
Hypocrite! Feh!
21 - TDavid
BB - I'll vouch for Eric in the technology department. Logging into the browser based admin area of Movable Type and throwing a few switches -- assuming that is what was actually done -- is not the same as hacking the code or even writing new code.
But there is a big difference between that and being able to hack up the code on the site and navigate browser-based admin functions in MT.
Also, Phillip is the publicized technical contact for the site and who is to say that he didn't take this action? I would support this action, in fact, based upon the prior actions of at least one other disgrunted Blogcritic in the past (and this isn't saying or even suggesting BB that you would do anything malicious to the site, but the fact is that at least one other disgruntled Blogcritic has).
So until you absolutely know otherwise, you might not want to insinuate that Eric has knowledge and skills that he says he doesn't possess.
With all due respect and I'm not trying to pick any fights here, BB, I wish to address the other issue.
I'm a bit perplexed about something and since you (or the admins or whomever) closed off comments in the other thread on your way out then I'll present it to you here and hopefully you would be kind enough to explain at your convenience.
If you didn't really want to leave (which may not be what you said, but is what I'm getting) then what's up with the drama?
Maybe when things chill out then just write him back privately and I'm guessing that he'll reinstate you. I know you are pissed off, but you are letting some of this get to you too much, IMHO.
If you did indeed want to leave as a writer, then I for one hope you will stay as a commenter. After all, I was (falsely) accused of encouraging you on to make that blowout post about Cheeseroni so I might as well be encouraging you to stay as a commenter.
I understood your initial blowout over Cheeseroni (I've grown weary of giving her Google juice) but from a business perspective I don't understand your exit plan at all.
You could use whatever traffic that Blogcritics sends you (and on the contry to what you wrote, I do pretty well with the traffic from this website when I publish an entry), couldn't you? All traffic is good, in whatever quantity.
There are blogcritics here who don't get involved in the commenting aspect, they mostly just contribute blog entries (you could become one of those, maybe?). The fact that you give any serious attention to Cheeseroni just proves she is getting to you.
Haven't you read the story of James Russell? Man, people like her beat you by quitting. You aren't punishing her, you are encouraging her. I'd rather see folks like you hang around and help keep her honest. Us Libras just love balance :)
In fact she actually did do damage to Blogcritics once upon a time by removing content and forcing Phillip to have to go in and hack the script so that people like her throwing an immature exit strategy tizzy fit couldn't delete all their submitted content through the MT interface.
And yes, I'm going to continue to remind folks, where relevant, that this was a historical event until at the very least she quits assaulting others -- in the comment section -- with her numerous hypocritical rants.
This is something to my knowledge that you never tried to do when you were a Blogcritic (remove content from the site), so I can't imagine that whatever you write here that Eric is going to be so hellbent on you leaving the site?
He might be pissed off on a personal level (and I have no idea if he is or not) with things that you post here to him, but on a professional level I think he'd welcome you back as a blogcritic, just as he did to Cheeseroni after her breakdown which was destructive!
To me it is a matter of site security to remove users who ask to be removed. It would be technical incompetence not to take this type action even if the person was not disgruntled. Just standard protocol and no offense intended.
This isn't saying anything about you though BB. Really.
Again, I hope you do stick around and help with the balance, even if it's only in the comment area.
Take care and keep writing!
22 - Eric Olsen
Thanks for all the kind words and support - they are always appreciated.
Al's general points are germane, although I would not have singled out those he did for special excoriation, for the sins he chose to underline - since those chosen all happen to disagree with him on many/most matters, there is a self-serving whiff about the list.
Of course we want to keep improving the quality of our posts and writing in general, and certainly our level of discourse, but I would make an absolute distinction between posts and comments.
Comments are going to range from the logical and didactic to the humorous, to the sarcastic, to the mean, to the cruel, to the irrelevant, to the incomprehensible. There are now over 48,000 comments on the site, they flow like water, they are conversation, view them accordingly.
BB, I have now gone from vaguely sympathetic to an unpleasant combination of irritated and bored regarding your threats and petulance. OF COURSE I turned off your posting and editing privileges after you loudly, publicly, and at great melodramatic length announced your departure from the site - what in God's name do you expect? Either you're in or you're out and you couldn't have made it much more clear that you are out. Why, in fact, are you not acting upon your own loud, self-aggrandizing pronouncements and continuing to snipe from the sidelines?
