Stereotyping bloggers

judgejudy.jpgThe Troppo blogroll was getting far too long and intimidating for comfortable use. Accordingly I’ve decided to revert to a previous organisational principle, namely listing blogs in rough ideological sub-divisions. Along with the individual description tags attached to each hyperlink, I hope it might help casual readers to find blogs within their “comfort zone”.

Mind you, I reckon one of the more enjoyable aspects of surfing the blogosphere lies in reading bloggers outside your comfort zone. Exposing yourself to the thoughts of people with different ideological viewpoints sometimes sheds new light on an issue. If not, outraged indignation is often a spur to creative outpouring.

Interesting to note that the RWDBs are still the largest political blog grouping by some distance. However, I’ve included people under that category who are only moderately right-wing and don’t really deserve the RWDB badge of honour (e.g. Scott Wickstein or Al Bundy).

Update – Mike Jericho displays a fine, light-hearted sense of humour (not) about the whole exercise. He doesn’t seem to realise that “Right Wing Death Beast” is a self-conferred badge of honour (coined by Tim Blair if I remember rightly), or that most RWDBs wear it with pride. I’ve adopted it as a heading in precisely that spirit. Mike thinks I should differentiate between extreme lefties and moderate ones. Well, there are limits to how many subdivisions you can usefully have. Moreover, within each blogroll tag I have differentiated. Niall, for instance, is described as a “Left Wing Death Beast”.

I suspect the real reason for Mike’s dummy spit is not so much my ideological categorising, but the fact that I described his writing as unoriginal (both in subject matter and style). But that’s my honest personal evaluation; there wouldn’t be much point in descriptive blog tags if they were just anodyne ego strokes. My descriptions certainly aren’t ideologically skewed IMO. I say very positive things about Professor Bunyip, for instance, and Mike’s mate Al Bundy. That’s because both are very good writers to my taste, even though I often strongly disagree with their opinions. There are plenty of people who think my writing is turgid, unoriginal and even pretentious (Pretentious? Moi?). Niall for one. I can live with it. I can’t please everyone, and nor can Mike. Anyway, he might profitably take the view that any publicity is good publicity.

Mike also seems to think I’m being a bit churlish in labelling Tim Blair as only “arguably” the “father” of Australian political blogging. But again, my own personal experience requires that qualification. Like many other bloggers, Tim has been generous with linking my posts (when he agrees with them), and he’s also helped me in a couple of other ways too. But he’s never linked Troppo from his blogroll, a privilege he reserves for ideological mates. I don’t have a particular problem with that, but some other long-time bloggers have more generous blogroll policies, and therefore arguably better merit the “father” tag.

The long-time bloggers who have really mentored my own blogging are Tim Dunlop (who first introduced me to blogging almost 3 a bit over 2 years ago), Scott Wickstein (my current blog host/landlord), and Mark Gallagher (my previous landlord and still very generous with technical assistance). I couldn’t possibly credit Tim Blair as the sole father of ozplogging without also crediting these blokes, and I’m sure Tim B wouldn’t want that.

Lastly, Mike says:

I disagree with this linkage practice myself, and find a need only to group my main links into two categories, based on merit. The exceptional and the excellent.

In other words, he only links blogs he personally likes on his blogroll. That’s fine, and it’s what the majority of bloggers do. I have a different philosophy. Like Tim Dunlop, I attempt to list all Australian blogs with any significant political or legal content, irrespective of their ideological slant or whether I think they’re any good. My hope is that this site might serve as a “portal” blog for readers new to the blogosphere, enabling them more easily to find other blogs they might be interested in reading. There are quite a few readers who do use Troppo in precisely that way. I have no doubt it’s a worthwhile exercise, and I intend to keep doing it (even though it can be time-consuming). Ultimately readers will make up their own minds which blogs they prefer, irrespective of how I rate them. But readers have to find them first, and I think the Troppo policy serves a useful function in that regard, for Mike Jericho as much as anyone else.

