|
|
June 22, 2007BackNo, I won't be blogging here again quite yet, but I'm now up and running at the Rocky Mountain News. You can see the new blog here, and a profile of yours truly (warning, there are pictures of me) here. It's good to be back. Posted at 11:58 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
February 22, 2007Shameless PlugI don't know how many of my readers might be interested, but a friend of mine has started a blog called Crossed Sabers where he is recording his working on the history of the American cavalry. He's already got some interesting posts up regarding the manning of the regular cavalry during the Civil War. If you have an interest in the Civil War, you might enjoy Don's site. Posted at 07:35 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
February 21, 2007Closing ShopAs I noted yesterday, it turns out that I have been blogging in violation of a Department of Defense directive that restricts how much political activity soldiers may be involved with. This directive is intended to prevent even the appearance of impropriety among military personnel: the United States prides itself on being a nation where the citizens tell the military what to do and not the reverse. While in theory this does not mean that a soldier shouldn't have the same opportunities as any other citizen to express his opinion, in practice they cannot have the same carte blanche as a civilian. One can hardly be blamed for wondering if the military is really in check to the civilian authority if soldiers are constantly seen expressing disagreement with their civilian masters, even if they obey their orders without question. The U.S. military has a long tradition of apolitical officers, and that has served both the military and the country well since our inception. While I am hardly well-known within the blogosphere, I have established enough of a brand that simply no longer noting my connection to the military is not sufficient for me to continue blogging. While I enjoy blogging, I cannot do so with a clear conscience in violation of orders. I could continue blogging while attempting to remain within the rules, but that kind of blogging is not really my style. For the past five-plus years I have written about what moves me, because that it what I enjoy. I would not feel comfortable attempting to balance my beliefs and my duties. I may still write something from time to time here. And the Rocky Mountain News has asked me to write about my experiences in Iraq, so I will be writing there beginning next month and I will put a link up here to that once it gets rolling. It has been a fascinating journey. I suspect that I will return when I retire. Until then, thanks to all (both?) my readers and take care. Posted at 06:12 AM · Blogging · Comments (8) · TrackBack (0)
February 20, 2007WhoopsIt would appear that yours truly is in violation of certain DoD policies (specifically directive 1344.10) regarding political activities by members of the armed forces on active duty. I am going to review the directive and make whatever changes are necessary to put me in compliance with that directive. So blogging may be light for a while, as I'm not going to put anything up that would have any potential to cross that boundary until I'm sure where the line is. Posted at 10:25 AM · Blogging · Comments (15) · TrackBack (0)
February 15, 2007Milbloggies OpenNominations are now open for the 2006 Milbloggies. The rules are as follows: Overview 1. A military blog can be nominated ONLY once by the same registered user. However, a user can nominate as many military blogs as they wish. All nominations must be submitted online through Milblogging.com by 5:00 pm EST on February 21, 2007. 2. The top five nominees in each branch and country category will be announced on February 22nd and those nominees will move into the Voting Phase beginning February 22, 2007. The Voting Phase will close on February February 26, 2007. Instructions on voting will appear on the website on February 22, 2007. 3. Nominees may be military blogs that belong to the following branch categories and countries in the Milblogging.com database: Branch Categories: U.S. Air Force Countries: Afghanistan 4. To nominate a military blog, you must be signed in or a registered user (just like last year). Registration is quick and free and you will not receive any SPAM. This helps maintain the integrity of voting. To place you nomination, simply click on the listing in the Milblogging.com database, and click the Nominate button at the top of the blog profile. You can reivew the milblogs you nominated at any time, by signing in and clicking Manage Favorites. Click the link that says View Milblogs Nominated by You. 5. Winners will be presented awards at the 2007 Milblog Conference on May 5, 2007. Winners are not required to attend the conference in order to receive their awards. If you're interested in Milblogging, this is a great way to find a lot of interesting blogs devoted to military writing. Posted at 08:06 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
February 12, 2007Victims"I'll be the victim!" So the Marcotte affair comes to a quick end with Amanda Marcotte resigning from the Edwards campaign rather than tar the campaign with her views. While I think it's unfortunate Marcotte had to go, her attitude towards the affair reminds me a bit too much of Amanda Buckman, quoted above. Yes, Marcotte was clobbered by a guy who is has an extensive track record as a hateful, disturbed man, and a Democratic campaign was nearly derailed by a right wing attack. But Marcotte's inability to even see how what she said was in many ways just as nasty and disgusting as anything Bill Donahue ever uttered strikes me as amazingly obtuse, and to paint herself as naught but a victim in this affair stretches one's credulity to the breaking point. Ms. Marcotte became a significant force in the blogosphere because there is an audience for people willing to express extreme opinions. By making virulently anti-religious comments, she drew a sizeable audience and earned herself some credibility among certain portions of the left blogosphere. For her to expect that to come at no cost was either foolish or naive. By entering the blogosphere, we choose to put our opinions in print where anyone can see what we have to say. In so doing, most of us look forward to drawing some attention to our ideas. We cannot then turn around and expect to have those ideas overlooked when they become inconvenient. If Ms. Marcotte truly believes otherwise, then she's deluding herself. If she was a victim of anything, it was of her own intemperate words. And she is likely to be of far greater use to the Edwards campaign from her post at Pandagon than she ever would have been as a campaign blogger. Campaign blogs produce little more than pabulum, and while I'm sure Ms. Marcotte could have produced effective mush for the Edwards campaign blog, her strengths clearly lie more in the area of whipping up support for Edwards via her real writings. The Edwards campaign may still reap some benefits from hiring Ms. Marcotte. Posted at 08:23 PM · Blogging · Comments (3) · TrackBack (0)