It should have been clear that you were not going to get the response you wanted when you (very publicly) wrote a post weeks ago demanding the ouster of another member, and EVEN PEOPLE WHO AGREED WITH YOUR ASSESSMENT of said individual did not want that person to be removed.
When you make a public power play, you are stuck with the results of that play - you lost, now you are a very sore loser.
Regarding your accusations on the opening and closing of comments - please allow me to explain my day for you and others who may harbor misconceptions: this site gets between 30-40 posts on a typical weekday. Typically, many or even most of those posts have something about them that requires my attention. Either there is a matter of editing, or procedure, or coding, or Amazon that I have to take action directly upon. Therefore, I routinely scan virtually every post (sometimes I miss for whatever reason) and automatically, without even thinking about it, make the necessary changes to keep the site running more or less smoothly, with some semblance of structural uniformity. It is certainly possible I changed your "comments none" to "comments open" without giving it a second thought, because that is the norm. I fix things that are outside the norm all day long, between trying to write my own posts for Blogcritics and other writing. Since I work 12-hours a day during the week, and another 8-10 hours on weekends, much slides by that my feeble brain doesn't really take notice of, and this could well be one of those actions.
I will not remove the comments on the post, I will not take any other action demanded of me by a former member who has now moved over into the category of screaming pain in the ass, after never really getting with the program in the first place.
I virtually NEVER make such judgments, but when backed into the corner I will do so: there is simply no comparison between the contributions of Mac Diva, who contributes widely, consistently, interestingly, with precision and erudition, on every category of the site, over an extended period of time, and the person who forced the comparison. It's David vs Goliath and in this case Goliath wins in a rout. Contributions to the site DO count for something and I disagree vehemently that the site would be a better place if her posts and comments (which are the gist of the complaints) were magically removed. She certainly dishes it out, but she also takes it: no one takes more criticism and yet continues to participate and contribute day in and day out. This counts for something - this counts for a lot, and I myself am often on the receiving end of her displeasure. That's just the way it goes.
My patience has now officially run out: when people quit, they are expected to leave the premises, please exhibit a tiny amount of redeeming grace and do so.
23 - Hal Pawluk
BB: "I quit BC and good riddance bro."
I second that, but doesn't that mean we don't have to see any more of his posts?
Phillip/Eric, can't you put a block on him and his IP address or something?
Since he has quit, I don't think you'd be violating any principles.
24 - Phillip Winn
Hal, we have so far only blocked spammers, those who have assumed the identities of others, and two others. I extended an invitation to BB to stick around and comment on BC, and I meant it. If he can manage to remember that he was one of 430+ contributors to BC and that he now has less standing than any of them, he'll be great to have around.
25 - Craig Lyndall
The ego-maniacal nature of posting your departure is still what rubs me the wrong way. I disagree with a lot of people on a lot of things on this site. I have disagreed with Mac Diva, Hal and others. And I am pretty sure based on offshoring conversations that Ms. Tek hates me by now. These things I can deal with. They are all based on arguments within topics on the site.
When you think you are bigger than the site though with some self-important, "I could sue the site, AND I am taking my ball and going home" post, that is the point at which I get upset. I like disagreeing with people and I enjoy the debate, but this other stuff outside of the topics gets old very quickly.
Jim Rome says on his radio program "the Jungle," that the biggest topic in the Jungle, is the Jungle itself. I understand that, and I think it is funny, but I am not sure how successful this site would be if the biggest topic on BlogCritics is the site BlogCritics. As a result, these public exits and calls for a member's removal just piss me off.
So here's to arguments on all the topics that we feel passionate about. Just remember you are 1 out of many and nobody is bigger than the site. Not even Eric.
P.S. You shouldn't be able to have the comments posted and dictate to everyone else that if they want to answer you they will have to write another full post to discuss something. You can close comments on your own site. If you didn't want to hear what the rest of us had to say then you should have skipped the ego-driven public post and just sent Eric an email to close your account.