Okay, this is just too damn funny. Where to begin…?
I don’t really know what BlogNetNews is or why I’m supposed to care. Anyone can build an aggregator, but the blogosphere relies on community buy-in, and apparently some of my fellow Georgia bloggers think BNN is something worth noticing, or at least something not worth laughing at? I don’t know. I remember hearing about it a few months ago at Grayson’s, then I forgot; then Sara blogged about it yesterday.
– Okay. I feel the need to interject something here, given the profound lack of basic reading and listening ability many people demonstrated during the fallout of the Creative Loafing hunk-of-shit blogosphere article. People who apparently couldn’t see beyond their own shit got all hung up on, “These folks are just JEALOUS that they weren’t INCLUDED!!1!11!OMGhighschool”. This isn’t about me being jealous of not being listed on freakin’ BlogNetNews, ffs. This is just some funny shit… Ren, got an extra “Typical” file? I need to replenish my stock.
(Interjection over.)
So anyway, after I saw Sara’s post yesterday, I overheard Rusty talking about other bloggers (who I don’t read as often) who had written about this apparent Top 10 list. I decided to check out the BlogNetNews site. There was a link to email them your feed if it wasn’t listed. So I sent a two-line email with my blog URL and my feed URL, with the subject line “For BlogNetNews Georgia.”
Here is the email I received in response:
Amber,
I am sure you’ve heard this before: You are trouble. BNN/Georgia is a humble politics and public affairs blog aggregator. Your content isn’t very local or public affairsy. However, I love the blog and your obviously broad blogging involvement. Take a look at www.blognetnews.com/cotillion . I built it for a friend who is a member. I am wondering whether you might have an idea for a group that you belong to. Thoughts?
Best,
Dave MastioBlogNetNews.com
We Serve BloggingRemember to visit our advertisers
Bwahahahaha… what the fuck.
We will come back to the “you’re trouble” remark. Let’s just stick, for now, with the “your content isn’t very local” part. I sent him some examples…
Search my 5+ years of archives (I haven’t been at that URL for long) if you’re so inclined… on the old blog I had a category for “Atlanta”; on the new blog I have an “Atlanta” tag. I publicize local events of interest very frequently. Everything tagged “Atlanta” at my new URL: http://www.beingamberrhea.com/tag/Atlanta
I organized PodCamp Atlanta. I’m the co-founder of the Georgia Podcast Network. Pretty darn local. I give presentations on the value of hyperlocal content. I attend meetings of the Atlanta Press Club (I’m a member), Social Media Club Atlanta, Georgia for Democracy, Georgians for Choice… the list goes on… to help figure out how to best leverage social media at the local level.
But okay. My content isn’t local or “public affairsy.”
Dave replies again…
Let me be a little more clear. The intent of the blognetnews state sites is to cover state and local news and politics. Reading your posts, I didn’t see you covering what I think fits in to waht I am trying to do on those sites. We are building other aggregators — city focused ones where all topics will be in and national ones that will take narrower slices of the blogosphere. You’d fit in both those places.
The last part of my note was a suggestion that you come up with an idea for a national aggregator where you’d fit.
I replied with a short note…
I understood the last part of your note, but I’m not interested in being part of a national aggregator. My main concern/interest is hyperlocal content, which is why Rusty and I started the Georgia Podcast Network. We feel new media has the most potential for influence at the local level.
I also asked him to clarify what he meant by saying that I’m “trouble.” His reply:
Visits to sex clubs are hardly the stuff of a mainstream site.
Now, this is the REALLY hilarious part. I mean, aside from it being just good old-fashioned sex negativity and compartmentalization of sexuality, it’s also just another boring rehashing of - guess what! - the double standard! Oh, yay! I just never get tired of that.
This is highly (grimly) amusing to me, because Rusty’s blog is listed on BlogNetNews. He recently wrote about our visit to the sex club, too. But, as Jenny said in an email, “You’re a woman. You may choose between your sexuality and your intelligence. You may not have both.”
Lest we forget!
Many other questions spring to mind, too, such as: what makes him think I’m trying to produce a “mainstream site” - whatever that even means?