February 07, 2007A Little PerspectiveI've stayed away from the whole Edwards-bloggers fiasco because, to be blunt, I really don't care. But I do concur with Ezra Klein about the larger picture: what should matter to the Edwards campaign is not what stupid things these two bloggers have said in the past, but are they qualified for the jobs Edwards needs them to do. And he's right. If Edwards hired these two to help with drafting policy, their intemperate words would probably be somewhat relevant. But since he's paying them to do non-policy related jobs, their particular positions on issues say precisely zero about what Edwards believes. I'm not a fan of Edwards, and I hope he goes down in flames during the primaries. But the fact he hired two people who have a habit of saying silly things on their blogs shouldn't reflect on his campaign, and the bloggers shouldn't have to face the threat of being fired from jobs they seem eminently qualified to perform for unrelated issues. Posted at 01:38 PM · Blogging • · Politics · Comments (5) · TrackBack (0)
February 03, 2007A Quarter MillionIt's a paltry sum compared to the big boys, but this site cleared 250,000 visitors earlier today. I'd like to thank everyone who has made this site at least marginally successful. Here's hoping the next quarter-million come a bit quicker. Posted at 03:33 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
December 21, 2006The Preparation BeginsI leave for training in just under three months. In that time, I've got quite a bit to do, as the Army has decided not to send me to Intermediate Leader Education, the Army's school for field grade officers, so I have to complete the course via correspondence, or more precisely, via the internet. Since I have no idea what kind of internet access I may have in Iraq, I need to get as much of the course as possible done before I leave. That means a lot of hours spent reading, writing, and studying, and that means there may be less time for blogging. I hope to keep this up as well, but this has to take precedence due to my impending deployment. I also intend to try to learn some Arabic, so if I have any readers who speak Arabic and have any interest in teaching a novice, please speak up now. Until then, I hope you'll forgive the slowdown in posting. Thanks. Posted at 08:52 PM · Blogging · Comments (7) · TrackBack (0)
November 17, 2006The 2006 Weblog AwardsNominations have opened for the 2006 Weblog Awards. If you've got a favorite blog, go on over and toss its name into contention, especially if it's a lesser-known blog, as I know it was a big thrill for me to be nominated a few years ago. Posted at 06:18 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
November 08, 2006CommentsI believe the comments are now working. My apologies for the problem; I'm not sure what caused it, but they are now working for me, at least. If you try to comment and they don't work, drop me a line at andrewolmsted[at]andrewolmsted[dot]com. Posted at 09:44 AM · Blogging · Comments (5) · TrackBack (0)
October 24, 2006CommentsThe estimable Stacy of Sekimori has stopped by to help out with my problems with comments. Please let me know if there are still any hiccups so I can try to address them. Posted at 05:23 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
October 19, 2006AgebloggingA quick congratulations to Kevin Drum, who is celebrating his 48th birthday today. While I often disagree with him, he's one of the smartest voices in the blogosphere and I rarely leave his site without learning something. Here's to 48 more good years, Kevin. Posted at 01:36 PM · Blogging · Comments (1) · TrackBack (0)
July 11, 2006Expanding HorizonsI've been asked to join the bloggers at Obsidian Wings (and a quick thank you to Gary Farber, who threw my name into contention), so I am now posting there regularly in addition to what I post here. I do apologize for the volume of posting over here. Unfortunately, I cannot post to this site except when I get a wireless internet connection from a public terminal. Army servers don't like my site. But I will continue to post here regularly. I also was interviewed by Bloggasm over the weekend, which you can read here. Posted at 06:08 PM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (0)
May 03, 2006Statement of PrinciplesSeveral bloggers have gotten together and crafted a statement of principles for bloggers addressing privacy for bloggers and public figures. I'd argue that most of it is just common decency, but as my fourth grade teacher, Mrs. Insani, used to say about common sense, it's often quite uncommon. Putting the principles into simple, declarative statements and asking others to sign up isn't a bad idea, if only because it ought to remind bloggers to think about these issues before posting. I do hope that the signatories do, in fact, take the principles to heart. It's easy to add one's name to a document; it can be much more difficult actually living up to the principles that document embodies. Nonetheless, I think the decision to post these and try to publicize them is a wise one, as those who were planning to violate these principles will likely do so anyhow, but those who simply haven't considered the question may read these and reconsider an action that would violate them. Online privacy is a difficult thing to maintain. For me, it's not much of a big deal, as I post under my own name (which poses its own risks; one of my former bosses advised me to stay away from blogging), but an enterprising person could use that against me. It certainly wouldn't be difficult to track me down to express disagreement with any of my posts. But even pseudonymous bloggers face challenges, as anyone who's really determined to crack someone's identity can probably do so. And some bloggers have not hesitated to try and unveil the 'secret identity' of pseudonymous bloggers they disagree with, actions that could have serious consequences for bloggers whose places of work ask them not to blog, or worse yet, for bloggers in foreign nations where the state has no hesitation in hunting down and removing voices of dissent. There is no way to know in advance how successful this statement will be. But the statement endorses the right principles and serves as a valuable reminder of how online discourse should be conducted. Posted at 12:15 PM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (0)
