November 25, 2005

Before you link to a blog...

...do you look around a while to make sure there isn't a post that depicts an act of violence against you?

Me neither.

Ever link to a blog, maybe even a few times, and then later discover a post that depicts an act of violence against you?

Well, I have.

40 comments:

twwren said...

Pretty Cryptic. I hope your blog is not morphing into a blog-to-blog, blog. I really do not know what to make of this; maybe I am missing something. Or maybe it's a secret language?

Ann Althouse said...

twwren: No, I just had a horrifying experience, and I don't exactly want to link to the blog post in question! I'm sure not trying to connect to the character. I just regret linking to him.

Laurence said...

We all do things we regret.

reader_iam said...

I haven't yet had that experience, Ann, as far as linking.

But yesterday I did a google search--which I do on a semi-regular basis as a habit--on the pseudonym I use for commenting and for my blog (I also do that on my actual name and others I know, by request). I was taken aback by a couple of links I'd never seen before, right up there on the first search-results page. I was left to wonder: where had I commented that led to that association, whether directly or otherwise? Or, was somebody just wholesaling copying somebody else's blog-comment section and my "pseud" just caught caught up in it? Or what?

That was bad enough. I gather that what you just experienced was exponentially worse. Horrifying, indeed--and a cautionary tale for us all.

tefta said...

This sounds ominous. The pajamas naifs haven't grasped that not everybody connected with the OSM debacle thinks it's as funny as we do. A lot of money may be at stake and that usually brings out the worst in people.

We've seen a few glimpses of that here on Ann's blog, one of the few places where there are pro and con comments and basically everyone is a sane adult who knows how to present an opinion or frame a rebuttal without resorting to name calling.

I still think there will be least one participant who will pull out soon and that will start a stampede.

the illavator said...

Well give us a hint already.

Ann Althouse said...

Tefta: Yeah, I'd love to see what the insiders are saying on the insiders' discussion board. I accepted a confidentiality agreement in the early stages of Pajamas Media, so I think there is a good chance that people are not allowed to talk, that there's a contractual code of silence.

I'll bet a lot of them wish they were out or at least feel a little awkward about it. I think a lot of people just thought: okay, they want to give me money and I trust these guys, so what the hell, and now they feel a little ... conflicted.

But don't assume this post refers to hostility against me arising from my criticism of PJM. In fact, it doesn't!

JBlog said...

That must be pretty frightening, Ann. There's a world full of freaks out there, but in reality the idiot woo did it is probably harmless.

The reason he (I assume it's a he) did it is because he doesn't have the intellectual capacity to actually challenge anything you say on a factual level. So he wants to make himself feel big by making you worry.

He's probably impotent too.

Easy for me to say don't let it bother you, but try not to.

Ann Althouse said...

Illavator: You have seen the apology.

Todd said...

Yikes. If that word isn't too loaded for you at this point.

Ya gotta wonder why so many people seem to consider invective and intimidation legitimate substitutes for reasoned discussion. But I'm afraid it's the price of blog celebrity, in this case. Take heart. People care about what you think. That's my half-full side talking.

On the half-empty side, I'm sorry you have to deal with that crap. I wish you didn't. But (because I can't stay on that side for long) just because I hear an ass braying doesn't mean I have to bray back.

[Tefta: you think it's someone from PJM? Fair assumption, though I'm not so sure. Straying off-topic, there are enough quality people involved that I still think they can make something of it. Half-full again.]

Please someone tell me if this comment doesn't make sense. I've had a long day. And the @#&$# Badgers ae in &%$#@# Hawaii and don't start until, er, now. Gotta go!

Todd said...

Heh. Four new comments in the time it took me to write mine.

Ann Althouse said...

Todd: LOL. "Yikes" is a blogosphere fighting word these days. Thanks for your sympathy. It's been a little time consuming, but it turns out I have nerves of steel. In fact, I have been restraining myself and avoiding all out reactions. Jeff Goldstein and John Cole have no idea what I would say if I actually used my full verbal powers to cut them down to size. But I hasten to add that this post does not refer to them.

reader_iam said...

Clueless here still, so can only offer my uninformed, but sincere, support. Good luck with it.

steve said...

On the internet no one knows you are a psychpathic dog, until you blog about it.
Keep safe.
I like some of the verification words. Sometimes I hit refresh lots to see what is next. This one is sioph.

Todd said...

Noting that my namesake is a carrion-eater, I await with bloodthirsty anticipation the uncasing of Anna Dare's 'full verbal powers.'

Commercial. Badgers just scored.

BTW Riley: mine's eohtfgrb. Sounds like an unseemly bodily function.

the illavator said...

Got it.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

You could try sending them a letter bomb...loaded with squism.

protein wisdom said...

Jeff Goldstein and John Cole have no idea what I would say if I actually used my full verbal powers to cut them down to size.

I guess that's what law professors call humility.

Don't hold back on my account, Ms Althouse.

Ann Althouse said...

Illavator: Smart!

Ann Althouse said...

Aw, Jeffy's back! And he thinks he should be the one to feel my full powers. But, no! No, Jeff, no.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

This is gonna' be a doozy of a podcast.

Ruth Anne Adams said...

Umm. There is gonna' be a podcast on this, right?

APF said...

Did I step back into second grade? What's going on here?

Ann Althouse said...

Actually, it's all gone now. Nothing to see. Move along.

Steven Taylor said...

Ann,

Whatever it was, I am sorry to hear that it happened.

