Category: Weblogging

Categories
Weblogging

You free blogging shits

Snippets:

 

“During that weekend, I came to the realization that I’ve been mulling over ever since: a lack of money is hindering the growth and potential of blogging. Free — or personal — blogging can only take us so far.”

…

“By paying great bloggers to produce weblogs, we remove economic constraints and enable them to devote their energies full-time to producing compelling content and creating outstanding weblogs.”

…

“If we can demonstrate that these blogs are worth the cost it takes to maintain them, we will enable the creation of many more compelling, useful blogs. The key to success lies in the creation of great blogs for these sites — blogs that will contain practical and engaging content and drive traffic to their respective hosts. One sure-fire way to do this is to hire bloggers.”

…

“There’s a vast group of people out there now who are experts in finding the news and links, capturing its essence in short snippets, and churning it out hour after hour, day after day.”

Meg’s latest and greatest at O’Reilly. (There’s a delicious bit of irony associated with the page–can you spot it?)

Want my opinion of the article? You know me, here’s a blank ___________ fill it in.

Better yet:

Hello O’Reilly!

 

I’ve written several books and articles for you, which unfortunately, don’t pay me enough so that I can focus on writing full-time. Too bad, really, because I love to write and spend a considerable amount of time on said books and articles.

 

However, after reading this latest article by Meg, I came up with an idea: why don’t you hire me as a professional weblogger, thereby freeing me from having to look for a new contract. Instead of writing articles and books full-time for you, I can weblog.

 

After all, I can research and link-comment-post with the best of them.

 

Sincerely, your author,

 

Shelley Powers

Categories
Weblogging

Well, someone’s a little cranky, aren’t they?

Let’s see now…

I trashed Meg’s newest article, my publisher, the intelligentsia, and Glenn Reynolds. Not bad for a day’s blogging. However, I think it’s past time that I temper the temper. What can I say, I woke up, I opened my email, I read my email, and I’ve been in a very bad mood ever since.

(Not helped by having a huge bug bite on my leg from last week that isn’t healing, and which is now compounded by this bizarre red spotted rash over both legs. Anyone from St. Louis in the audience have an idea of what this could be?)

On to positive things:

We’ve seeded the RageBoy cloud with our spam Body Parts email campaign and all we can do now is sit back and hope for rain. Or better yet–lightning and thunder. Regardless, thanks to everyone for getting involved in this, and I hope it was a little fun for one and all.

And Chris, humor aside, we miss your voice. Dive back in, the water’s fine, and we’ll help you stay afloat when the water gets rough. You have friends here

Categories
Weblogging

Wow, thanks, Glenn

Recovered from the Wayback Machine.

All of that material and effort that went into the cross-blog discussion with Eric Olsen, and Glenn Reynolds doesn’t link to any of it.

However, Professor Reynold’s comes through today by pulling a quote out from another one of my postings –out of context — to somehow prove a point about warbloggers and technobloggers not being able to reach agreement because of some form of a “cultural divide”.

Cultural divide? Ares and Athena?

Update

Looks like Professor Reynolds and I are going to be going back and forth.

True, professor, you don’t have to link to me at all. Whether you do or do not has nothing to do with fairness. I apologize for pointing out to you that you do tend to link only to those you feel justify your viewpoint. However, this is human nature, so who am I to label something ‘fair’ or not (though, I don’t remember using this expression in any way.)

However, when you say that those of us who are against the invasion of Iraq have no ‘stomach’ for fighting, then you are dead wrong. The truth is that I have no stomach for a fight that has no justification.

There is no documented evidence supporting a claim of eminent danger from Iraq and all the reasons provided as justification for an attack could also be applied to several other countries. If we’re justified in attacking Iraq, does this also mean that the US should go to war with Saudi Arabia? Syria? Jordan? China?

What criteria sets Iraq apart from any of these other countries? Or do you think we should invade Saudi Arabia next? Perhaps Iran, too? How about Syria? When do we stop?

You’ve identified yourself as a member of the Libertarian Party if I remember correctly. Well, even your party has come out with a press release stating that the party is dead set against invasion of Iraq.

