There's been a bit of discussion both here and at Lava Rodeo about the possibility of compiling a Best Australian Blog Essays 2006 anthology. Efforts in that regard are afoot.
But what about best comments? This one from Nabakov over at LP (about Howard's Oz culture citizenship test) would have to be a strong contender for Best Blog Comment of the Year. I'm asking readers to nominate other contenders in the comment box to this post. Maybe LP might consider doing likewise, and we could then convene a judging panel to select the top 3. Just in case I end up as a judge, please note that I might be amenable to payment of "trucking fees" in the form of a respectable bottle of red wine.
Comments, of course, can be from any blog at all, not just Troppo and LP. Maybe we could even get frequent readers of Tim Blair's blog to nominate best comments from there, and maybe someone from Spin Starts Here (which often generates wickedly funny comments) could do likewise.
"Best" would certainly include witty comments but also more serious, thoughtful, original and incisive ones. Sometimes you get a comment that's much better than the original post that inspired it; Geoff Honnor often used to post such comments, and still does so occasionally. There might even be excellent examples of abusive/sarcastic comments, although they'd need to contain strong elements of humour too. Nakedly aggressive sledging (e.g. Cambria, Bird, Fyodor) is neither clever nor entertaining. Maybe we should have 3 categories: best humorous comment; best serious comment; best abusive comment. And then perhaps a Golden Boogy Award for best overall comment.
Update - the comment thread has been totally derailed by the appalling Graeme Bird, who appears unable to understand (or is so insensitive he doesn't care) that his presence here is unwelcome. Can someone advise me how to put a commenter on moderation generally in Wordpress. I've hit the "moderation" button for several of Bird's individual comments, but that doesn't appear to stop him from posting further ones that are just as offensive and abusive. Is there a straightforward way of doing this? Maybe I'll try classifying him as spam!
Further update - I've deleted every one of Bird's comments and will continue doing so until he gets the hint and goes away. But it would be much better if I could simply ban him. It's a measure of Troppo's liberality (and my technical incompetence) that I don't actually know how to do that. Some commenters appear to have ended up in general moderation some time ago, but I have no idea how it happened!
"Nakedly aggressive sledging (e.g. Cambria, Bird, Fyodor) is neither clever nor entertaining."
Yeeowch. Fair cop, guv, but that's a low blow associating me with the Clod Couple.
You cut me deep there, real deep.
[Eek! Nakedly Aggressive Sledging! Help! Help! I'm being assessed!]
Best abusive comment.
Yes, Mark's comment was a beauty and entirely deserved on Bird's part.
Fyodor, I only associated you with Cambria and Bird because you associate yourself by following them around the blogosphere and responding to their dickhead comments with almost equally dickead comments of your own. I'm sure you've been told that before. I don't understand why you bother; arguing with them just encourages them. Your comments in their absence are often well worth reading, but the Bird/Cambria/Fyodor trio is one of the least funny standup acts I've ever witnessed (possibly exceeded only by Kramer's anti-semitic schtick).
Ken, at the risk of further diverting attention from the excellent idea in your post, you may not be entertained, but I am. You seem to think that the "standup act" is somehow for your benefit; it's not.
I'm disappointed to hear that my comments are only "almost" equally dickhead, however: I assume that means I'm not podium quality in the Nakedly Aggressive Sledging Dickhead division. Quelle domage.
P.S. "Kramer's" shtick was anti-negro, but I get your point.
And I nominate this entire thread, though it might need another category.
It's not poetry, but... http://andrewleigh.com/?p=1193#comment-18271
One of my personal faves.
Ken
What is it with you? Every 6 months or so you blow out a bit of steam and get stuck into me again for the same stupid reason that you don't like my comments.... you don't find them entertaining. I'll let you in a little secret, they weren't meant for your entertainment.Comments are either meant for the thread promotor or another commenter. You can of course choose not to read anything of mine, which is obviously something you aren't doing otherwise you wouldn't be offering this sort of opinion. So stop it now. When you get to me, just gloss over it as it seems it would be far better for you mental state.
The only interaction I have had with Fyodor has been about gold/ monetary policy threads. As we much as we dislike another I think we would attest to that. We don't go chasing each other around the blogs. If you think we do, I would pleased if you could bring it to my attention. Otherwise it would be really nice if you retract this comment?