When I first started blogging 3 a bit over 2 years ago, there were less than 30 Australian blogs listed on my blogroll. Currently there are 89 96. They need to be categorised in some way to remain useful and accessible. The current arrangement is the best I can come up with for the moment, but I’m always open to suggestions for improvement.

About Ken Parish

Ken Parish is a legal academic, with research areas in public law (constitutional and administrative law), civil procedure and teaching & learning theory and practice. He has been a legal academic for almost 20 years. Before that he ran a legal practice in Darwin for 15 years and was a Member of the NT Legislative Assembly for almost 4 years in the early 1990s.
This entry was posted in Uncategorised. Bookmark the permalink.
54 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Grinder
2022 years ago

Those description tags are great.

Craig G
Craig G
2022 years ago

If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. I liked your blogroll, thats why TA is my first port-of-call.I don’t care if the bloggers are left, RWDB or whatever in between, its their readability, guts and style that I appreciate. It’s now made it unwieldy for me to negotiate the A-Z in its sometimes wierd and wacky diversity.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Craig

Hmmm. I’ll wait for some more feedback to gauge overall reader feelings. Personally, I find the classificatory breakup easier, because that’s the way my brain works. But if most readers prefer a straight alphabetical list then I’ll put it back that way.

Rex
Rex
2022 years ago

For old hands Ken it makes little difference, but I recall when I first discovered the blogs, It was hard to remember which blogger held what viewpoint. When I stumbled across your blog and your idealogical classification, I could use it a reference point. It was of great benefit.

Stick with the current format

cs
cs
2022 years ago

I think its great Ken, and no, definitely not, perish the thought, I insist this seal of approval is not only or even just because it places Back Pages in a somewhat fortuitous position …

Actually, despite the (often severe and sometimes counter-productive) limitations of the spectrum metaphor, I like all my blog’s company, which is some sort of test I guess …

… and continue to harbour strong doubts the validity of the conveniently so-called ‘centrist’ lable. Bah! Humbug!

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Chris

I would be perfectly relaxed personally about being classified as a moderate conservative, except that it doesn’t really fit my position on economic issues like taxation levels and the role of the public sector in relation to ownership, regulation and fostering equality of opportunity (where even moderate conservatives and classical liberals like Jason Soon would certainly shun me as a leftie). So I actually think centrist is a useful classification, and that it fits people like me and Neale Talbot (and Meg Lees) quite well. I put Ambit Gambit there for a slightly different reason. Graham Young clearly belongs in the moderate conservative grouping, but a couple of his co-bloggers are moderate left, so I concluded that “centrist” was the most appropriate slot.

cs
cs
2022 years ago

Fair enough Ken.

The objections are: (1) the views etc of most folks would not fit into one (imagined) position on an ideological spectrum (which, paradoxically, as is often pointed out, tends to meet at its extremeties); (2) obviously, more than either side of the spectrum, the centre is a nondescript relative position, purely dependent upon how one (and history) divides the metaphor – a liberal today may tend to the centre, when that tendency would have been the lot of social democrats prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union, for example; (3) ‘centrist’ carries other political connotations which unfairly advantage the pose position, such as ‘balanced’, ‘unbiased’ ‘meritricious’, ‘average’, ‘mainstream’ etc, which is of course why major political parties are not right or left, but ‘centre-left’ and ‘centre-right’. In sum, the presumption of ‘centrist’ is privileged, relative and loaded, which is why it also tends to get up the nose of those deprived of these advantages.

Still, otherwise, as I said at the outset, fair enough.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Chris

I agree with all your observations. It’s a debate we’ve had before (and more than once). The absolute locus of left and right tend to shift around (in terms of the range of substantive ideas they encompass) just as much as the centre, depending upon prevailing historical, cultural and political trends and currents. That doesn’t detract from their practical utility as classificatory tools, as long as we keep in mind their inherent relativity.

