Unspun Logo

Coming Unspun™

Posted by Rick · July 8th, 2004 · No Comments

Before anyone gets too excited, seeing Unspun™ back online again…

I have no plans to start writing again.

The only reason I put it back up is because the log files show many people still hitting my server (presumably directed here from search engines) looking for old articles and (in the interest of my own commitment to freedom of speech) I thought I should allow the latest insults against me to be viewable.

My supposed “constant preaching about how the blog is no longer worth much of [my] time,” as near as I can tell, consists of one article to that effect and a few comments responding to reader comments. It seems a mischaracterization to label my writing “constant preaching,” even if one thinks it appropriate to label it “preaching” based on so few instances.

My “constant belly-aching [sic] about how others respond to the blog” I can only assume is related to the same post and comments just noted and perhaps also to the fact that reader posts which attack me (and occasionally my arguments) using rhetorical devices not based on normal logical principles of argumentation. I can only apologize to those who find it acceptable (see next point after this parenthetical section) for others to employ such devices, but unacceptable for me to criticize them for doing so. I find it perfectly appropriate to point out the failures of such “arguments.” And while there are more instances of my complaining about people’s “valiant” attempts at discrediting my posts through the use of epithets or mere statements of disagreement as to the veracity of statements made without providing evidence of a lack of veracity, I still think “constant belly-aching [sic]” is a mischaracterization; personally, in this case I think “bellyaching” itself is strong. If one is counting the times I’ve taken readers’ comments to task for fitting into the categories of epithets or mere statements of unsupported disagreement over veracity, it doesn’t fit the definition of “bellyaching”; my comments in those instances are more often refutations of the implied validity of such appraoches, rather than “complaining and finding fault whiningly or with disgruntled peevishness.”

Incidentally, my last response to the last insult (to anyone who may be interested), was this:

Just to clarify things, to make sure I properly understand your argument…

You’re saying that readers, such as yourself, are entitled to and shall exercise the right to react to the content or form of my writing as they please, including (but not limited to) insulting me and/or criticizing my arguments as b*llsh*t without providing any evidence of that. At the same time, I am neither entitled to nor should I exercise the right to react to the content or form of their comments as I please, including (but not limited to) insulting them and/or deciding that I will no longer put into any future writings the degree of effort (in terms of research time) I have put into past writings.

Did I get that about right?

Believing that I did get Mark’s argument right, I find it untenable. For one thing, to a certain (not major, but nevertheless not insignificant) extent, my reaction has been somewhat mischaracterized.

For another thing, for some odd reason, I believe I am no less entitled to insult others than they are to insult me.

Categories: Blogs & Blogging


0 responses so far ↓

  • There are no comments yet...Kick things off by filling out the form below.

Leave a Comment