April 17, 2006Tu Quoque!It all started with a Washington Post reporter who didn't know much about the blogosphere, but who was familiar with the term 'The Angry Left.' So the reporter, one David Finkel, wrote an article about The Left, Online and Outraged. The basic thrust of the argument is that the lefty blogosphere is a haven for incredibly angry, bordering on deranged, people who use the internet to scream epithets into the air. I read it when it was published and considered commenting, but decided against because, let's face it, trying to prove that one side of the traditional left/right political divide is meaner/nastier/less polite/worse dressed/etc. than the other is an exercise in futility. People who tend towards that side of the political spectrum will agree, while those on the other side will point to examples of the other side's excesses and note that however bad they are, the other side is worse (tu quoque). Granted, we cannot fall prey to the fallacy of the mean and assume that both sides are necessarily equally culpable, but trying to prove to someone on the right that the right is angrier than the left is a waste of time. Regardless of the evidence marshalled in defense of that proposition, it will not convince the conservative that his side is worse. He'll only dredge up his own evidence of horrible things said by people on the left and, voila, the other side is shown to be worse. I don't even have the faintest idea how you would go about 'proving' that one side is worse than the other. Do we restrict our search to actual politicians from the respective parties? Or does anyone who supports that side have the opportunity to contribute to the hatefest? How do you measure various comments? Does Senator Jesse Helms' comment that President Clinton 'better have a bodyguard' before visiting military bases rank higher or lower than Randi Rhodes suggesting the assassination of President Bush? Helms, after all, was a sitting Senator, while Rhodes is just the host of a radio program. On the other hand, Helms' words were more suggestive that military personnel in North Carolina might view President Clinton dimly, while Rhodes' comment was much less equivocal. And I'll bet that most of my readers have already disagreed with the way I've framed this debate, depending on where they fall on the political spectrum. Now try to rate an entire blogosphere and radiosphere's worth of commentary to see which is worse. My favorite blog is QandO, and they're currently providing a beautiful example of this phenomon. McQ noted the article when it came out and intimated that, while Finkel's piece was over the top, he had a point and the left blogosphere does tend to be characterized by vitriol rather than logic. That was more than enough to open the floodgates to 68 comments (and counting) that all add up to: your side is worse than my side. In fairness, a few voices of reason have attempted to calm the waters, but I suspect the conviction that the other side is worse will continue to dominate the threat until it drops out of sight. Nor should this come as a surprise to anyone. The number of people willing to accept that the other side may have a point is vanishingly small. To most of the left, the right is made up of racist, sexist, homophobic plutocrats who are interested in nothing but advancing their selfish, hateful agenda. Not to be outdone, the right considers the left to be anti-American communists who want to ruin the United States to further their agenda of transnational progressivism. Who in their right mind would want to converse an opposite number dedicated to such horrible things? You don't talk with enemies like that, you defeat them by any means necessary, right? At least, that seems to be the consensus opinion. Posted at 09:25 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
April 08, 2006I Am Amused By the Simplicity of This GameAgree or disagree with him, there's a reason Jim Henley ought to be one of the A-list bloggers of the blogosphere, as this post so wonderfully demonstrates. Posted at 09:53 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
Idealism and the BlogosphereI see Matt Welch is bemoaning the horrors of the blogosphere as he leaves Reason magazine (a fine publication you'd do well to read regularly) to take a job with the Los Angeles Times (which I could take or leave). Welch's subhead really tells the whole story: "I used to think blogs would transform ideologues into nonpartisan truth-seekers. Man, was I wrong." Not to be too harsh on Matt, who's a fine writer I enjoy reading, but it's hard not to respond to that with 'duh'. Yes, it's true that after September 11th, people were briefly willing to set aside their partisan tendencies. That's a natural reaction to an existential threat. At the time, it was clear we were facing people who were willing to do just about anything to kill us; banding together to figure out how to defeat them mattered a lot more than domestic politics. But that could only last as long as the threat was evident. As the months and years went by without an attack, the worry about terrorism striking us has faded, allowing our basic disagreements to resurface and take on greater apparent importance. Let's face facts: we disagree on some very basic premises of what America is and should be. When I think America is about individual achievement and you think it's about equality, we're going to disagree pretty strongly regarding how the government should act. And Americans have always been willing, not to say eager, to demonize their political opponents going all the way back to Washington. That doesn't even consider the fact we disagree on the best way to deal with the threat of terrorism. Despite what some Republicans might have us believe, Democrats do care about protecting the country and worry about the right way to do so. But people can worry about the same situation and come up with very different ideas for how to deal with it. Depending on who you ask, invading Iraq was a vital next step in winning the war on terror, or it was a terrible distraction that has placed us in greater danger than we were in before. As difficult as it may be for some of my readers to believe, it's perfectly possible to believe either of those things quite sincerely, and despite what a lot of people say, there is insufficient evidence to demonstrate that either side's conclusions are accurate yet. But sincerity doesn't change the fact that if one is correct, the other is incorrect, and doing the wrong thing can have catastrophic consequences. For those who believe the war in Iraq is a distraction from the larger war, all we've done in invading Iraq is squander moral capital and the lives of our Soldiers and Iraqis alike. Those opportunity costs have ensured our inability to respond forcefully to events of the past few years in Iran and North Korea (whether or not it would have been wise to do being a separate question; Iraq has limited our options) and continue to limit our ability to respond to terrorism threats elsewhere. If those who oppose the Iraq war have assessed the threat correctly, we find ourselves in a very bad position to continue to fight terrorism in a war that will last for many years. Conversely, if those who support the war in Iraq are correct, calls to pull out now are only harming our cause and making it more likely we will be threatened by