I also don’t intend to lay claim to any superior position for centrism in terms of balance, lack of bias and the like, any more than most people are probably convinced of the commonsensical merit of their own strongly held views. Thus, if it gets up your nose, it’s because you’re making assumptions I’m not conveying (at least not intentionally). The sub-divisions aren’t intended to reflect any moral claims at all; they’re just a useful tool to assist readers in locating blogs they might find interesting to read.

Homer Paxton
Homer Paxton
2022 years ago

Ken ,
It is good to see you are thinking of your ‘customer’s ‘ interests!

Stereotyping becomes problematic when some people can’t be put into nice little boxes.

If Norman Hanscombe is a RWDB then I am Genghis Khan, make that Joshua.
Steve Edwards is too indiosyncratic to put in a proper box also.

apart from teething problems such as these you have a good idea.

zoe
zoe
2022 years ago

The categories are helpful if you’re in a cranky mood and can’t stomach a right wing bore-me-to-death beast at that particular moment.

However I think on balance the old way was better; alpahbetical order plus a description was pretty clear and led me where otherwise I might not go. And I think if you’re going to group, you should have a bit more fun with naming the categories.

A boring technical problem has returned with your reorganisation; when you changed your style sheet I could see the full potted description. Before that, and since changing your blogroll, it cuts off. That’s on XP and Mozilla 1.7 all the way through.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Zoe

Bugger!! I don’t know why that should have happened. I haven’t changed anything except to add a few additional sidebar divisions, and shift the hyperlinks between them. I might say I found Mozilla has always chopped off the tags, both before and after the stylesheet change. Tim Lambert mentioned some additional Mozilla components you could load that would supposedly fix the problem. But it all sounded so tedious that I didn’t bother. I don’t feel anti-Microsoft enough to be bothered messing around with a product that doesn’t do the basics “out of the box” as well as IE. If they want to beat the hegemon, they’re going to have to work harder, as far as I’m concerned.

zoe
zoe
2022 years ago

I guess I’m a little more contrary than you then …

Jason Soon
Jason Soon
2022 years ago

Norman Hanscombe is a classic example of how these categories strain in practice. I recall an exchange he had with Andrew Norton where basically he expressed the position that it wasn’t a good idea to encourage competition between schools, and another with some other right-wing blogger where he expressed traditional Old Left sentiments on redistributing wealth. While Norman strives to project a troglodyte image, in reality he’s an old softy and in some respects more to the left of me.

Jason Soon
Jason Soon
2022 years ago

hmm, I know what you’re trying to do in breaking people like me and c8to and wickstein out of centrist category but i’m not sure that moderate conservative is the term to use. this is basically an american term. americans refer to people with right of centre views as ‘conservatives’ because the philosophical status quo of the US is essentially right of centre liberal (thus the American dream, everyone being encouraged to be wealthy and not resent the wealth of others, etc) and therefore people who express these views are conserving the philosophical status quo. unfortunately the term has then also been used to describe people who are generic conservatives i.e. in wanting to arrest change (Pat Buchanan). in the Australian context to refer to the more individualist strain of the Liberal school (people like me and Wickstein and c8to) as ‘moderate conservative’ isn’t really hitting the target. In many respects for instance our views are the very antithesis of conservative – we believe in Permanent Revolution in the sense of believing in allowing the free play of Schumpeterian creative destruction. There is very little that I believe in conserving for its own sake as opposed to facilitating the ability of people to hold on to structures that gain them increased utility – i.e. the final arbiter is shifting individual preference rather than conserving for its own sake.

cs
cs
2022 years ago

Ah … as Jason illustrates, tamper with the metaphor and you’re really buggered … better go for something like ‘moderate right’ Ken.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

OK. Point taken.

John Quiggin
John Quiggin
2022 years ago

The differences in terms of who you would want to read probably relate to style as much as political position. The term RWDB refers more to extremism in style (and partisanship) than in substance.