Btw, Dave is fine w/ my blogging these emails because, as he stated, BNN is “big on free speech.” Just not wrt sex clubs, I guess.
I will reserve further commentary because really, these emails speak for themselves. I wouldn’t want to kick a puppy. (Commenters, however, should feel free.)
READ ME: Disclaimer
61 Responses to "Maw! I’m trouble!"
Kinda makes you wonder WTF he means by “We serve blogging.” If he means serve like “perform a benefitting act for,” his arbitrary selectivity kind of rules that horseshit. Maybe he just means “dole out in preconfigured packages,” like a Happy Meal. Then he’s got more of a leg to stand on. Either way, move over YASP, now we have YAFA, and I don’t see who died and made him king. Nor can I really see any value added through this YAFA; I can hardly get a jist of any of the stories from the limited excerpts, and I’m not any more inclined to click on those links to find out more than I am to build my own folders in Google Reader.
And I am, of course, an old-fashioned subscriber to compartmentalization of sexuality, but I totally think you should be in the BNN cotillion. They dance at cotillions, no? Where’s the pole?
cotillion
hee
YAFA! I love it!
I think BNN is one of a slew of aggregators out there; if you ignore it, it’ll go away. Hopefully. Dave Mastio, though, does come from the world of MSM (former USA Today editor and Bush speechwriter), so maybe that’s where all this self-important “we serve blogging” and such comes into play.
Seriously though…a cotillion? I think I just threw up a little about that. Maybe you can come out as a ‘mainstream’ blog!
At this point I’d almost prefer not to be ranked or listed at all. There’s no good reason for me to be listed as a local political blogger and for you not to be. Except, of course, that I don’t visit sex clubs or poledance.
Wonder if doing those 2 things would get me disqualified?
Okay, it’s obvious to me that you’ve “sex-up” your post with visits to the sex clubs. But now, you need to “local up” your sex posts. Example:
“Rusty and I went to Trapeze (4470 Commerce Dr SW.
Atlanta, GA 30336 - Google Map link here). Things really got swinging when Chuck Eaton (Buckhead Young Republican Club) completed the spitroast that Mr. and Mrs. Jay Bowman (Georgia Right to Life Committee) started in the jello room. While we would normally not attend a Republican fund raiser, the email said they were requiring head shots before allowing people in. Promising that the Atlanta’s moral majority would also be mainly hot!”
Now, that might warrant some local attention.
BNN seems like another half-baked attempt by old media to control and categorize new media.
Stay independent and defy classification.
See, I would have completely understood your omission from the list if, IF. Rusty had not been included. Because seriously, your blogs are very, very similar in structure and content. He may blog a bit more about the inner and outer workings of the state government, but his content is just as interspersed with “trouble” as yours is. The response about the sex clubs was thus pretty hilarious.
Robert,
Heh. Well, we ARE going to do a podcast about Atlanta sex clubs. But naming names… now THAT is an interesting strategy! ;)
Not sure why, but I just got SERIOUS deja vu reading this part of your comment, Sara. It freaked me out. Do not want.
This is such bullshit. Who the hell does he think he is to say “you’re trouble”? “We serve blogging”??? No, you serve your advertisers! Those tag lines really irritate me. If they served “blogging” then they would have actually hung out in the Georgia Blogging ‘hood for a while to get a sense of the connections and “influence” of the various blogs. Links and stats are not the soul indicators of jack.
Oh, and you’re in my top 5 daily reads - as if it matters.
Oh, I could go on and on…
I looked at their “Life” tab. It has “cycling” and “parenting.” How exciting! Not.
Excuse me, would you please translate YAFA?
I like trouble. ;-D
I am not in the liking of the aggregators. But, then again, at least this guy isn’t running around taking ppl’s feeds and re-presenting them in the way the other place was a while back.
YAFA is, I assume (and Shelby, correct me if I’m wrong), “Yet another fucking aggregator.”
What Garrett said. Just because the title of my blog may imply a purely-politics blog does not a purely-politics blog make.