Ken, let's understand something very clearly. If you're going to throw mud around, I would suggest you stregthen the jaw a little. Last time you threw a couple of jabs, you ended up going to into blog "ER"- going into temporary retirement to get you health back.
And what's with dissing Jason Soon? He's one of the nicest guys around. Are you suffering from that same "illness" of a few months ago that makes you want to take random swings?
Take it easy, Ken. There's more to life than the best blog competition, or finding the best and worst comments at 100 million blogs. Is Darwin that boring?
What is this
Fyodor, Liam, Ken, Trotsky....
You guys aren't starting the equivalent of a "Bird's Battered Wives Association" are youse. Just kidding round fellers.
One last thing Ken.
Some while ago you plugged us in to the potential of lawsuits arising from slander and such that pervades various blogs- you opined anyway. I would suggest you ought to take your own advice first before you get all lawyered up again and accusing people of being dickheads etc. Maybe take a real hard look in the old mirror.
This one.
"I think Ken would advise himself to note that ordinary insults are generally not defamatory."
Not really. Ken's previous post had everything to do with insults. In Ken's world he should be the only one to throw insults around. The moment the same thing happens back to him he throws a fit, writes a legal opinion on defamation and then goes on hibernation because "he's a little tired" of blogging.
Ken doesn't know who I am yet throws what he thinks is my name around. Maybe one of these days he could try and do that face to face. But I wouldn't bet on it.
Trotsky
It's ironic that you carry around that hateful moniker when your talking about Pinochet and mass killing meanwhile your namesake was responsible for the slaughter of 30 million innocents. But anyway I digress
The point of my comment was that if he doesn't like to read a commentors opinions, then don't read them. It was similar although not identical to the comments Fyodor made.
It occurs to me that "Trucking Fees" spoonerised is f*cking trees.
How can Blair have 'frequent readers' if he keeps banning them?
JC,
You know what happens when you say things like that.
I'm starting to think you take some sort of perverse pride in your collaboration with Birdy here.
The only point that JC has ever proved is Ken's...
Nevertheless I probably was a bit gratuitously unkind to JC in this instance, and thereby provoked his subsequent torrent of abuse (not that he needs much provocation). His initial comment on the Pinochet thread was much more moderate than Bird's (as I acknowledged on that thread). So maybe it was a bit unfair to just lump him in with Bird in the primary post here. But I certainly don't intend apologising to him, because even though JC's initial comment on the Pinochet thread was moderate it's been all downhill from there. Whether this sort of acknowledgment will help to calm him down is doubtful at the very least, but we'll see. I don't really want to put JC on moderation if it can be avoided, because he sometimes offers a bit of colour and movement, and even the odd sensible, astute observation or two from time to time.
This is amazing.... and pathetic.... and hugely ironic.
We have Trotsky who happily goes round whistling in the dark with a mioniker dedicated to the mass murderer and we have Robert whose web site proudly displays a Soviet ensign lookalike as the mantel to his blog site.
These two sit in judgement of what they consider enthical and righteous. Meanwhile Ken has a go at me, but thinks these two clowns behaviour deserves a perfect pass.
This is Parish's view of the middle ground.
Hello, hello, Bizzaro world calling.
Ken
You misrepresented my comments.You should apologise as its the right thing to do.
If you can't, then put me on moderation if you like as you seem pretty good at the abuse and run tactics.
In any event have a great Xmas season, Ken.
Which one Tony?
I thought this was a brilliant comment from j_p_z on the LP thread that got C.L. banned. It had everything: wit, timing, irony and a neat reversal of thread direction. Certainly pulled me up in my tracks.
Have the Lava Lamp Pro Deus mob forgot to renew their domain?
I like Gummo's, though I was one of the people in the middle of that argument so I don't know if I can judge.
I liked another of Nabakov's comments, and I think if there were a "commenter of the year" award then Nabs would probably take it out.
Didn't there use to be commenter of the year awards which Nabs always won?
Nah, I think that was commenter of the week...