As an example, the Howard government is not consistently right-wing – it regularly steals Labor policy initiatives, or goes for straight-out electoral bribery. This is likely to produce criticism from the people you’ve classed as moderate right, but not from the RWDBs

Homer Paxton
Homer Paxton
2022 years ago

Actually the more I think about it the better the previous system was.

When you think about it there are economic liberals such as Jason or Andrew who are also social liberals indeed those and you Ken are decidely left wing on social issues.

There are others such as Steve Edwards who are economically liberal but socially conservative.
Whilsts there appear to be a lot of ‘RWDBs’ who are hard to categorise in either. They simply support howard or bush no matter what.
They are a lot of leftwing pinko types who will oppose bush and howard no matter what.

In other words its too hard Ken, so go and have a beer!

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

I’ll go and have lunch anyway. It’s too early for a beer. And I don’t usually drink beer anyway. Moderately-priced quaffable red wine is more my thing, and seldom before sunset. Moderation in all things (including excess). But that’s probably what you expected. At least I’m not a chardonnay socialist!

But I think I’ll stick with the categorization. It suits my browsing habits, and blogging is at least in part a self-indulgent hobby (albeit a very socially constructive one, I reckon).

True RWDB
True RWDB
2022 years ago

“They simply support howard or bush no matter what. They are a lot of leftwing pinko types who will oppose bush and howard no matter what.”

Yes, I think you’re pretty right there, Homer. I’m one of the former, not because I think Howard and Bush are always right (they’re clearly not), but to comment in this vein gives aid and comfort to the latter (“look, even the RWDBs hate him, too”). Nevertheless I do disagree with Howard on a number of issues, principally economic. I really think he’s having a “tea break” on economic reform, as Wolfgang Kasper so eloquently puts it. Examples are “compensation” to sugar growers because they don’t benefit from the FTA (they are not penalised by it either), and subsidies to car manufacturers like Mitsubishi. He does buy votes from sectional interests. In his defence he would surely introduce more economic reforms were it not for the bloody-minded obstructionist Senate. But as bad as Howard is in these sins I’m hesitant to criticise because Latham would be far worse; he’s unlikely to oppose the worst anti-community sectional interest of them all, the unions, and we’d travel well and truly backwards on industrial relations reforms.

True RWDB
True RWDB
2022 years ago

Ken, like cs, I’d also criticise your placement as a “centrist”. You are very right-wing on some issues and quite leftish on others, although your rightist positions I feel are further to the right than your leftish ones are to the left. I don’t think this makes you a centrist – it’s just that the “average” of your positions are more or less in the middle. It’s just like having one foot in a bucket of boiling water, the other encased in ice. Hardly a comfortable middle-of-the-road position. Meg Lees is far to the left of you. What makes her perhaps seem like a centrist sometimes is that she is pragmatic and not “all or nothing” like most lefties, who would rather go down with the ship than make any concession by accepting a life jacket from a political enemy.

Anthony
Anthony
2022 years ago

Look, you upset Mikey. I said diddums so he banned me :-)

Neale
2022 years ago

Ah, True, I think that Ken is very much a centrist, and that part of being a centrist is having one foot on the Left and one foot on the Right when it comes to different issues, rather than being “on the fence” across all issues.

Ken tends to strike me as slightly Left of center, too, so I disagree with your slightly-Right comments… which is probably why Centrists is a good descriptor.

Niall
2022 years ago

I tend to agree with some of what’s written above, and disagree with other portions. Does this make me centrist on the subject of blog categorisation, but still leftist on the subject of John Howards morals?

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Niall

If the above discussion has proved anything, it’s that it is impossible to come up with a classification system that everyone will agree is fair and accurate. And it’s also obviously true that almost no-one’s views fit neatly into a single little box, however it’s defined. But it’s the best I can do, and I still reckon it’s a useful facility, even though it’s necessarily subjective.