worse terrorism in the future. It is hardly surprising each side has grown more and more shrill over time in defense of what they honestly believe are the right decisions to make, decisions that are quite literally a matter of life and death. Welch also fails to understand the dynamic that drives a lot of web traffic: agreement. It would be lovely if the human race consisted of people who did nothing but seek out all data and work together to determine the optimum solution to each problem, but that's not how we work. As any honest reporter can tell you, objectivity is an incredibly difficult standard to meet under any circumstances, because it goes against our instincts. Because there is so much information available to us, we all tend to shorthand most data given to us based on preexisting criteria: who provided the data, is it congruent with what we already believe, does it support what I can see with my own eyes, etc.? It's intellectually sloppy, but it's also the only way we can function without being bogged down in paralysis by analysis. And so it should come as no surprise that a lot of the most popular and best-known blogs out there are highly partisan: they provide data that people are already inclined to agree with. Whether you want to hear about how badly President Bush is screwing up or how dumb the Democratic party is, it takes very little research to determine where you can go to find like-minded people. And so partisanship, as is its purpose, allows the creation of pockets of strength that may be greatly disproportionate to those positions' strength in the larger society. Complaining about these facts is understandable; I often find them frustrating as well. But one may as well complain about the Earth's frustrating tendency to rotate on its axis or orbit the sun; the facts will remain as they are. Rather than complaining, the best thing Welch could do is to try to be one of the lights he believes the blogosphere could provide. Would he get the traffic of the biggest sites? No way. But that's no reason not to offer a little factual analysis and reasoned comment into the mix. (Hat tip: Professor Althouse) Posted at 07:59 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
February 23, 2006The Joy of ReadingLa Shawn Barber points out a number of good reasons to review books as part of your blog. Number one, that I fully concur with her on, is free books. I've gotten probably a dozen books and DVDs as review copies since I started blogging, and I'm well down on the 'tail' of the blogospheric link curve. I can only imagine the number of books top of the line bloggers receive. So if you're a blogger who has any interest in reading, check out the Blog For Books. Posted at 12:14 PM · Blogging · Comments (1) · TrackBack (0)
February 14, 2006Signs People Need to Take a Day Away From PoliticsIn the wake of Vice President Cheney's hunting accident, some people are getting upset about a Dana Milbank appearance on the Keith Olbermann show in which Milbank wears a bright orange cap and reflective vest to talk about the shooting. This is used to demonstrate Milbank's liberal bias, and Michelle Malkin is comparing Milbank's act with a reporter appearing in an interview with a bumper sticker reading "I'd rather hunt with Dick Cheney than ride with Ted Kennedy." I may lose my VRWC credentials for this act of heresy, but I think people need to take a deep breath and relax about this. The Vice President went on a hunting trip and shot somebody. Like it or not, that's pretty funny, since the injured party will be fine. Poking a little fun at the people in power is an American tradition, and I see no reason why reporters shouldn't have a chance to get into the act when they're not reporting. I mean, seriously, who watches Keith Olbermann for news? The guy's shtick is being obnoxious about current events. That's not news. (It's arguably not humor either, but that's a judgement call.) Yes, Milbank leans pretty hard to the left, and it's reasonable to assume he might not have taken the chance to poke fun at a Democratic politician. So what? Have we come to such a point that reporters are expected to be equal opportunity in their jokes? I thought the right was the side that just wanted reporters to admit that objectivitiy is a myth. As for Malkin's bumper sticker, yes the reaction to the two would be different, and for good reason. Chappaquidick involved the death of a young woman. Cheney's accident involved some pain but no permanent damage to his victim. I don't think I should have to explain to conservatives that joking about a tragedy tends to be in poor taste. Is it sometimes annoying that so many mainstream reporters lean left in their coverage? Sure. (Unless you're on the left, in which case the problem with the media is that it leans to the right.) But getting worked up about an incident that was pretty darn humorous just allows people to invalidate more reasonable criticism by pointing to incidences of overreaction. Posted at 01:21 PM · Blogging · Comments (1) · TrackBack (0)
March 17, 2005Rocky Mountain Blogger Bash v4.0One of the great benefits to blogging in Colorado is that there are some very accomplished bloggers in the Front Range, and they're very good about getting together. Case in point: the fourth annual blogger bash is scheduled for 2 April atthe Denver Press Club. to plan on being there (yes, I'm actually coming home) and I expect it will be as much fun as last years at least. Hope to see you there as well. Posted at 06:48 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
February 13, 2005Jordan, Gannon, and the BlogosphereThere appear to be two basic lines of thought regarding the Eason Jordan situation (and to a lesser extent the Gannon issue): one side sees the takedowns as generally good things for the blogosphere, since the 'sphere was able to put pressure on people who had either dissembled or who refused to answer questions regarding their actions with the complicity of the media. The other side sees the blogosphere as a lynch mob that is quite good at advancing the politics of personal destruction (I often suspect that people who use that term aren't very familiar with what was said about political candidates in the 19th century), but isn't very good at shedding light on the issues. Conversely, I'm not sure that blaming the blogosphere is a realistic assessment of the issue. The blogosphere has very little power to affect events. It can keep issues from disappearing, but it is limited in its ability to frame the issues. Once it became clear the World Economic Forum would not release a tape or transcript of the session in question, I'm not sure how many options the blogosphere had. Each of the bloggers pursuing the story could have abandoned the story, but that would have left the question up in the air. Or they could do what they did: continue to keep the issue percolating in the hopes public pressure would force the issue to the surface and perhaps force the