Well since he rejected Shelby’s blog for being not local enough, I’m not entirely convinced that he typically makes it much past the title. (Unless there is “troublesome” content, of course. Must… not… look… at… trouble…)
Shelby did that video that contained “Sexy Back.” I’m sure that is why he was rejected.
I simply must sex up my blog more so that I can be taken off the damned list!
Oh yes, cause sex clubs make you trouble….not homicide, or pushing heroin, or racism, or, you know, things that are REALLY trouble, but you…female….dared walk into a GASP sex club…
what are you, a hooker?
NEVERMIND that most swingers are middle class, 30 and over somethings that you would NEVER know were swingers, what with the kids and the mini vans and normal jobs and all…
ffs
How the Hell do you even navigate through BNN? The little hover-drop menus across the top are too obscure to parse, not to mention miles short of anything approaching accessibility. And what does he mean by “Cotillion” — are we all supposed to get all gussied up for some kind of coming out party?
If BNN is the “blogosphere’s front page,” then I wonder no longer why we’re treated like no-life idiots.
But let’s be completely honest. This is an aggregator site. It does not produce its own content. Instead, it takes available content, surrounds it with advertisement and returns it to the web-at-large. And it does so with only the aggregator’s gain in mind. It this evil? No, I guess not. That’s the risk of producing a feed, I suppose. But it is … well … asshole-esque.
Well, if nothing else, this week’s fracas has gotten Sara’s blog the added attention it deserves, no matter how skewed the BNN ranking system may or may not be.
Now don’t get me wrong. I don’t have a problem w/ aggregators. I think the extensibility afforded via feeds (listen to me go!!) is a good thing. BUT. This gate-keeper business is just silly. It’s a MSM mindset, and it’s dying. It’s this dumbass power trip of “you’re in, you’re not” that cracks my shit up. WhoTF are you anyway, fella?
How dare I go to a sex club!!
But Rusty can go. Just not with me… or.. wait….? *explode*
(and shelby isn’t local)
Also… same old bullshit re: “sex is the bad word.” I must quote from my section of Naked on the Internet when I get home. Thanks for proving my point, BNN!
Okay, one last thing… because this is just too damn funny…
According to Wikipedia, a cotillion is: “a formal presentation of young ladies, debutantes, to polite society.”
Ha!!!
You certainly went through a lot of back and forth for a site you didn’t care about being listed on in the first place.
Yes, yes, Greg, we know… if one acknowledges something’s existence AT ALL then that must mean one CARES about it and wants to BE A PART of it! Or there’s some TRUTH to it! You know… like, Ann Coulter only pisses people off because she has a POINT!
Simple concepts for simple minds, I suppose.
Greg,
Don’t confuse a response with jealousy. If the neighbor’s dog walked up and shit on my foot, it would illicit a response. However, I am not going to smack the dog with a newspaper because I am jealous of its magnificent shitting form. Perhaps I’m trying to correct the dog’s behavior. Or perhaps it’s just cathartic to thwap the stupid dog after it does something stupid.
You bitches are jes jealous!!1!
(When I left Atlanta in ‘05, I pretty much stopped blogging about politics. Stopped caring. And even though I’ve gotten a bit into the swing of things when I came back a few months ago, I wouldn’t describe my blog as Georgia political. It’s more about the bullshit of Georgia law. But that’s ok because political things are afoot!)
Amber,
For years I’ve tried to get the boomers who run MSM institutions to accept the fact that bloggers are just people talking and not some raging horde they should try to ignore, stereotype and denigrate. But by acting like a stereotype, you undo all my work.
Case in point: All this blather about the Cotillion. All you would have to do is take three or four clicks from BNN into some of the Cotillion sites — and you would easily have found that the Cotillion is a self-organized group of women conservative bloggers, just like you could click on our Eschatonian page and discovered that Eschatonians are a self-organized group of liberal bloggers that regularly comment on one site but have their own blogs about a million different subjects.
Instead of actually trying to understand something and have some facts to discuss, you’d rather sit in your safe little hole and sneer, proud of how smart you sound.