Al Bundy
Al Bundy
2022 years ago

When I first started blogging 3 years ago, there were less than 30 Australian blogs listed on my blogroll. Currently there are 89. They need to be categorised in some way to remain useful and accessible. The current arrangement is the best I can come up with for the moment, but I’m open to suggestions for improvement.

Let’s see. I remember adding a site to my favorites some time agoa called the Parish Pump. Was there a fore-runner to that one?

zoe
zoe
2022 years ago

Ahh, Ken, I already made my suggestion. Have more fun with the categories. Perhaps do it by star sign? (For starters, I’d call Tim Blair an Aries, you and Gianna Geminis, the Tugboaters would be Aquarians and Chris Shiel a Libra.) And I’d like you to rename people’s blogs for your own amusement. I’d go and read something called “Anodyne Ego Strokes” at least once.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Al

There was an earlier Blogspot version of the Parish Pump. It’s still there at http://kenparish.blogspot.com/ . The first post was on 18 August 2002, which is just on two years ago (in 5 days time). But from memory it was going for a few months before that under a different name (just Ken Parish, I think), however the archives to that somehow got deleted. Nevertheless, it’s an exaggeration to say it’s nearly 3 years. It’s more like 2 years 4 months or thereabouts, I think.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Pondering about it a bit more, I think there were only 2 or 3 archive pages that got munched, and I would have been on fortnightly archiving. So I probably started blogging in late June or early July 2002. Thus I’ve recently passed my 2 year anniversary without noticing. But I’m pretty bad at anniversaries in general. (thinks) I will remember Jen’s birthday … I will remember Jen’s birthday …

Mark Upcher
Mark Upcher
2022 years ago

Maybe a better classification than left vs right is the classification used in the Australian Political Quiz at:

http://www.gravett.org/yobbo/quiz/quiz.htm

This would at least give you five boxes to try and put bloggers in.

Mike Jericho
2022 years ago

Oh come off it. You haven’t been married to me (that I know of) so you can hardly lay claim to knowing my mood.

I was being flippant at worst when I dealt with the flurry of yawnish sentences that your description of my blog anxiously attempted to convey.

Or are you shocked at having a person take note of the fact that you managed to fit “unoriginal” “uninteresting” and “dull” into the one description? Aren’t I allowed to snicker at the irony of it?

But I’m glad you noticed that taking three sentences to say just how uninteresting a blog is can be self-defeating. Perhaps even sending the opposite message.

The tiny one sentence that you now use looks much more aloof and geniunely disinterested. ;-)

(I add the smilie-face so that you can tell that I’m not foaming at the mouth, or issuing RWDB fatwas against you).

Mike Jericho
2022 years ago

Oh, and Anthony?

I banned you because you only said “diddums”.

Had you come up with anything remotely resembling a rational criticism or witty rejoiner, you would have been my welcome guest.

Anthony
Anthony
2022 years ago

Aha, so Mike you have a policy of banning commenters who don’t say enough? An excellent one and good luck with it.
(My comment still stands, however. There’s something so oddly touching about the would-be macho free-thinking RWDB plaintively bemoaning the unfairness of the world.)
Anyway, kudos to Ken for organizing the blogroll, without which I wouldn’t have bothered wandering over to Jericho-land and getting my first ban! A badge of honour – even Andrea’s never threatened me with that.

wmmbb
2022 years ago

I have a modest, and rarely visited, blog over at the Duckpond. I am trying to rouse any friends and acquaintances to visit it (with some success), and its seems they do commonly seem to be interested in political issues, and I am attempting to hopefully make them aware of the wider world of blogging, especially the Australian sector. Some of the developments I am following do not seem to be taken up to the same extent by the usual suspects – maybe reflecting a darks shadow in the muddy waters of the pond. And, fingers crossed, I am hoping the comments section works better now than it did. Not that I suggest you enter it in your list, but perhaps note that it exists in its concealed and remote tanguillity on the Wollongong escarpment.