WEF to cave. As it turned out, the pressure was sufficient to get the issue into the public eye, but Jordan chose to quit (or was forced out by his superiors) before the pressure turned to the WEF. I'm not sure the blame for this lies solely at the feet of the blogosphere. As I noted a few days ago, I think Jordan's remarks deserved public scrutiny, as a news executive who is willing to throw around unsubstantiated allegation is news, as would be evidence that U.S. troops are intentionally targeting journalists. I don't think it would have been right for bloggers to simply ignore the issue because they might be perceived as a lynch mob. Jordan and CNN could have fought back if they so chose. The fact that they didn't is interesting (and does not necessarily mean that Jordan is guilty of the worst claims against him), but that choice was not forced on them by the blogosphere. At worst, the blogosphere forced them to make a choice. How they chose to deal with the issue was their responsibility. I don't want to simply grant blanket amnesty to the blogosphere in this matter, but the longer I look at the issue, the more I think that the 'bloggers as lynch mob' argument doesn't hold water. Bloggers raised the question of what Jordan said at Davos, interviewed people who were there, and attempted to get a copy of a transcript or video to determine precisely what was said. While I'm sure there were many indivdual bloggers who acted in less constructive ways, I'm not aware of any way to stop that. Blogging is a tool, and like any tool, it can be used wisely or poorly. More to the point, I'm not sure what else the blogosphere could have done to raise the issue in any way that didn't risk Jordan bailing. Your thoughts are welcome and appreciated. Posted at 08:49 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
UghLong essay zapped when Firefox crashed on me. I will try again tomorrow. Posted at 08:13 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
January 22, 2005Now That's a FireI thought I'd seen what an Instalanche would do, but nothing prepared me for this week. Although I should note this particular surge was helped along by David Pinto at Baseball Musings and the estimable Vodkapundit, but still...wow. Posted at 09:21 PM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (0)
January 20, 2005WelcomeWelcome to Andrew Olmsted dot com's new home. I'm jumping servers, which explains the change in address, but as Stacy already noted, there will be no need to change bookmarks, as the domain will be propagated within 24 to 48 hours, keeping the whole transfer as transparent as possible. Posted at 06:02 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
January 19, 2005Time for a ChangeMuch as I liked the original work Robyn and Stacy did on the site, I was never able to fix the color scheme to make links as visible as I would like. So I decided it was time for something new, and who else to turn to than the blogosphere's best: Sekimori. All I told Stacy was that I wanted something themed on The Incredibles, and I think you'll agree she took that ball and ran with it quite successfully. The new design is both beautiful and functional. Now I've just got to start producing some content that lives up to the design. Update: I've enabled comment moderation and allowed people with TypeKey accounts to post without moderation for the time being. My web host doesn't automatically provide one of the scripts necessary for MT-Blacklist, and with Blacklist down, I've already been hit with more than 40 comment spams just since Stacy got started. Once my host gets things straightened out, I'll probably return to business as usual. Update 2: Welcome, Instapundit readers (and thanks, Glenn, for the link). Come to enjoy Stacy's handiwork, don't forget to come back for the commentary.Posted at 05:21 AM · Blogging · Comments (9) · TrackBack (0)
January 16, 2005Addicted to BlogLa Shawn Barber is seeking the answers to a few questions about blogging. Since the questions are personal and I've got an ego large enough that I'm always eager to write about myself, I thought I'd jump into the fray. 1) How long have you been blogging? Since October 11, 2001. 2) Do you believe you’re addicted to blogging? Please explain, and be honest. It is habit-forming, I must confess. No. I blog because I enjoy discussing political and philosophical questions and my blog provides me a platform to do so. I do not blog for the sake of blogging, I blog because certain issues attract my attention and I want to put my assessment of the issue into the public sphere for others to read, discuss, and dispute. 3) Have you ever taken a hiatus? If so, for what reason and how long? No. 4) Have you ever thought of giving up your blog? Why or why not? Not seriously. While I'll concede that I have often been frustrated by my inability to attract a larger audience for my writing, I long ago decided that I write for myself as much as for an audience. Giving up my blog would simply eliminate an opportunity for me to lay out my arguments. By taking the time to write out my arguments, I force myself to think things through and often find myself changing my mind when new information comes to light. The blog is therefore a valuable tool for me even if nobody reads it. If you're a blogger, think about taking the time to answer La Shawn's questions.Posted at 12:04 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
January 12, 2005Do Your Own WorkEvery once in a while I get a comment or email that goes as follows: "Hi, I'm looking for information on XXX. Please send me information on XXX. Thank you." I get this kind of request every few months, so I thought I'd try to establish what ought to be obvious: I am not a research service. If you need information on something and you think I may be able to provide it, feel free to ask specific questions that are relevant to me and my experience and I'll try to answer them if time permits. But I'm not going to assemble a research paper for you just because you either don't know how or are too lazy to do so. You want to know about something? Go look it up. The fact that I write about a certain topic does not mean that I'm interested in providing you with voluminous data about that subject. On the other hand, if you're willing to pay me for my time, feel free to email me your terms...Posted at 02:10 PM · Blogging · Comments (1) · TrackBack (0)
December 28, 2004Iran Tortures BloggersThis should come as no surprise. Blogging offers another means of self expression free of government censors. Regimes that don't like self-expression are likely to try their old methods to shut blogs down. But even the harshest regimes can be affected by public opinion on occasion. So get the word out, and let's see if we can get these guys some relief.Posted at 05:22 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