What’s especially frustrating is that, as with the debate with Eric, rather than attack my position, you drop me into a group and then dismiss us with the most spurious of reasons. We are talking cross-purpose, we’re not talking the same thing, we who are against an invasion of Iraq don’t have the ‘stomach’ for fighting.

However, you are right about one thing: I apologize for any sense I may have given that I don’t think you’re fair and unbiased in your linking–your weblog, your links. It was wrong of me to get irritated (and I was irritated) because you linked to Eric’s weblog in this cross-blog debate rather than myself or the other participants. I agree–It was petty of me to get irritated about this.

About as petty as reducing my very real, very serious, and carefully documented concerns about a war in Iraq to not having the stomach for fighting.

Categories
Political Weblogging

War shit

Tom writes today that he’s bowing out of war blogging:

I think I’ve finally got the Iraq blogging out of my system. I wish I hadn’t allowed myself to get sucked into it. It’s not what people read my blog for. Readership seems to have evaporated. Emails and quotes have been conspicuously absent. I should have known better.

I can identify with Tom, because writing about politics, ‘debating’ with the warbloggers, and being a peaceblogger aren’t necessarily the focus of this weblog, either. My focus is on people connecting with other people, technology, philosophy, the environment, photography and writing. And sensuality, can’t forget sensuality.

And I have found that sensuality and war don’t mix. Sensuality and politics don’t mix. Sensuality and warbloggers don’t mix.

(There’s a pattern emerging here.)

So why do I do it? Why do I get into the debates, comment on the politics? The timing of Tom’s posting is serendipitous, because the posting I pulled earlier today touched on this. I salvaged a bit of it to repeat here:

Someone once asked me in an email if I think webloggers are journalists. I told her that webloggers aren’t journalists, we’re conduits; we don’t originate stories, we provide pipelines to new sources of information, ones that may be escoteric or obscure or unknown to the average person on the street. And these sources of information provide the news we don’t get from the mainstream press.

 

If the information is interesting our readers may discuss it with their family and at work, and this news finds its way, slowly, haltingly, gradually into the non-Net world. If there are enough pipelines joining the flow, it causes ripples and eventually even the mainstream press might take a reluctant interest.

 

Every once in a while I divert from my regularly scheduled programming to discuss a political topic, or to take on the warbloggers, as I’ve done this last week. I don’t do this because I really enjoy beating my head against a wall (‘it feels so good when I stop’), or because I expect to win the debate or to convince the warbloggers to see the error of their ways.

 

I do it because I’m laying a pipe.

I do it because I’m laying a pipe.

Categories
Weblogging

Body parts campaign

One week it was teeth the next it’s lips. I don’t know about anyone else, but I think it’s time for Rageboy to give equal time to other body parts. So, I’m starting an email campaign and am asking for your help.

To participate, copy and send the following in an email to RageBoy, replacing it with the body part of your choice:

Dear Mr. RageBoy:

I’m emailing you today to protest your discrimination against body parts other than those associated with the mouth. Though I appreciate the interesting teeth and the ruby red lips, I think it’s past time for you to provide equal representation of other body parts.

For instance, my personal preference is __________________. And the reason why I think you should feature _________________ is _________________________.

And while you’re at it, I wouldn’t mind a word or two to go with the image. Just so we know you’re still breathing and that you have a synapse or two left to spare.

Thank you. I will name my ____________________________ after you as a gesture of gratitude.

Sincerely

(Your name)

Don’t hesitate. Send those emails in now, and encourage your readers to do the same.

 

Those who’ve joined the campaign:

 

Jeneane Sessum — middle finger
Burningbird — neck
Frank Paynter — tits
Gary Turner — septum
Elaine — elbow
The One True b!x — guiche (They pierce these you know)
Steve Himmer — coccyx
Banana Bob — cubitus
Dave Winer — feet and ears (Dave gets two body parts because he, like RageBoy, is one of my BlogTree parents)
Howard Greenstein — humorous…urh, sorry that’s humerus
Fishrush — 1980 Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser Passenger Side Headlamp Assembly
Ryan — the big toe (‘…this toe goes to the market…’)
Tom Matrullo is disappointed that his favorite body part was taken already.
Denise Howell — ankle

(This is a pretty escoteric crowd I’m finding.)