Mike Jericho
2022 years ago

Anthony, you do agree that a person has a right of reply without first being accused of being a whiny baby, don’t you?

Also, you should feel very priviledged to be banned by me. Believe it or not, it’s a rare thing. I’ve had all types of loonies come on there and attempt to make me cry.

The only other two fellows that I ever had to ban, had repeatedly threatened to “ass-rape” (direct quote) my wife and children. I don’t have children, but I decided that it was sufficiently unpleasant a thing to say to require banning anyhow.

You weren’t offensive. Just unoriginal.

Anthony
Anthony
2022 years ago

Sure Mike, you can have right of reply. In fact, you have a whole blog to reply, and you did. But you know, there’s reply and then there’s whinge. And given that the last time I remember looking at your blog you’d changed one of Tim Lambert’s comments so it said “I’m a sissy little computer nerd bitch who takes it up the ass”, and now you ban me for saying “diddums”, well, you do seem a little thin-skinned.
Anyway, I’m sure we have taken up enough of Ken’s (and Scott’s) real-estate with this fascinating discussion. Thanks for the moderately amusing diversion.

still killing myself
still killing myself
2022 years ago

“diddums” double-ups! Hey, diddums! How’re they hanging? Commmnet of the year.

Tim Lambert
2022 years ago

The comment that Jericho altered is here. He also changed the next one as well and banned me from commenting. He does seem a little sensitive.

mark
2022 years ago

Thanks, Ken! First I’m a “centreist”, then a “mentor”. Undeserved praise, to be sure, but welcome nonetheless. (I almost don’t want to point out that you used Scott’s URI by mistake…).

Re: “fathers of ‘blogging”, probably the first Australian ‘blogger who considered himself a ‘blogger would be Anthony J Hicks. The longest-running ‘blogger who got more involved in politics than was good for him (as do we all) would be Graham Freeman; both are still running, actually. Compared to those two (and, hell, even me, though I’m cutting it a bit fine), Blair is a baby. December 2001? Pchah!

mark
2022 years ago

Mike, your post *was* whiny. Don’t be offended, and please don’t cry. Whining is something we all do from time to time (although the better ‘bloggers are able to keep a lid on most of it). I’ve had some ripper whines myself in my time.

I found your post entertaining, although largely because you seemed to mistake Ken for some Official Gubmint Arbiter of ‘bloggy quality, and proceeded to take him to task for his disgusting lefty bias. Now, Ken (along with the other posters to TA) is a damn fine ‘blogger, but he’s still just another ‘blogger, a private citizen expressing his views. So are you, of course, and you can complain if you wish. It’s a long tradition on the Internet. But if you do it in such a fashion, you will be laughed at.

Mike Jericho
2022 years ago

Thanks for the clarification, Mark. Now maybe you can show me the point at which my post ceased to be a retort at my unprompted panning, and became a whine-fest. Otherwise concede that you believe that we should be able to label any reply to criticism “whining”. There ought to be a criteria, don’t you agree?

As for you, Lambert, I think you’re an asshole. You came to my blog and told me to “be a man” over an argument I was having with Dunlop. I changed your post because that is what I fully intend to say to your face when you and I hook up at a blogger-bash. I very, very much look forward to that. I like affording people opportunities to tell me things in person.

Funny that they always seem to become far less free with the sneering when that happens.