December 14, 2004The Koufax AwardsNamed for one of the greatest southpaws ever to play the game, the Koufax Awards honor the best lefty blogs out there. Wampum is currently taking nominations here, although they may move. Swing by and put in a good word for your favorite lefties (politically, not handedness; yours truly emphatically does not qualify).Posted at 07:13 AM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (0)
December 04, 2004Electoral Shenanigans at the Blog AwardsOn the one hand, I can certainly sympathize with the boys at Power Line being miffed that they're now behind the two liberal powerhouse blogs, Daily Kos and Eschaton. I don't think much of either Kos or Atrios, and it would be frustrating to lose to them. On the other hand, this does tend to point to the biggest flaw in the awards process: the winners will frequently be whoever is most willing to flog their readers into voting, rather than whoever really is the best site in a particular category. I suppose this isn't at all surprising, but it does tend to undermine the nominal value of the awards, at least for me. Then again, maybe I'm just saying that because I'm getting clobbered in my category. This is why they don't release the ballot totals for the Oscars. Update: I should probably note, for the record, that one of Kos' readers posted a script allowing people to cheat, so the awards are now all higgledy-piggledy.Posted at 06:31 PM · Blogging · Comments (8) · TrackBack (0)
December 02, 2004And the Nominees Are...Kevin Aylward of Wizbang has posted the 2004 Weblog Award Nominees, a task that must have taken him an inordinate amount of time. From now until December 12 voting will go on to select the finalists. Yours truly heads the slate of nominees for Best Essayist (thank God for alphabetical order), alongside such luminaries as James Lileks, Bill Whittle, Steven Den Beste, Virginia Postrel, and many other luminaries. Looking at the list, all I can think of is a technique used by unscrupulous baseball agents to get their clients a bigger payday or Hall of Fame promoters looking to build a case for a particular client: Bill James describes it as 'we can make a list;' take three, four, or five different statistics, set your client or candidate's numbers as the minimums and voila, you've got a list that seemingly proves your candidate fits in with a bunch of great players. Of course, the key is to use minimums but no maximums, so if your guy hit .301, he's listed among anyone who hit .300 to .350, making the list your guy and a bunch of people who are lots better than he is. Which is a really roundabout way of saying that it is a tremendous honor just to be nominated. I recommend at least checking out the ballots, both because Kevin clearly put a lot of time and energy into them and because I'll wager there are many blogs on those lists you'd enjoy if you took the time to check them out. Plenty of good reading to be had, for those with the time to read it.Posted at 04:21 PM · Blogging · Comments (6) · TrackBack (0)
November 24, 2004Blogger EthicsTTLB points to an proposal by blogmeister Nick Denton to create some kind of permanent institution dedicated to blogger ethics. The concept, as I understand it, would be to establish something dedicated to keeping bloggers honest by 'rapping the knuckles' of bloggers who violate ethical standards. While I'm sure that Nick has the best of intentions here, I really think such a committee undermines some of the best aspects of the blogosphere. There is no central committee designating certain blogs as good or bad as things now stand. If you take a look at the best-known blogs (using the Bear's own ecosystem as an easy example), there is a mix of old hands and new blood. While it's certainly difficult to break into the top echelon of bloggers, the same is true of breaking into the top echelon of any endeavor; I don't think it's any more difficult in the blogosphere than anywhere else. So how do you gain an audience? (A cynic might argue that I'm not the best person to answer that question, but we'll leave that be.) Much like the old joke about Carnegie Hall, you get there by writing a lot of good stuff. Take a look at Bill Whittle: he started blogging in December 2002, doesn't produce a great deal, and he's just published a book that will probably do reasonably well. Why? Because he produces a quality product. We can't all be Bill Whittles or Atrios (Atrioses?), but if you're willing to put the work into it, you can still break into the blogosphere and be successful largely thanks to your own effort. Yes, you need to be noticed by a few big name bloggers in order to get people looking in your direction, but once you do that, the rest depends on whether or not what you write is good enough to get people to come back the next day. Creating some council on blogger ethics strikes me as contrary to this ethic. Will prospective bloggers be expected to hew to this code they've had no part in shaping? If so, why? Further, how on Earth do they propose to keep politics out of it? I assume most people familiar with the blogosphere are familiar with the hubbub that surrounded the Daily Kos' "screw 'em" remarks in response to the killing of four contractors in Fallujah this year; he was generally condemnned, but his readers continued to pour in and he came through the controversy generally unscathed. What might such an incident do to the credibility of such an ethics commission? There's no safe place there; stand aside, and one side will condemn you for tolerating an ethical breach; take a stand and be accused of partisanship and worse. How long would this kind of ethical committee last before one side or the other decided it was merely a tool of the leftists/VRWC and abandoned it? If people want to form voluntary associations, more power to them. But I think this kind of project is doomed to failure. Ultimately, the people who decide what the ethical standards for bloggers should be are the bloggers themselves and their audiences.Posted at 11:49 AM · Blogging · Comments (1) · TrackBack (1)
November 20, 2004Self-CongratulationWizbang is kicking off the 2004 Weblog Awards. And, for the record, I'm not at all bitter for never having been nominated (which, remember, is an honor in itself), let alone winning. More seriously, if you know some good blogs that aren't particularly well known, nominating them isn't a bad way to send a little more traffic their way and get their message out to a little broader audience.Posted at 07:13 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
November 18, 2004Intellectual Honesty NoteI've disagreed with Kevin Drum on numerous occasions (and I have no doubt he'd disagree with me more often if only he had the time), sometimes harshly. Today he points to a good piece by David Adesnik that notes that the only two successful counterinsurgency campaigns in the post-WWII era involved 'colonial' powers promoting self-rule (though only limited in the case of Malaysia). I wouldn't interpret this to mean that we're destined for success in Iraq (nor to I think that's Adesnik's point), only that if we actually support self-rule in Iraq, it's our best chance for success. Kudos to Kevin for pointing to an article that (to judge from his comments section) isn't very popular on his side of the political fence. It takes a sizable portion of intellectual honesty to note the best arguments of the other side, rather than trying to sweep them under the rug. Don't forget to check out Adesnik's piece.Posted at 02:08 PM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (1)