I think so, and he may well win again, because that one at LP earlier today was a little ripper. But you never know. There are lots of really sharp intellects out there with a witty turn of phrase. It's just that one's memory for great comments tends to be even more ephemeral than for primary posts. Maybe we should ask the great commenters to shed any false modesty and nominate their own greatest comments!
Yes, a friend of mine sent Nabs' comment around to all his friends this morning.
You might be right, Ken, about the memory angle.
Nabs' comment got quite a few chuckles from some of the Australians that I chat with here in Euroland.
mick,
If it's the Bully Boy Advocates of the Intellectual Status Quo madness you're talking about, I'm fairly sure Nabs had a hand in that too. But the parties responsible seem to have cultivated a mysterious air of self-effacement, so I could be wrong.
oi Rob, that thread ended up with me banned also, all because of my moniker!!!
I'm 38, Birdy. As to whether anyone is "smarter" than you, I'm sure the court of public opinion will decide. I'm not and have never been a Marxist. You can now return to Rafe's thread and your complaints that McCarthyism didn't go far enough, or go tell someone that carbon emissions are a good thing.
You're not banned, Homer.
I'm afraid this comments thread won't win any awards, Ken.
actually Gummo, thanks for the nomination! Bully Boy Advocate of Intellectual Status Quo, Physics Division was me in drag.
Sedgewick used to have comment awards, the last in 2004 I think. The categories were a thing of beauty.
And yeah, Nabs took out the gold logie.
Although the "Bully Boy ..." etc moniker was Nabs' work, wasn't it Jason?
actually the 'bully boy' coinage was Birdy's. I'm pretty sure I started the sockpuppetry, at least I posted the comment of 19 February 2006 at 10:29 pm but all I did was use Birdy's coinage.
Well, it's a cracker. If only he was so pithy the rest of the time ; )
What Mark just said - not one of your best threads here, Ken. You might be pleased to know, however, that you've scored an "8" on the Birdy Scale.
Although I see that one of Birdy's comments has dropped off its perch and, technically, you have to share the score with Liam & Trots, as the named targets in Birdy's 7/8 comments. Still, that's pretty damn good - I believe the record count of Birddroppings is 9, held by JohnZ at Catlaxative. I myself am only a "6", so you may just have outdickheaded me there, mate.
Mark, it is very hard to comment if the moniker is not allowed!
hey Birdy as for wit , I think you join me in being halfway there
Birdy, yes, it's all about you, son.
One aspect of repartee you might care to study is directing your abuse at people who actually said the things you are trying to rebut/mock. I've never made a comment about icebergs off the coast of New Zealand.
How's that property empire in Greenland going? Lots of healthily warmed up fields for future scions of the Bird dynasty to gambol in...
Put up a link, Bird.
Yawn. Once again GMB derails a thread with irrelevant abuse. Can't you just ban the bugger, at the very least until he learns to stay on topic?
Not Ken's fault that his excellent idea got derailed.
You guys are actually thinking of voting for Nabakov for being witty? Have you got the category right? He isn't witty he's a vapid, boastful ignoramus.
Ken, go read some of the pitiful stuff he leaves here for people to endure.
He's now a multi-millionaire wasp! Don't get dazed with money people it's only paper.
Yea, I know Ken, I about to go on moderation any second. But before I do, I nominate two of Birdies pieces for the best ever put down and the most interesting piece.
1. The Son of Joachim Fiori piece was possibly the best ever put down in history. I think it was directed towards Trostsky??? Can't recall, but from that day on I always thought of the guy in a different light. Jason I'm sure can retrieve the piece for judging
2. last nights effort by Birdy. The piece was about Nicole Richie. Birdie turned it into a discussion about a cows tits.
see here.
http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=2217#comments
Ken. I know it's your blog and everything, but Fyodor and I had never finished our discussion on Pinochet. Is there a chance, any chance you can re-open that thread. We're dying to get to each others throats. It's been a while now.
It's Xmas. Think of of it as a gift going both ways.
I've got no idea how I'm trying to trick you, Birdy. My cunning Marxist plans are impenetrable even to me.
Joe, credit where it's due. I've always said I enjoyed Birdy's more lyrical flights of fancy. His various Zarathustra moments are immensely fun reading. Perhaps he should play to his strengths?
Derisive D
You know, for a lefty I always liked you except for the time you wanted to compare annual income, which i thought was a little, how should I say, lowrent.
