<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel> 

	<title>Comments on: Blogging terms going mainstream</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream/</link>
	<description>Comments on MetaFilter post Blogging terms going mainstream</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:37:07 -0800</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:37:07 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>

	<item>
		<title>Blogging terms going mainstream</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream</link>	
		<description>&lt;a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/4115073.stm"&gt;BBC warns regarding dangers of being &quot;dooced&quot;&lt;/a&gt; Not long after making the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.11/start.html?pg=7&quot;&gt;Wired  Jargon Watch&lt;/a&gt;,  I finally got to see the term &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=dooced&amp;r=f&quot;&gt;&quot;dooced&quot;&lt;/a&gt;, in action as the BBC posts an article regarding the growing conflict between employers and employees when it comes to blogging.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">post:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:23:47 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>superchicken</dc:creator>		<category>bbc</category>		<category>dooce</category>		<category>dooced</category>		<category>wired</category>		<category>jobs</category>		<category>employers</category>		<category>heatherarmstrong</category>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: damn yankee</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814653</link>	
		<description>That BBC article doesn&apos;t even mention &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dooce.com/&quot;&gt;Heather&lt;/a&gt;. I hate it when reporters don&apos;t bother to do the most basic backstory research.

(At least we have Wired for posterity ...)</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814653</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:37:07 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>damn yankee</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: 327.ca</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814658</link>	
		<description>If there&apos;s anyone left who hasn&apos;t read her site, it&apos;s never too late to start. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dooce.com/archives/daily/02_26_2002.html&quot;&gt;Here&apos;s&lt;/a&gt; her post about getting &quot;dooced&quot; (before it was known as that.)</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814658</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:39:32 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>327.ca</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: dhoyt</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814680</link>	
		<description>dude that is so not fetch</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814680</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 16:58:32 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>dhoyt</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: elpapacito</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814705</link>	
		<description>That inspired me the following:

&lt;b&gt;The Paradox of Required Experience (Salary Catch-22)&lt;/b&gt;

To get a work you need previous work experience
To get previous work experience you need a work

Therefore, if you never had a work, you&apos;ll never have one
but because nobody is born with previous job experience
nobody will ever get a work ; therefore even if you didn&apos;t
really knew until now, your work is an illusion. Therefore
we need not pay you.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814705</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 17:30:48 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>elpapacito</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: camworld</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814721</link>	
		<description>I was &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.camworld.com/screwed/&quot;&gt;fired over my web site way back in 1997&lt;/a&gt;. Heather&apos;s situation is nothing new.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814721</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 17:56:03 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>camworld</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: Maxson</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814722</link>	
		<description>Wow, freedom of speech sure burns sometimes, doesn&apos;t it? Barring obvious problems (like libel or revealing legitimate company secrets), I can&apos;t help but feel good about the power of the blog. Kinda like cheap cameras: yes, people use them in stupid and illegal ways, but they also raise the chance of the public learning about important events we&apos;d never see otherwise. I know seeing firsthand footage of the tsunami&apos;s effects made the tragedy all the more real to me, as irrational as that may be.

In short, I hope we stop this &quot;doocing&quot; crap.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814722</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 17:58:56 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Maxson</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: freebird</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814731</link>	
		<description>The link didn&apos;t provide any etymology for the &quot;dooced&quot; word - I&apos;m sure it&apos;s something goofy but I&apos;m curious. Anyone?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814731</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:19:32 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>freebird</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: 327.ca</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814735</link>	
		<description>&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.dooce.com/faq.html&quot;&gt;OK&lt;/a&gt;.

But why not just take a look at her site?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814735</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:29:58 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>327.ca</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: i_am_joe&apos;s_spleen</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814744</link>	
		<description>My favourite in this genre is &lt;a href=&quot;http://callcentrediary.blogspot.com/&quot;&gt;Call Centre Confidential&lt;/a&gt;. The poor author works as a supervisor in an English call centre.

&lt;i&gt;Call Centre Tony was livid. &quot;So you&apos;re telling me I have to fill in a taco-graph to tell you every time I have had a slash in the day &#8211; what are you going to do? Fit a cafeti&#232;re so I don&apos;t need to leave my desk?&quot;

&quot;Catheter.&quot; Sooty said.

&quot;Pardon?&quot; Tony was raging.