S

Mark Daniels said...

Ann:
I'm sorry to read of this.

There are times when I disagree with you. I also feel that you can occasionally use rather sharp elbows. I must also confess that I haven't read everything that you've written on the subject of OSM.

But the beauty of blogging is that it allows people who might not otherwise know of one another's existence to dialog, discuss, debate, and perhaps, learn from each other.

Hopefully, that can happen with mutual respect and tolerance for differing perspectives.

Whatever your experience has been, I am saddened by the fright it has given to you. I've prayed for you, simply asking God to help you right now, whatever help you may need.

Best Wishes,
Mark Daniels

Squiggler said...

I haven't had the experience of seeing acts of violence wished on me, but I have, just today, been completely misinterpreted and ended up getting rudely dissed over a comment. It left me wondering why some are so defensive and rude, but then I realized that, just like in the real world, there are bloggers with no class. Violence - now that goes beyond no class and crosses over into scary.

Squiggler said...

Sorry about posting a second comment, but I missed reading your comment about "Yikes" being fighting words these days before posting my first comment. Thank you, thank you, I now know why I got such a rude and confrontational attitude to what I thought was a rather benign statement on my part. I started it with "Yikes." I didn't know. Oh dear, "Yikes" has been my choice of computereeze expression since 1987. LOL.

reader_iam said...

Squiggler: I too missed the new generic "loadedness" of "Yikes" and I too have long used it as a standard part of "computereeze" (hell, on my first Thanksgiving post at my blog, I think I started off with FOUR repetitions of that word).

Since then, I've been attempting to reform. Yesterday, I tried using the word "Gadzooks" at my place instead. Not sure it had the same easy ring to me, but we're working on it ...

XWL said...

I recommend 'Zounds!' or 'Criminy!' or 'Blimey!' as replacement interjections for the now less useful 'Yikes!'

or you could create a new usage and say, "What a load of SquismTM"

Ann Althouse said...

"Yikes. If that word isn't too loaded for you at this point."..."'Yikes' is a blogosphere fighting word these days."

This is all just a jokey reference to Jeff Goldstein's overreaction to my balloon post. Nothing more. "Yikes" is pretty mild, in my view. If you're dealing with Jeff, however, it seems to mean something along the lines of "you're a monster."

Squiggler said...

Well Ann, Jeff has a friend in Bill Quick at Daily Pundit. Who knew that a couple of nice gals like us could be such threats? Criminey, gadooks, zounds, gee willikers, I'm a Groovy Granny for pete's sake. And someday I'm gonna figure out who that Pete is too.

tefta said...

Why are yikes, gadzooks and similar expressions fighting words on the internet?

EddieP said...

Crikey as the ozzies say is a nice one also.

Sorry for your current woes Ann, but this is one of the hazards you considered when making the decision to open comments. In spite of some negative posting, your comments section is an important part of your blog personality. There's a lot more good than bad here.

As to links to psychos, the internet nutters even go after the President, so you're in pretty good company.

Regards

HaloJonesFan said...

edditp:
>Sorry for your current woes Ann,
>but this is one of the hazards
>you considered when making the
>decision to open comments.

"Girl was askin' for it, havin' her comments open like that an' all." Is that about the sentiment you're trying to express, here?

Ann: Well, it's apparent that you just didn't appreciate the tone of IRONY in that picture depicting you being fed through an industrial wood chipper.

But hey, at least you don't have professors trying to get you kicked out of your grad-school program because of something you posted in comments!

ntodd said...

I swear it wasn't me.

BTW, I have a lovely podcast about feminism posted. I'm sure you all will love it.

Pooh said...

"Girl was askin' for it, havin' her comments open like that an' all." Is that about the sentiment you're trying to express, here?

Is it possible to say that, this being the internet, there is a certain degree of risk of people acting inappriopriately because they are largely anonymous, without it becoming the odious "she's asking for it" argument? We know there are trolls. We know they react to certain stimuli in an 'aggresive' manner. The fact that they are in the wrong doesn't mean we should act surprised when they do. Of course, the simplest way to deal is just to delete the specific comments and move on...

Archfiend said...

"Ever link to a blog, maybe even a few times, and then later discover a post that depicts an act of violence against you?

Well, I have."

Tease =D Don't tell us about it and then not show it. Where's the fun in that? Would be more traffic in doing it the other way too...

John Hawkins
http://www.rightwingnews.com

HaloJonesFan said...

Pooh:

Your first sentence was an atrocity. It's usually a good idea to bring things home once you hit the second comma.

>Is it possible to say that
>anonymous people will often
>act inappriopriately without it
>becoming the odious "she's asking
>for it" argument?

I cannot see how that wasn't the argument that eddiep was making.

>We know there are trolls.

There are trolls because people allow them to act as trolls, and people allow them to act as trolls because of the attitude that there will always be trolls. The suggestion that having a public forum is an implicit statement allowing people to troll is ridiculous--you're saying that people can't be blamed for acting like assholes, and that the only way to have reasonable discussion is to moderate with an iron hand!

Pooh said...

Halo,

Sorry for my tortured grammar. That sentence really is a crime against humanity. I'm not defending trolling. They are the bane of reasoned discussion. But to ignore that they exist is stupid. Certain things draw them, such as scatology. So why put out the troll-bait in the first place.

People shouldn't steal my bike, but that doesn't mean its a good idea to leave it unlocked...


OOH and my verification word is "yawks"...is that an internet fighting word?