Your point about BNN including Rusty’s site and not yours is equally ridiculous. His site is mostly about politics and yours is mostly not. The BNN state sites try to cover state and local politics through the ideas and priorities of the bloggers who write about it. Ignoring the clear difference between the two blogs and pretending it is about your genitals must be a comforting pose, but it simply doesn’t stand up to the slightest scrutiny.
I don’t see much future in ignorance as a lifestyle, but I wish you luck with it.
Dave
That’s perfect though, because as your ranking and mine clearly show, BNN is very very fond of the bullshit!
Damn, Amber. You already put in my best line! :-)
I’m trying *really* hard right now to set aside that little tidbit that this guy was a Bush speechwriter, because that could easily pull me way off course…that does, however, make it all the more interesting to note that he got in “trouble,” shall we say, on this blog when he got off message. Remember your mentor, Repubs. Stay on message. You must always stay on message. Never deviate from the message. Message.
The argument that a blog is or isn’t “enough” of anything will always be subjective. However, this lovely little
censorservant of the blogosphere betrayed his true motives when he deviated from the “you’re not local enough” or “you’re not political enough” and slipped right into, “Oh my god, you’re a woman who talks about sex!”As we’ve already noted, it was okay for *Rusty* to go to a sex club…but not Amber. Huh. In my lower-case-d-democratic view of things, that just doesn’t add up. But then, counting all the votes was never a strength of the Bush camp, so maybe we should cut the guy some slack.
Now, Mr. A Little Hot & A Lot Bothered by the thought of a sex club, none of us really give a damn what your personal views are. None of us really give a damn if Amber is linked on your precious li’l aggregator (though whether she is or isn’t would make for an interesting insight into your psychology at this point).
What is so fucking annoying is that, my god, the hypocrisy is old. If you have standards, have them. Don’t double them.
Message.
Since it didn’t fit with my “message” theme, I just have to say…
Remember to visit our advertisers
You serve blogging, do you? Really? Or do you serve your advertisers?
Given the clear importance of *his advertisers* to my new Repub friend, part of me can’t help but wonder if the concern about content that isn’t “mainstream” is for fear of losing advertising revenue. I can hear the argument already, “we can’t exist without our funders, blah de blah, blah, blah.” That argument still doesn’t make any sense though, because we come back to our Amber v. Rusty double standard.
Perhaps the problem is I’m trying to make rational sense out of someone who thought it possible to write coherent words for our most eloquent and illustrious leader. I think I’ve misunderestimated something…
Dave, one quick thing, bc I don’t have time for a long comment, but be clear with your “you.” I am not, in fact, every woman. Or every man, for that matter. My commenters are individuals, who chose to talk about the Cotillion - which, I agree, seems ridiculous. That is the way the conversation flowed, but you’ll note my original post didn’t focus on it. So be clear, please.
Jenny,
When are you starting a blog already. You’re making me sound like a broken record.
I will even collect your best comments from my blog and you can import them as archives!
Shit, I’ll stop after this, I promise.
There isn’t ONE DAMN WORD in the “About Us” section of “BlogNetNews” that mentions “politics” or “public affairs.” Not ONE. It purports to be about Georgia and the issues that are being discussed most frequently in Georgia blogs.
I repeat, not ONE DAMN WORD about politics or public affairs.
Perhaps we should start by *defining* our message, my Repub friends. You’re really not up to the Rovian standard.
I’m done. At least for now.
(Amber, why are my comments awaiting moderation?) :-(
Let’s see…
I wrote about the sex club yesterday. Which wasn’t the first time I wrote something “troublesome” about sex on my blog…
Sometimes I write about video games…
Sometimes I write about being keeled over in the airport in writhing pain…
I used to write about driveways a lot…
From September to January, you’re more likely to find posts about NCAA football than Georgia politics…
While it may be true that I write more about Georgia politics than Amber does, you must not read very closely if you’re saying it’s mostly about Georgia politics. Methinks you’re applying standards, if there are actually any, inconsistently here.
Well, wouldn’t that also violate the Creative Commons non-commercial clause?
