January 16, 2001 12:45 AM   Subscribe

Ouch So, a new Fantastical is out via wetlog. Am I the only one a little put off the by scathing article about weblogs? (more inside)
posted by Hackworth (23 comments total)
Granted, it has it's points, but is such negativity warranted? What are weblogs good for other than reading about people? Isn't that the point?
posted by Hackworth at 12:46 AM on January 16, 2001

weblogs are good for starting navel-gazing threads on MetaFilter on a slow news day.

almost ... too good.
posted by Sapphireblue at 9:50 AM on January 16, 2001

I'm not at all sure what the 'article' is trying to say. First it tells us that weblogging is worse than geocities but the author keeps 'several'. Basically today's bloggers can't write and will eventually give up, but, they shouldn't have tried in the first place, but I guess the media's to blame for this. Reminds me of an ignorant linux zealot, which in, you can't use the pc, and you shouldn't try. heh.

Btw, I love the last/next tread bar on the bottom. A bit startling being it the first thing in the morning though. heh.
posted by tiaka at 10:00 AM on January 16, 2001

To save everyone some trouble I have compiled some of the better comments from previous MeFI discussions of this topic:

'Firstly, this man is doing us all a great favor by writing this wonderfully articulate piece.

If only he wasn't jumping on the bandwagon a little late. I thought the long, drawn out "Blogger sucks, all they do is link to eachother" pieces were done. Apparently not.'
originally found at...

'If people keep reacting to this sort of stuff, it will be open season on Bloggers twelve months of the year. If one is going to take the time to respond to criticism in a meaningful manner, then surely it should be in response to a piece that has at least some passing merit.'
originally found at...

'Despite the fact that most weblogs are useless and boring to me, I think it's great that they exist, whether they're entertaining hundreds of people, one person or even just themselves.

And I can't honestly say that a whole bunch of boring text is cluttering up the net more than, say, the billions of megs of hardcore pornography being tossed around every day.'
originally found at...

'When I rule the Web, nobody will ever be able to complain about how "X" ruined the web by allowing any idiot to publish on it until they are willing to show us their very first homepage.'
originally found at...

'I am so f***ing sick of all of these losers trying to tell me what's good and what's bad about weblogs (or the internet in general). This is just like when old people shake their fist at you and telling you how things were so much better when they were your age. Please shut the hell up and quit wasting my time! The greatest triumph of the web is that it give all of us a way to express ourselves any damn way we feel like it. I've got a simple rule for all of these elitist twits: "If you don't like it, don't read it!" That's what bookmark files are for.'
originally found at...

'I have a philosophy about the web, if you don't like it, then maybe you shouldn't be reading it... even more so, if you want to tell the world you don't like it, than maybe you should be contributing to the world something that is better. Hai Capito?'
originally found at...
posted by ericost at 10:03 AM on January 16, 2001

I've never understood this type of editorial. They all say the same thing. And they all generate the same counter arguments.

Here, I'll summarize the history of "weblogs suck" threads.

"Weblogs are amateurish" - So? It's the web. What were you expecting?

"Weblogs are all the same" So? With 100 million people online I think we can look forward to much redundancy. Fact of life.

"Weblogs are boring" - So? If thet're so bad, why are you reading them?

"Weblogs are linky-love" - And this is bad why?

"Weblogs suck bandwidth" - HA! As if!

"Weblogs encourage bad writing" - Thank you William Strunk, Jr. ppssssssth!

posted by y6y6y6 at 10:08 AM on January 16, 2001

I suppose the article makes some contentious points, but I can't get past the cool naked guy on the cover . . .
posted by aladfar at 10:39 AM on January 16, 2001

I liked the weblog piece. I think it echoed what has been said before, true, but it also related back to points some of the interviewees made.

If there wasn't any smoke, there wouldn't be the fire.

(God, that's such a horrible cliche statement, isn't it?)
posted by rich at 11:11 AM on January 16, 2001

So I guess now the Blog Backlashâ„¢ is in full swing. Too bad...
posted by jmcnally at 11:50 AM on January 16, 2001

If this is the Blog BacklashTM it's been in full-swing since Slashdot started using Slash code to generate their posts.

There's just more blogs now, so there are more bloggers (and former bloggers, and never bloggers) who are making more noise about it.

If signal = blogs, and if noise = blog detractors, the Internet's favorite ratio is the same as it was 2 years ago.
posted by cCranium at 12:30 PM on January 16, 2001

I just don't understand talking smack about a medium that you use yourself. If I played piano (which I do) and said that playing piano was all of the things that Neale said about blogging, I'd be something of a hypocrite, wouldn't I?
posted by Dreama at 1:38 PM on January 16, 2001

ericost: I didn't realize there was that much discussion on the topic already...I guess I should have done my homework. =/
posted by Hackworth at 2:02 PM on January 16, 2001

No, Dreama, I don't think so. I'd say you were someone who, despite having affection for the piano, saw that it was not beyond reproach, and that your affection for it allowed you to want to see it get better, grow and change - rather than bow down in slavish adoration to some wood and ivory.
posted by gsh at 2:28 PM on January 16, 2001

Hmm, g, I didn't see much by way of wishing for betterment, growth and change in that article. Lemme re-read. Nope, still don't.
posted by Dreama at 2:47 PM on January 16, 2001

Thank GOD people are finally taking this guy seriously! For iYears1 he's been getting away with blatant negativity in the name of "sarcasm" and "comedy" - well PLAYTIME'S OVER BOY!
Frankly, I'm not nearly as offended by his weblog comments as I am by the fact that he called me a "redneck, confident, optimistic, stupid, randy, adventurous, stupid, sexy person" who is "no sex god" in his "Are You a Love God" liftout section. I mean, he called me stupid TWICE! How lame is that? Besides, I got my ass kicked way too many times by the 2in High School to be called a redneck.

Not only that, but where does that "lance" guy get off calling my weblog a dirtclod palace? Geez! Heap a few dirt clods around the edges of your site and suddenly you're labelled!

1 Weeks. Sometimes months.
2 The Cowboy Clique - their name, not mine.

posted by
CrazyUncleJoe at 3:42 PM on January 16, 2001

... er ... 2 should have referenced the term "Hicks" - whoops.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 3:44 PM on January 16, 2001

What an insecure bunch of twerps.
posted by Graham at 4:35 PM on January 16, 2001

CUJoe, been a while since you wrote anchors? :-)
posted by cCranium at 4:40 PM on January 16, 2001

er... uh... hm.
posted by CrazyUncleJoe at 4:57 PM on January 16, 2001

If weblogs are bad, then at least we are all being bad together.

Sing it.

"We'll all go together when we go!"
posted by john at 6:58 PM on January 16, 2001

For myself, I took this one as a rant against weblog hype, more than weblogs.
posted by dhartung at 1:46 AM on January 17, 2001

"All suffused with an incandescent glow.
There will be no more misery,
When the world is our rotisserie.
Yes, we all will go together when we go!"
posted by bradlands at 8:31 AM on January 17, 2001


Your Tom Lehrer fan kit is in the mail.
posted by john at 4:37 PM on January 17, 2001

A hallowed spot is reserved for it, next to my autographed PDQ Bach 8x10 glossy and my plush Allan Sherman doll.
posted by bradlands at 6:19 PM on January 17, 2001

« Older Justin's Relationship Resume   |   Gay Legislator in Deal to Leave U.S. Army Reserve Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments