Special Case

Rivrdog has problems with my public re-linking of Gut Rumbles.

No offense intended here ma'am, but what is the big deal about linking or de-linking? Blogging is simply the public expression of personal thought. If you find something that offends you, stop reading it and don't refer to it. Conversely, if you find something that you like, you can say so and or link to it.

I explained about linking and de-linking in the first paragraph of the post. You claim to have read it and re-read it, so I’ll only re-iterate this: Acidman is a special case (no pun intended).

You have no clue how much Rob and I have communicated before or after this incident; no clue as to how close (in on-line terms) we had become. You might have considered this, before you made your hasty judgment. My ego is large, but not so large that I don't consider that there may be factors in a situation that I don't know about.

The blogroll of a blog is not controlled by some pompous government regulation.

Really? Thanks for informing me of that. I had no idea that this wasn’t the case. /sarcasm

If you update your blogroll by adding to it or deleting from it, that is likewise a personal decision.

Alright. Since it’s obvious that you actually ignored this part, I’ll repeat it just for you. (It is really all about you, isn’t it?)

Generally, I don’t make a big to-do about linking or de-linking to a blog. If a blogger has a nice body of work, I’ll simply add it to the blogroll. Conversely, if a blogger hasn’t posted in a while, states his/her intent to quit blogging or the blog manifestly no longer exists, I’ll simply de-link the blog without comment (with one or two exceptions). I’ve only de-linked one blogger for cause.[SNIP]

So I quietly de-linked him and we handled our business in private. I hate unnecessary drama.

Rivrdog continues:

In evaluating the worth of a blog, I look to content only. Content is composed of the elements of creative concepts and writing proficiency.

That’s a fine standard to uphold. I try to use it as well. However, this situation had nothing to do with any of that. This was, and I repeat, a special case.

I view with suspicion any blogger who would make any kind of fuss, positive or negative, about linking or delinking another blog.

As do I, which is why I said nothing publicly during the mass de-linking. In this special case, however, I felt that, since Rob was so widely de-linked in public, that he should get the same for a re-linking, which goes against my usual policy, as I said in the first sentence of the first paragraph of the post in question.

That smacks of ego projection, which is NOT an essential element of writing.

It does if one ignores the special case elements of this situation, as you have done.

Rivrdog makes another attempt to show me the error of my ways.

I'm afraid you didn't get MY point, which was that decisions on linkng or delinking have zero to do with the content of one's blog, are simply housekeeping, and shouldn't require any discussion.

Since I agreed with this—spelled it out at the beginning of the post in question that I don’t normally make that decision in public, then implied there and spelled out here that this is a special case--what’s your point? Since I never said or implied that decisions involving linking or de-linking to a blog had anything to do with the quality or content of my blog, what’s your point?

Shakespeare said it best: Methinks you protesteth too much? (or similar).

Protesting what? Okay, I suck as a writer, my content stinks and my ego is too much for my readers to take. Any blog-reader would spend his/her on-line time better elsewhere.

Is that enough humility (hah!) for you, Rivrdog?

I’ve never claimed to be a great writer. I post, others read and make their judgment, one way or the other. If they like, I’m gratified. If not, I assume that most of them are intelligent enough to find the “door.”

If you’re trying to say that you don’t like my writing, just be direct about it. As you so sardonically pointed out, there’s no government regulation which directs you to read this blog.

I have a large ego, but not one so overblown that I would write to a blogger—either in public or private—telling him/her that I am suspicious of something he/she wrote. I am humble enough to suspect that he/she wouldn’t give a rat’s behind and would deserve it if he/she called me out in public, if I kept pushing it and kept ignoring the special case elements that went against the SOP of the blog in question. Under normal circumstances—unlike in this special case--if I don't like a blog, I simply don't read it or link to it. To repeat to some who cannot read and needs it constantly drilled into their heads, this is a special case.

Take the last line of your last comment and turn it around on yourself, sir. On the large ego score, I rate high; however, I defer to you.

Comments

[Deb]

"If they like, I’m gratified. If not, I assume that most of them are intelligent enough to find the “door.”"

I like. I enjoy reading you, whether it's comments on the news, the world or your own personal experiences (yes, even your de-link/link post). I seem to recall something on Acidman's blog which maybe applies here to Rivrdog: "If my blog does not meet your standards, then LOWER YOUR STANDARDS. Who the hell do you think you are, anyway?"

[El Capitan]

Perhaps I'm missing the point of blogging entirely, but it occurs to me that the required content of a blog is whatever the owner of the blog decides it to be. I suppose I would be a trifle suprised if den Beste linked to 50 different blogs in one day, or if Reynolds penned a 5000 word essay on an obscure topic, but it would never occur to me to email them and complain that they are doing the wrong thing, or gripe about their level of ego.

If you just HAD to justify it, though, it seems to me that blog 'housekeeping' would fall into the same categorizing of public & private, similar to how media treats newsworthy individuals. Put yourself in the spotlight, you're considered a 'public figure', and anything goes. A minor change may not be worth pointing out. A major event might just be.

Acidman's infamous screed and the mass de-linking that followed made some pretty large ripples in the big blog pond, and I'd sure consider that newsworthy. Your re-linking is just an echoing wave from the original splash.

[Steve H.]

I can't believe there are people out there who feel entitled to tell you what to write about. I've gotten the same nonsense in my comments, and my response boils down to, "Screw you, start your own blog."

[La Shawn Barber]

Don't you just love it when people like that give you material to blog about? I also get miffed when someone tries to tell me what to blog about, especially liberal types. For instance, I'm "airing dirty laundry" when I point out muddy thinking in the black community.

[Cythen]

Uh, so he just basically came back and said, "Don't make a fuss out of de/re/linking". Which is your policy anyhow. *blinks* I must be missing something, or else it was the case that he was exceptionally bored.

I like the content :D

[dank1j]

Love your perspective. You provide insight to those, like me, who don't personally know any black people or people with extensive military background for that matter well enough to discuss serious matters of politics/racism etc.

I certainly get joy and knowledge from reading opinions from the major conservative black commentators, but your blog provides the unprofessional passionate perspective on many topics of a personal nature.

I can write well enough to make a point now and again. I read a few blogs, 5+ conservative online magazines, and books. Your writing, to my untrained eye/ear, is very clean, clear, and easy to read. The content makes it worth the read and the writing makes it enjoyable. Wish my writing was as good.