I think that if you’re using a CC license that restricts commercial use for gain, well then yeah, it might - as long as they’re swiping it. If you submit your own feed, then I think that’s probably gonna be viewed as having waived that part of your CC license in this one instance. But I ain’t no lawyer.
I missed this from Amber when I commented last night: “Yes, yes, Greg, we know… if one acknowledges something’s existence AT ALL then that must mean one CARES about it and wants to BE A PART of it!”
This all started with you asking to be included on BNN, Amber. So let me help you rephrase a little more accurately: “If one asks to be a part of something, then, yeah that must mean one CARES about it and wants to BE A PART of it!”
It just defies understanding how Greg could leap to the conclusion that you wanted to be a part of BlogNetNews.com because you took the trouble to put up a link and send an email ASKING to be part of it. (Note: That’s sarcasm for the reality challenged.)
Nikki,
The Creative Commons license cannot, as a matter of well-established law, restrict the “fair use” rights of other publishers. Fifty word excerpts combined with two links back to the original (headline and the … thingy at the end of the excerpt) fit well within fair use.
Thomas,
Earlier in this thread you say: “This is an aggregator site. It does not produce its own content. Instead, it takes available content, surrounds it with advertisement and returns it to the web-at-large. And it does so with only the aggregator’s gain in mind. It this evil? No, I guess not. That’s the risk of producing a feed, I suppose. But it is … well … asshole-esque.”
You’re wlecome to your opinion, but I can tell you that this part is completely false: “And it does so with only the aggregator’s gain in mind.”
If you want to see an aggregator built with only the aggregators gain in mind check out blogowogo.com — full posts are reprinted with tiny link backs and the system tries to get you to leave your comments at the aggregator instead of at the blog.
BNN is built so that people who want to leave a comment or read a whole post have to go to the originating blog. The point of BNN is to have mutual benefit.
I put up a link bc I saw that that was one of the requirements to have one’s feed included. (Also, the ‘About’ page states: “Those blogs that add BNN Georgia on their blogroll will get a permanent link on our front page as well.” Perhaps you may want to amend this statement, Dave.) I asked to be included bc several local bloggers, whose content I respect and whom I consider friends, had said positive (or, at least, non-negative) things about BNN. As I mentioned in my post, the blogosphere relies largely on the intelligence and “buy-in” of the community in assessing value, and since I noticed people who I’ve come to respect linking to BNN, I figured it was at least worth checking out myself.
[...] Meta — Audacity @ 2:47 pm Blognetnews’ recent political rankings and its owners response to Amber has led me to question - what exactly is political [...]
Damn. No response about the fact that there’s no reference to politics or public affairs in the explanation of why BNN exists.
This is what I hate about the blogosphere. When you make a point that invalidates someone’s “argument” they can try to ignore it.
I’d like an answer.
If BNN exists to provide “an update on what’s going on across the blogosphere” and to enable people “to find the best Georgia content, not based on random voters or some editors choices, but based on the real actions of Georgia bloggers and their readers,” how can you justify excluding a blog with so much local content?
I don’t know that it’s possible to footnote in comments, so here’s my reference: http://www.blognetnews.com/georgia/about.php
Please, Dave, take a deep breath and try to provide an answer that isn’t laden with sarcasm or yelling. It’s counterproductive.
Dave, I guess this isn’t quite the conversation you had in mind :-D
But ya see we ARE just people talking. I don’t understand what the point is in that statement.
No, Amber. Apparently because we disagree with Dave we are a raging horde. We’re not talking. We’re raging.
Rage on, horde.
And remember to visit our advertisers.
Dave,
Are you a former Bush speechwriter? Did I read that correctly and is that accurate? Because that would explain the raging horde/angry liberal meme you tried to pass off.
And I’d like an answer for why it’s somehow okay for content about sex/video games/NCAA football/driveways/etc. to appear on my blog but it’s not okay for content about sex to appear on Amber’s. You’re going to have to boot almost everyone off your aggregator if there’s a “no personal posts” litmus test being applied.
Amber (and others)
Yeah, I know I stated the absolute obvious. I now I realize it’s important to take heart in the site’s rejection. You must have done something important to them–and not just writing about the sexx0r. Something else entirely….
