Jim Stillman
Randy InmanA Matter of Courtesy and an insistence on Confusing Political Views with Respect
October 20th 2007 13:42
Some time ago, I had sent a personal message to an author of some note for her postings on Orble, asking for her comments on an post I had written. She replied,
I assumed that posting a comment on another’s blog was a courteous thing to do; this way others could read conflicting viewpoints in a convenient manner and, in addition, numerous comments on a post made it more likely to have the post earn “points” and thereby gain a larger audience.
Recently this writer posted a criticism of California’s adoption of a law regarding passive smoking and danger to children. I responded with a comment and, because I felt so strongly about the issue, posted a statement of my views. I was respectful to the writer and only contested her political positions. To my request that she comment on my post and engage in dialogue, she said,
It seems to me that we should be willing to recognize each others’ blogs and accord them with respect. There are those who attack and engage in name-calling, but I have done none of this
This other writer, answering my request that she post on my blog, for the reasons expressed above, explained that
Perhaps no one is interested in my opinions. Actually I am more of a Libertarian than Liberal; I was not that unwilling to be considered a “Compassionate Conservative”. But in any event, if a reader feels I am off-base or otherwise disagrees with a position taken, take me on.
Dismissing anything I say as “dreck” indicates an insecurity that I had not seen previously.
By the way, as far as popularity is concerned, I was not aware it was a contest. I have earned $.56 so far!
“Hi Jim. No problem with the comment, I'll be glad to do it. Can I ask you a question?? Why don't you leave comments on my blogs instead of sending these messages? Just curious.”
I assumed that posting a comment on another’s blog was a courteous thing to do; this way others could read conflicting viewpoints in a convenient manner and, in addition, numerous comments on a post made it more likely to have the post earn “points” and thereby gain a larger audience.
Recently this writer posted a criticism of California’s adoption of a law regarding passive smoking and danger to children. I responded with a comment and, because I felt so strongly about the issue, posted a statement of my views. I was respectful to the writer and only contested her political positions. To my request that she comment on my post and engage in dialogue, she said,
"I won't dignify it with a response on your blog, you can accept this as my response or not."
It seems to me that we should be willing to recognize each others’ blogs and accord them with respect. There are those who attack and engage in name-calling, but I have done none of this
This other writer, answering my request that she post on my blog, for the reasons expressed above, explained that
“Perhaps your opinions are not drawing readers because they're bored with liberal rhetoric (see Air America and most of the cable news channels who have almost no audience)….. and that the reading public isn't interested in liberal drek”
Dismissing anything I say as “dreck” indicates an insecurity that I had not seen previously.
By the way, as far as popularity is concerned, I was not aware it was a contest. I have earned $.56 so far!
| 60 |
| Vote |
Add To: 
Subscribe to this blog
Comment by Ahmed
techy.Bytes
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Qwerk
Cinema Three
On the topic of liberal media 'losing ratings', liberals are in fact going online. Blogs, websites, youtube, thats where it's all at for 'liberals' nowadays. Sure theres going to be a drop in print media and TV ratings but everything online is exploding. Conservatives accuse the internet of having an inherint liberal bias and they scare off 'conservatives' from even trying to go online. I guess Bill O'Reilly feels better after attacking bloggers, FOx News feels better after reporting of the 'anonymous threat' and so on and so forth.
As for name calling, I do it heaps, only because I have zero respect for those whom I call names. Most of the time it starts when they attack me as a person rather than my views, in which case I don't see anything wrong with a retaliation.
I'm still young and dumb, not interested in being taken seriously and am in no insecurities with my beliefs (in other words I don't mind being wrong) so I'm all for the name calling thing. Sure it ruins a debate, but if someone starts with the name calling it may as well end with the name calling.
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
The whole problem is expecting to be treated as human.
The fact that you mention the person as an 'author of some note' indicates to me that such things impress you.
However I happen to personally know around half a dozen authors of some note who have been published and I they are no different that the rest of the world. You don't require any brains to string together sensational rubbish but you so need brain to research the subject properly and give a considered balanced view. The intellectually inept will always find an audience to listen and read their isane musings. Just as people listen to shock jocks on the radio, most of the aidience hate everything that they say but listen anyway.
You also have to ask yourself some questions about the person who wrote back.
Why would they choose to post on a Australian Blog Site?
Is it possible that they could not hack it on a American Blog site? Or have they been held upto far greater scrutiny and dashed off when things became too hot for them?
Why would someone fling baseless insults at any one who slightly disagrees with them?
Is it possible that they have deep seated doubts about their own self worth?
Is it to divert attention away from the empty rhetoric.
Or are they just a spiteful ball of hate?
In the end you are not going to get the fictional person to engage you in your post because that would require courage and it is something that she seems to totally lack.
Comment by Jeff Musall
Secular Humanity
don't let it bother ya..when it comes to some, I think of my Dad's saying "Sometimes the only thing you get when you piss into the wind is wet."
My goal is to marginalize them, to expose the idiocy of the views and ideology, and to push them to the lunatic fringe.
As for Damo and an "Austrailian blog) I'm an American who writes on here too, mostly because I want an international voice...I want citizens of the world (however many may read me) to be reminded that not all of us are closed minded self-righteous self-important jackasses..
Comment by D. Armenta
The Florida Keys and Everglades
The Black Sheep Chronicles
What constitutes bad manners?
The male mystique
Debate Fan
You can choose to exploit that, as others here have openly admitted to doing, or not.
I wouldn't take the lack of comment on your blog personally; I think the writer in question prefers to concentrate on her own material rather than expend valuable vitriol on another's post.
Just my guess....
Comment by Jim Stillman
Opinions of a curmudgeon
Political Certainty
Comment by S.L. Bradish
Since I have now commented on your blog, I hope you can sleep well. Goodness knows, your politics can't lend to sweet dreams.
Comment by Ahmed
techy.Bytes
Video Gamer Kids
Little Green Foosballs
PolyKicks
Qwerk
Cinema Three
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Quote an example of my name calling.
Come on I dare you.
I double dare..
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Comment by Damo
For the Sake of Argument
My Apologetics
Game over.
You lost.