October 24, 2004Academic SurveyBarbara Kaye, an Associate Professor at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville, is conducting another survey of Internet usage for political purposes. It can be accessed here. I will be interested to see the results of the survey.Posted at 03:45 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
October 11, 2004Three Years and CountingIt's hard for me to believe, but today marks the third anniversary of my weblog. It has been an enjoyable time, thanks in large part to a number of intelligent and polite readers who have been kind enough to make my comments something I enjoy reading rather than something I fear to enter. An advantage of this weblog's small readership, to be sure. To all those who have visited over the past three years, thanks for stopping by, and I hope I can keep things interesting enough to lure you back (and maybe even a few of your friends).Posted at 04:03 PM · Blogging · Comments (5) · TrackBack (2)
September 24, 2004Time to Dump PayPal?Bill Quick is being told to change the content of his web site (DailyPundit, in the highly unlikely case you're not familiar with it) by the internet money transfer service PayPal. Apparently Daily Pundit does not meet with their exacting standards, so they're going to suspend his account. They are perfectly within their rights to do so, and I would defend their right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. But PayPal will not see another dime of my money, and I would encourage my readers to withhold their support from them as well. Just as I believe that private enterprise has the right to run their business however they choose, I believe that private citizens have the right to reward or punish businesses for those choices. I wouldn't frequent a business that refused service to people based on their gender or ethnicity, nor will I frequent a business that attempts to censor their customers.Posted at 07:45 PM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (1)
September 22, 2004Intellectual Blinders Worn ProudlyA law professor at the University of Texas is upset that the blogosphere is covering what he considers to be unimportant issues like the CBS forgeries rather than the far more important issues like Michelle Malkin's book. In the tradition of people with more rhetoric than reason, the professor demonstrates his command of ad hominem in the hopes of fooling his readers into thinking that he's right without offering a real argument. Ann Althouse is knocking him about, but he is apparently too dense to realize when he's beaten. I realize that, if you're a John Kerry fan, I almost certainly won't be able to convince you that the CBS issue matters. But, since it's my bandwidth, I'm going to try anyhow. Despite what some (including Professor Leiter and myself) consider overstated triumphalism in the blogosphere, the blogosphere is unlikely to ever be anything more than an adjunct to the media. When I'm looking for something to write about, I go to the media first. Why? Because they have the assets to cover topics in far more depth than I normally can, and because we expect the media to go out and find the facts. The blogosphere (really the Internet) offers people who can go into greater depth than the media, because the media is run by generalists, but we normally only get involved after the media has done the groundwork on an issue. Further, even when the blogosphere gets involved, it is really only successful when it can push the information it has gathered into the public eye via the media. I think the blogosphere offers far more value than Professor Leiter does, but the media remains vital. Which means we're placing a lot of trust in the media. When they present information to the public, they receive the benefit of the doubt; we assume that stories we see on TV and read in the paper are accurate (despite a great deal of evidence to the contrary). So the fact CBS was willing to use documents that even their own experts thought were questionable is a big problem, because it calls into question the possibility the media is using its considerable powers to take sides in a presidential election. I'd call that a problem. Which is why the CBS documents question is more important than CBS (or Professor Leiter) would like to admit.Posted at 08:48 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
September 10, 2004Making a Difference..But in What?Much as I hate to admit it, since I'm certainly guilty of it, Ginger has an excellent point: for all the excitement lighting up the political side of the blogosphere over the possibly forged Bush documents, the odds are pretty good the whole story isn't really going to have an impact unless and until it blows up in the major media. We're arguing over minutia, and the only thing that will really count is, did CBS knowingly use forged documents? If so, CBS will get hurt. If not, the story is going to vanish with little to no effect on the political situation (with the possible exception that it is eating up campaign air time). Hat tip: Unqualified Offerings.Posted at 08:53 PM · Blogging · Comments (9) · TrackBack (0)
August 29, 2004Gulliver's TravailsSteven Den Beste has decided to hang up his blogging gloves, at least for the time being. His reason: he's tired of nit-picking letters from people reading his essays who tease out one niggling detail and try to debunk or improve his essay based on that. The bottom line was simple: he wasn't having fun any longer, and so he wisely chose to quit rather than force himself to do something he didn't enjoy. For those who don't spend much time in the blogosphere, Steven was one of the giants of the genre. What Glenn Reynolds did for linkers, Steven did for thinkers: bloggers who like to get into the meat of a subject and really chew on it for a while. I have always admired his writing ability and his clarity of thought, even when I disagreed with the point he was making; his blog was always one of the first stops of the day, and almost invariably provided interesting reading, and plenty of it. But, like another giant, Steven found himself tied down by Lilliputians, using email rather than ropes. Here's hoping that, whatever he does next, it brings him some of the same joy he originally got from blogging.Posted at 06:56 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
August 26, 2004Six Figures
Yes, I know it's less than what Glenn gets on an average day, but it's still not too bad for a hobby.