My site (IndependentReport) is included in the Florida section, and I phone it in all the time. And rarely write about local Florida issues. Now I’m curious as to the real reason for your banishment.
According to Dave ( http://blog.vivianpaige.com/2007/04/06/bnn-influence-index/ ), he was actually a speechwriter in the Bush I administraion.
Which would explain his deviation from the message.
To stay on mine…I’d like an answer.
If BNN exists to provide “an update on what’s going on across the blogosphere†and to enable people “to find the best Georgia content, not based on random voters or some editors choices, but based on the real actions of Georgia bloggers and their readers,†how can you justify excluding a blog with so much local content?
Oh, Greg! Thank you for the morning melodrama… my “banishment!” Lordy lordy!
Anyway, it’s been pretty well established that writing about sex is plenty to get me “banished.” ‘Cause I’m a woman, ya see, and we can be smart, or we can be interested in sex and not be ashamed about it - but we can’t be both.
Waaaaaaaaaaait. Clearly I shouldn’t post anything before I’ve had my coffee in the morning. Sorry. I guess my brain just went Zoellick = A Bush Administration
1994 was not a Bush-friendly year.
Wait again. There’s an error in that email. Am I losing my mind or did Zoellick leave public service during the Clinton years? [please pause for verification] Yes. He did. And he was at USTR from 2001-05. Methinks perhaps that email should have read 2004 not 1994? And the Australia FTA and CAFTA (or DR-CAFTA) that Dave references were certainly not incarnations of 1994. Whatever.
If Dave ever pokes his head out of the sand, perhaps he’ll clarify. Lemme bring it all back to the fact that…
I’d like an answer.
If BNN exists to provide “an update on what’s going on across the blogosphere†and to enable people “to find the best Georgia content, not based on random voters or some editors choices, but based on the real actions of Georgia bloggers and their readers,†how can you justify excluding a blog with so much local content?
Greg: If you think I’ve made a mistake in including you on the Florida site, I’ll go back and take a look.
Amber: The whole ooooh, BNN won’t let women write about sex thing is pretty tedious. The problem with your blog is that it mostly about things that aren’t in the news and aren’t political. Personal and off topic posts add lots of color to BNN sites. I don’t mind them at all, but that’s not the main course.
Rusty: I hope the above makes it clear why your site was included and Amber’s was not. A better explanation of our standards will be part of the redesign next month because some confusion is perfectly reasonable given what we have up there now. Like many things on the Internet BNN is evolving as our programming gets better and we figure out what works for readers mostly through trial and error.
Also, my point in a previous comment was that many mainstream journalists believe bloggers area raging horde. I don’t. Bloggers undermine my argument when they can’t even bother to click a couple links to find out what the Cotillion is.
Jenny: I agree with you, “This is what I hate about the blogosphere. When you make a point that invalidates someone’s “argument†they can try to ignore it.” I tried to answer your point in my comments to Rusty. Our explanation of what we are doing is not good enough. If you take a look at the bottom you’ll see I wrote it in July 06. It will be updated some time next month when I get the whole redesign up.
I am so tedious.
Btw, if the sex thing is so tedious, then why, Dave, did you explicitly state to me, “Visits to sex clubs are hardly the stuff of a mainstream site”? Seems like you thought it was worth singling out.
No, Amber. You’re charming. I’ll let people come to their own conclusions on where others fall on the Oscar Wilde scale.
Dave, for someone with a background in communications I have to assume you’re either not skilled in your field or you’re being deliberately obtuse. Your answer to my question is meager at best and simply boils down to, “I’m not communicating well.”
I agree. You’re not.
Here’s a tip: If I can’t trust BNN’s own description of what it is, how could I possibly trust its content, recommendations or ratings?
Work on your credibility.
………………..
I’m tempted to tear into some of the other bs in that post (what is “in the news” and what is “political” - are blogs only to re-spin what MSM packages?), but I actually have some work to do. Maybe later.
Wow Amber,
And to think that I turn to your blog for a lot of “new media” info…. as well as your great posts about sex “tsk, tsk”, and book reviews, dance, feminism, and wow, you know content?
