Ever notice that dissent on blogs often takes on a certain character that’s well outside the scope of civil discussion? Stephanie Zvan did, and she does what she does best — asks you pointed questions about it until you “get it”.
How other bloggers cope sometimes is beyond me, though. The onslaught of commenters telling people what they should be writing about, how they should write it, what they can and cannot say about it, how what they left out is far more important…well, you get the idea. And the people saying, “Thank you, I enjoyed reading that,” or, “I’m so glad you brought that to my attention,” are rare indeed. All the more precious for that, but rare.
Read more over at Quiche Moraine.
I was surprised at how much of myself I saw reflected in her main critique, that the only cover charge expected of a blog reader is that they actually read the article in question before freaking out over some slight. I don’t think I got to see the particular piece of drama that brought on this post, but I’ve seen enough examples of exactly the kind of dysfunctional discourse to which she’s referring, to “get it” myself.
Thank you, I enjoyed reading that. I am so glad you brought that to my attention.
I can tell you’ve been out of the loop for a while, if you’re not reading one of your own co-blogs! Hope things are getting better for you, man.
I was just being a little sly. I am lucky enough to see previews of Stephanie and Greg’s works. Things are going well for me, I am just keeping things on the QT, the sly, strictly hush-hush, Mounds View Confidential.
Ahhh. *touches nose*
I am honoured that I am considered far enough into your inner circle that you can be sarcastic to me. I’m also honoured that you didn’t berate me when it flew clear over my head.