Thanks to all who have visited over the past 32 months. I hope it's been worth the price of admission.
Posted at 03:19 PM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (0)
August 18, 2004They Also Serve...Jeff Quinton is assembling a list of bloggers who served, and since I never miss a chance at self-promotion, I'm adding my name to the list. ;) Besides, I imagine my own triple threat of service, so to speak, is at least reasonably unusual in the blogosphere: Service: Army National Guard, 1988-1989, Infantry U.S. Army, 1992-2002, Armor U.S. Army Reserve, 2002-Present, Armor.Posted at 08:10 PM · Blogging · Comments (2) · TrackBack (2)
August 05, 2004New Blog AlertWinning Argument is a liberal blog with a difference: each post lays out a premise, then seeks to defend that premise, showing why their side is correct and the other side is incorrect. While it is unquestionably a liberal blog, its format is well done and it appears (thus far) to be free of the ad hominem and otherwise nasty commentary that seems to mark far too many web sites.Posted at 04:58 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
June 07, 2004Road TripIn response to a request from John Dunshee of Just Some Poor Shmuck, and with the help of ScriptyGoddess, I've created a Mobile News Page that people can use to view the site via their PDAs. The link is also to the lower left under the archives. Enjoy.Posted at 10:46 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
June 06, 2004RMBB Photos, Part IIDorkafork has posted his own photos of the Rocky Mountain Blogger Bash. He caught quite a few scenes I had missed, so his pictures are definitely worth checking out. I'll have to pay more attention next time.Posted at 09:17 AM · Blogging · Comments (0) · TrackBack (0)
June 04, 2004Blogger Bash Physical EvidenceCharles Sakai, damn his hide, has posted photos of the RMBB here and here. And yes, I really am that fugly.Posted at 08:24 PM · Blogging · Comments (4) · TrackBack (0)
May 29, 2004RMB ReportI attended the very first Rocky Mountain Blogger Bash back in 2002, and had a fine time doing so. But last night's Rocky Mountain Blogger Bash 3.0 was everything Walter was promising and more. The turnout was incredible, giving me the opportunity to finally put some names with faces. The evening began when Amanda and I picked up Gary Farber of the estimable Amygdala for dinner. As neither of us visits Denver on a regular basis, we took a little time to decide on a place for dinner, but settled on The Cheesecake Factory. A nice enough place, although loud and with a menu packed with ads, which I've never before seen. Nonetheless, we were able to have some good conversation over dinner, particularly as dinner took its sweet time arriving. Sadly, we didn't have time to sample any of the roughly 50 varieties of cheesecake they offered, as we were already late for the Bash. We found the Press Club without difficulty, a small building near (or possibly in) Denver's infamous LoDo (Lower Downtown). It seemed a nice enough place, although the walls ensured that conversation quickly turned to cacophony, forcing me to lean in and ask people to repeat themselves on a disturbingly regular basis. As I'm not the most gregarious of individuals, I tended to lay back and observe rather than leap in and introduce myself, although I still managed to meet many bloggers. The list of bloggers I met includes Charles Sakai of Bloodthirsty Warmonger, Walter of Walter in Denver, John Orr of Coyote Gulch, Ed Driscoll of EdDriscoll.com, Stephen Wheeler of Off In The Tall Weeds, Jed Baer of Freedom Sight, Andy of the World Wide Rant, Jeralyn Merritt of TalkLeft, Tim Berglund of Tim Berglund dot com, Cory of Jimspeak (don't ask), Darren of Colorado Conservative, the estimable Zombyboy of ResurrectionSong whose real name I've already managed to forget, Jeff Goldstein of protein wisdom, and Stephen Green of Vodkapundit. The best thing about meeting them all was that they all struck me as nice people, so it was simply a fun time. It's important to remember that, while we often disagree on a number of subjects, we can still get together and talk without it degenerating into silly partisan ranting. I saw Andy, a somewhat militant right-wing atheist, chatting amiable with Jeralyn, a lefty lawyer, and Tim, a blogger who spends a bit of time on theology. Rodney King would have been proud. All kidding aside, I enjoyed some fascinating chats with the various bloggers, and my only regret was that I failed to circulate enough to meet all of my fellow bloggers. In particular I was hoping to meet Anne Zook of Peevish..., but she apparently didn't make it. To those I missed, I hope to catch you at the next one, which I hope will be sooner rather than later. As an aside, the bloggers I missed were: The Speculist, Rover Pundit, Publicola, Whomping Willow, TBOTCOTW, Dorkafork, Final Protective Fire, Tahoe Web Diary, and Confessions of a Flabby Colosotan Ironman.Posted at 10:36 AM · Blogging · Comments (12) · TrackBack (2)
May 28, 2004Party TimeWe're off to Rocky Mountain Blogger Bash 3.0, so don't wait up for us.Posted at 04:35 PM · Blogging · Comments (0) · |