Sex-shaming women, yawn… wake me up when we get to the sex club….
What’s particularly amusing to me about all of this is that Amber’s blog gets more traffic than all but a handful of the others on the top 20 list based upon technorati rankings, thanks in part at least to her high profile within the feminist blogosphere. I think the problem is that Dave isn’t interpreting discussion about feminist issues to be political. But given Amber’s involvement in the Georgia political blogosphere and podcasting circles that most of the rest in the Georgia political blogosphere would consider her to be a well-known voice within that blogosphere. So shouldn’t that be enough for her to be included?
I think, Dave, that the problem is we who go to the same events, post on each other’s blogs, are part of the same social and media networks, etc. have a better sense than you do from a daily perusal of whatever blogs you find in a Technorati search of who is actually contributing to political discourse in Georgia.
And I say that with full recognition that many would argue, perhaps legitimately, that I am *not* one of those people. At best, occasionally and tangentially. My blog is about personal stuff and legal issues primarily, secondarily about politics and even less so about Georgia politics than national. So I still just don’t understand why I was included but Amber still won’t be even after all of this discussion and pointing out her role in things like PodCamp and the Georgia Podcast Network.
Maybe your answer will be to un-include me, and hey if that’s how you want to play it then so be it. Or maybe you should consider expanding your tent just a little even if it means that you might get discussions about feminism, sex workers, or sex clubs. For plenty of people sexual freedom is a political issue.
Beautiful, Sara. You saved me the time and I couldn’t have said it better.
And now, ladies and gentlemen, we shall observe the complete silence from Dave. Since he has no argument.
Or he’ll come back comment on anything else. Misdirection is also key in Rovian politics. I’m talking…I’m not answering your question…but I’m talking. (But he also missed the Message class, so who knows.)
Prove me wrong, Dave. I do so love being proven wrong. Address Sara’s post in a substantive way. Yes, I said substantive. Not like your “aw shucks” approach to my question. And (here’s where I get the Repubs IRL and they can’t run away), if you can’t do that, maybe you should re-think your position.
You’ve been tagged
“Like many things on the Internet BNN is evolving as our programming gets better and we figure out what works for readers mostly through trial and error.”
Oh great. Another “work in progress”. Now that’s tedious. If you can’t get your shit straight, go back to the drawing board.
Sara said it best. I’ve always taken Amber’s many posts and weblog references on sex workers and sexuality in general to be overtly political, so to find someone say that this is not a “mostly” political site is odd. Clearly, ‘political’ is what’s in dispute about the content of this blog.
Amber does something that I find extremely helpful, which is allow people to follow along on the personal and practical problems and solutions and triumphs and regrets associated with the practice of doing politics. I am amazed with the number of conferences and organizations she and Rusty are participating in and organizing. Political action, so I’d like to think, does have this personal content to it that cannot be removed in favor of dry commentary about who voted on what bill or appropriated which funds. I don’t think I’m the only lurker/commentor who finds her struggles so openly discussed and available to be helpful and educational. That shit’s hard work, and learning from her mistakes and successes, thoughts and opinions, on how it’s done is beneficial. But perhaps none of that is considered political.
I mean, being one of the two founders of the Georgia Podcast Network ought to be it, for whatever standard is out there. But maybe that’s not political, but rather “technical”?
[...] Atlanta Press Club Next up, the Atlanta Press Club is now posting podcasts to the Georgia Podcast Network. I’ll leave it up to others to comment on the implications of the marriage between new media and old going on here. APC is very enthusiastic about embracing this stuff and being more inclusive of bloggers and new media types, but they also have some areas where they are trying to tread carefully. Which is smart. You’ve seen what happens when people come in and start trying to categorize blogs arbitrarily at the expense of others. [...]
That Mel. She don’t pull her punches! You tell ‘em, hon.
And one other thing, I never got to go to Cotillion ’cause my parents were hippy freak weirdos. But if I had an aggregator, I’d let old-money prep-a-zoids, and their no doubt many fascinating blogs, onto my site. So there.
Leave a comment