Quantcast

«

»

Oct 17 2008

Not This Fucking Shit Again

Abel Phuckwit and PalMD are leading a panel discussion on “on the needs and justification for anonymity or pseudonymity in blogging” at the upcoming ScienceOnline’09 conference (16-18 Jan 2009 in RTP, NC, USA). While I understand that there could be interest in this topic, I think that in large part it is superfluous, and the very existence of such a panel is tantamount to “blaming the victim”.

Whether anyone “needs to”, or can “justify”, blogging pseudonymously is besides the point. Whose fucking business is it whether someone else chooses to blog pseudonymously? Anyone who doesn’t like it can choose not to read pseudonymous blogs.

I think all this pseudonymity/anonymity handwringing is driven by the florid neuroses of a handful of non-pseudonymous bloggers who are outraged by the fact that their real-world credentials gain them no credibility at all in the blogosphere, while numerous pseudonymous/anonymous bloggers have developed–through the demonstrable value of their actual motherfucking content–tremendous respect and credibility. It pisses these weebly doucheknockers off that people laugh derisively at their inane gibberish and fancy-ass degrees, while taking very seriously the well-developed and well-written content of numerous pseuds, all of whom could very well be labrador retrievers with Windows passwords.

13 comments

Skip to comment form

  1. 1
    Isis the Scientist

    I don’t know what you’re talking about, PP. Dr. Isis’s real name is Isis and she has a degree from a very prestigious institution.

  2. 2
    bikemonkey

    not Labs. Pitbulls. With lipstick.

  3. 3
    eumenidis

    A panel discussion. At a science conference. Good grief, *what* an inappropriate & jejune waste of time.

  4. 4
    bikemonkey

    eunuchidis, you did click through, right? it is a ScienceOnline conference. The focus is on the latter, not the former…

    not that it isn’t a circle jerk, which is perhaps what you meant to say…

  5. 5
    eumenidis

    Sorry, “eunuch” doesn’t apply, I’m female & my ovaries are still in place, thank you. Afraid you’ll just have to find a different insulting play on words.

    No, I didn’t bother to “click through”, as it was clear that the subject was just a variant of an argument about the use of pseudonyms that I encountered in a fan fiction community about 20 years ago. It was a puerile waste of time & energy in a community of amateur fiction writers; it’s even more obnoxious in a community supposedly dedicated to science; it’s behavior I would expect from my teenaged nephew, not from well-educated adults.

  6. 6
    Peggy

    I think the fact that it does keep coming up means that it worth discussing in the context of science blogging and your desired audience. If Joe the Plumber stumbled on your blog, he might be more likely to “listen” to what you have to say if you blogged as Dr. Hubert Farnsworth, professor at Famous Ivy League University. The question is whether you care, or even if you should care.

  7. 7
    eumenidis

    The question that occurs to me is that if Joe or Josie the Plumber were to stumble upon these blogs whether they would be welcome to engage in comment or discussion, or be expected to keep their prole mouths shut & gratefully receive instruction from their betters. It would be nice if we could safely assume that the motivation behind science blogs was to communicate & teach science to lay people, but unfortunately scientists are as prone as any other group of bloggers to prancing displays & demeaning others to inflate their own feelings of self-importance.

  8. 8
    Comrade PhysioProf

    It would be nice if we could safely assume that the motivation behind science blogs was to communicate & teach science to lay people

    That may be a motivation behind some science blogs, but where the fuck do you get the wackaloon idea that it should be the motivation behind all science blogs!?

  9. 9
    eumenidis

    Since I’m not a complete loon, I don’t assume that. I was responding to “Peggy’s” argument that Joe or Josie Blow who happened to stumble across a science blog was more likely to be impressed by & listen to a blogger who listed his qualifications. In any case, it makes little sense to me for a blog intended solely for communications between colleagues to be open for lay people to stumble over. Well, little rational sense; I can think of quite a few irrational reasons.

  10. 10
    bikemonkey

    eumenidis, the colleagues that I meet on various science blogs are ones that with 3 exceptions I would probably never interact with or even meet IRL.

    Peggy, your new nickname for PP is awesome!

  11. 11
    Isis the Scientist

    Ok, BM. Dr. Isis is #1. Who are the other two jokers?

  12. 12
    Candid Engineer

    I am, in fact, a labrador retriever.

  13. 13
    Peggy

    Bikemoney: Professor Farnsworth is one of my favorite scientists. I totally want a Smell-O-Scope.

    eumnidis: In any case, it makes little sense to me for a blog intended solely for communications between colleagues to be open for lay people to stumble over.

    I think you are missing the egalitarian nature of blogs. The blogger writes and people who are interested read. Sure, the writing can be tailored towards a specific group, but it’s not a closed club. What I like about science blogs is being able to get a glimpse into people’s research and experiences as scientists without being a real-life colleague. Interested lay people, as you put it, are welcome to the readership club too. I think it’s the casual browser who isn’t interested enough in the topic to stick around and “get to know” the blogger, pseudonymous or not, who is most likely to be swayed by an impressive-sounding title. Some blogs are tailored for that kind of casual browser, but there isn’t any reason all of them should be.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite="" class=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>