&quot;A cafeti&#232;re makes coffee. A catheter collects urine.&quot;

&quot;And like you Nigel &#8211; it takes the piss.&quot; With that, Tony left the room.&lt;/i&gt;</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814744</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:56:47 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>i_am_joe&apos;s_spleen</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: superchicken</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814747</link>	
		<description>&lt;i&gt;In short, I hope we stop this &quot;doocing&quot; crap.&lt;/i&gt;

While I agree with your sentiment, I&apos;ve actually had a run-in at my previous work where a supervisor used to denigrate her employees and co-workers on her personal blog that was widely read throughout the organization.   I reported the site and it was shut down -- but the individual was not fired.

&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.camworld.com/screwed/&quot;&gt;Cam&apos;s experience&lt;/a&gt; explains what many people will forget: &lt;b&gt;private companies can fire an empoyee for any reason as long as it isn&apos;t about race, gender, age, disability, etc.&lt;/b&gt;

Eventually, there will be more and more cases and companies will realize that this is an issue that could resolved without harsh reactionary measures.

Until then, it&apos;s blogger beware.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814747</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 18:59:36 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>superchicken</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: reklaw</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814751</link>	
		<description>&lt;i&gt;I reported the site and it was shut down&lt;/i&gt;

You suck.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814751</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:11:48 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>reklaw</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: freebird</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814753</link>	
		<description>Thanks 327 - I seem to have developed a lame habit of not following Wired links; I&apos;d just hit the first and last of the post. My guess had been that it was an adaptation of some acronym; it&apos;s fortunate that I didn&apos;t bet the car on it after all.

Dismissed Over Online Catharses?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814753</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:15:48 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>freebird</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: i_am_joe&apos;s_spleen</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814754</link>	
		<description>&lt;i&gt;private companies can fire an employee for any reason&lt;/i&gt;.

You forgot &quot;In America, ...&quot;

Sorry, couldn&apos;t resist.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814754</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 19:16:36 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>i_am_joe&apos;s_spleen</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: airguitar</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814879</link>	
		<description>The BBC article starts with the story of a girl who writes &lt;a href=&quot;http://queenofsky.journalspace.com/&quot;&gt;The Diary of a Flight Attendant&lt;/a&gt;. She was dooced (she guesses) for posting pictures of herself lounging about in short skirt and unbuttoned blouse in an empty plane. &lt;a href=&quot;http://queenofsky.journalspace.com/?cmd=displaycomments&amp;dcid=393&amp;entryid=393&quot;&gt;Funny stuff&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814879</guid>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2005 22:24:55 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>airguitar</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: superchicken</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814911</link>	
		<description>reklaw, I&apos;m all for free speech, but some people clearly abuse this right.  This particular person was my supervisor and she not only used profane slurs to describe my co-workers, but she had also used the first and last names of customers who annoyed her. 

After a while it got so bad that her entries became common conversation.  &quot;Did you hear what xxx said about xxx?  She called her an annoying slut!&quot;  When the affected parties came to me and expressed their anger over this, I as their supervisor made sure it didn&apos;t happen again.  I didn&apos;t ask for the site to be taken down or her fired.  My guess she took the site down voluntarily, and she kept her job and was warned.

That&apos;s more than I can say for other people who were fired for far less.  They didnt&apos; deserve it, she did.  But I guess working at a government institution versus prviate sector makes a huge difference here.  

Regardless, I don&apos;t believe people like Cam and Heather should have been fired.   In my case, if I was the supervisor, I probably would have fired this bad egg, considering she&apos;d been given more than a few warnings about this.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814911</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2005 00:11:41 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>superchicken</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: jackiemcghee</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814943</link>	
		<description>My previous employer tried to can me because I said in my blog that Lotus Notes was a fucking nightmare to work with (it&apos;s an IBM shop).

It was really funny because he screwed the whole thing up and I would have ruined him at an industrial tribunal (note to employers, disciplinary procedures are there for you to follow too).

It was even funnier when I handed in my notice 3 weeks later and suddenly, he didn&apos;t want me to leave.

I don&apos;t miss it, and Lotus Notes is still a pile of shite.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814943</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2005 01:26:13 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>jackiemcghee</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: HTuttle</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#814976</link>	
		<description>I guess you&apos;d also get fired for putting up a billboard by the freeway saying &quot;Acme sucks!&quot;.

Billboard, Internet, what&apos;s the difference?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-814976</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2005 04:25:08 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>HTuttle</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: Sidhedevil</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/38354/Blogging-terms-going-mainstream#815333</link>	
		<description>327.ca is right--if it&apos;s called being &quot;dooced&quot; because of Heather&apos;s being fired over &quot;dooce.com&quot; (and there seems to be no other logical explanation for it)  then it was lame-ass reportage for the BBC not to include Heather and dooce.com in the story.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2005:site.38354-815333</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2005 11:06:57 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Sidhedevil</dc:creator>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