And if any other bloggers intend to have a public snigger at my expense, be prepared to back it up in person. The line between academic exchange of disagreement, and plain ridiculing a person in front of hundreds of readers, is clear. If you do it without being mindful of repercussions, you will have no-one to blame but yourselves.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Mike

Unless I’m misreading you, you’re now threatening to beat the shit out of your critics. This doesn’t seem like a very mature response to me. Don’t you think you’re overreacting just a shade? I mean, I know I said I found your blog unoriginal and predictable, but so what? As someone else suggested, I’m not Judge Judy, I’m only another individual blogger. Who cares what I think? Or what Tim Lambert thinks, for that matter. There are clearly plenty of people who really enjoy reading your stuff. There may even be people who find your blog through Troppo blogroll, read it and enjoy it and think to themselves “That fucktard Parish, what would he know?”. And they’d be right. It’s only one person’s opinion, and blogging is only a hobby (although a potentially socially worthwhile one IMO). So “chill out” as they say. It’s no big deal.

Gary
2022 years ago

Bitching about how others run there site always gives some impression of seeking attention. Trying to introduce a code of conduct is not what the Internet is about (just my personal opinion). I have cs and his “colleague” Niall more for my contempt for them and its mutual. Mark Gallagher and Rob Corr can argue substance and don’t rely on BS to bluff opponents so they have my respect or though respect does not have to go both ways and not something should be expected from others. Rethinking this I maybe un fare to Niall as he doesn’t come across like an Email scam. What you put on your blogroll s your business all I ask if you can reconsider D’s lable and give him the same consideration of his coherence the youv always given mine. “D” no matter what you think of his opinion has guts to put his thoughts down, alot more then me anyway.

Gary
2022 years ago

I have cs and his “colleague” Niall more for my contempt for them and its mutual

Change that to

I have cs and his “colleague” Niall under the title of ‘fifth collum’ more for my contempt for them and its mutual.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

But ‘d’ is incoherent much of the time. He’s the Right’s answer to Loopy Jack Roberston, who used to run a blog but now graces the pages of Margo’s Web Diary.

There’s not much point in rating blogs if you’re only allowed to say nice things about all of them. I actually toned down my description of Mike Jericho’s blog because I thought on reflection it was a bit unfairly strong. I’m pretty relaxed about the description of “d”, however, who was once in the habit of posting abusive rants here until he got his own blog.

Mike might also note that my description of left-wing blogger Gary Sauer-Thompson is fairly similar (if wordier) to what I wrote about him: “Gary is an Adelaide-based academic philosopher(?), very left-leaning. Deeply interested in environmental issues, Gary often posts challenging, thoughtful material, but is sometimes undermined by his own strongly partisan views and a somewhat turgid writing style”.

However, that’s nowhere near as scathing as Tim Blair, who has repeatedly compared G S-T’s blog unfavourably with a spoof site called The Dullest Blog in the World. So you see, my tags are actually comparatively gentle.

Anthony
Anthony
2022 years ago

Interesting Mike that you talk about consequences. Because, you see, one of the consequences of being whiny on the internet is someone might say diddums. One of the consequences of thinking you’re smart (because you found a 5-month out of date article), when you’re not (because it had already been blogged about at great length by Tim Dunlop), is that people might point that out. And (I might add) one of the consequences of inviting some critics to “suck your dick” while using homophobic insults and threatening biffo on others is that you end up looking like a twat, and one with some serious issues at that. Good luck with that. Still, at least you are good for a laugh.

Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

I think I’ll close off this comment thread at this point. It doesn’t seem likely to result in any more constructive discussion.

trackback
2022 years ago

Dasypus novemcinctus ‘Tropicana’

That (un)pretentious paragon of post-worthy publishing from the deep north, Mr. Parish, has a smallish post regarding the oft demonised…

trackback
2022 years ago

Left, right, blogs, links, etc

Ken Parish is creating controversy over at Troppo, where he has classified his links to Australia’s ‘sphere according to his assessment of their author’s position on the left-right spectrum. Overlooking the irony in that Ken the Categoriser has decline…

trackback
2022 years ago

fee fi no fun

I loathe abuse on the internet. It is like watching someone shit on a library floor. Chris Sheil, in picking up on Ken Parrish’s remarks about reclassifying his links, has started a comments line which really pins down my…