But Christ you're a bit of a wowser. Lighten up a little and move with the story.
Birdie isn't harming anyone.
Just relax, take a deep breath and push down. It's doesn't hurt, or so Fyodor tells me. not that i would ever try it.
He makes some good points, ie. that Nabs is too vapid to even consider.
Jason,
Thanks for clearing that little mystery up.
As for nominating myself for comment of the year - nah. I was just revisiting the good times.
As for the Son of Joachim Fiori piece, I never read it. So if it was a put down of me, it was wasted. If it's specimens of Birdwit you're looking for there's a thread over at TBP (linked in the Pinochet comments) where you can see GMB and his little egger-on JC at their combined best.
Mark B
"Joe, credit where it's due. I've always said I enjoyed Birdy's more lyrical flights of fancy. His various Zarathustra moments are immensely fun reading. Perhaps he should play to his strengths?"
Hia Mark.
The Nicole Richie to cow tits is one of the best. Deserving an award of sorts.
Trot
How many times do I have to tell you. You can't go spreading moral virtue against state killing machines when you've proudly tattooed Trostsky's name to your forearm. We can all see it. And it scares the young kids, Dude. My teenager ran out of the room when she saw that.
Not sure if this comment will be read as a positive or negative: it's given as an observation.
The phenomenon of self-publishing is perhaps the singlemost revolutionary development of our times. Where it will lead to and what changes it will wreak are anyone's guess.
On that account I use the term 'mainstream media' very cautiously in what follows, chosen only in the certainty that it has historical context.
Against that backdrop, here in Australia the mainstream media approach to independent publishing has been itself developing. Today, every major newspaper is running a clutch of hungry urgent online blogs, all scrambling for readership engagement where once that innovation was derided.
One milestone along the way occurred when mainstream media began making mention of opinions occurring "around the blogs" in attempts to reinforce an observation or to further develop a point or opinion. From that day, blogs were publicly embraced for the qualities and powers they embodied, and deemed credible to their msm readership.
The growth of mainstream online blogs - the so-called "larger" sociopolitical sites - has been particularly interesting. In many ways these led the way towards obtaining that credibility, some of which was obtained by drawing to readers' attention the foibles of msm itself. There seemed to be a valiant air about the blogs as they took on this charge, aware (obviously, because they commonly said so) that they were rightfully deserving of greater recognition.
On account of running a blog with solid and growing readership, more than a few bloggers were then called upon to provide information or opinion in msm itself. This had happened before, but this milestone was evidenced by people being called to do so on no other account than their achievements in self-publishing.
I hesitantly suggest that another milestone has been reached these last few days, arrived at no doubt from an evolving communal dialogue, though maybe not in direct terms, and not discounting that it may at times have been.
This next is not intended as criticism: it's an observation. It is tabled on top of the bloggers' observations some long ago when first exploring the ways and means, including the foibles, of msm.
In the last few days, this has occurred: one blog has openly backslapped itself when given an award by another blog without open consideration that the latter is competing in the online world and may have in their awards decision chosen to steer away from one more threatening to their readership; another mainstream blog which is enriched by images and takes those images freely from elsewhere has chosen to publicly admonish one of its sources; and another blog not a few days ago deriding awards in matters of creativity is now pushing for that very thing.
Matters surrounding the msm Walkleys do come to mind!
And I do say that all as a good thing. It shows that blogs and self-publishing in mainstream online media has indeed come a long way.
The next step, to be enjoyed, will the msm development highlighted by the plaintive online claim "Oh, that's right, blame the bloggers".
I nominate this comment by z.
PS: Banning Bird improves the quality of comments on a blog.
Ken, the most effective way to ban Bird is to install the Spam Karma 2 plugin. If you use it classify a few of his comments as spam, it will quickly learn to put the rest of his droppings in the spam pile.
My experience is that telling him to go away does not work -- he has no respect for other people's property.
JC,
.... [edited in the cause of shallow civility]
Tim
We've got Akismet anti-spam plugin installed. You're right about Bird not taking any notice of requests to go away. He just posted another comment and I marked it as spam, so we'll see if Akismet keeps him at bay. It may be that that's how we accidentally banned Joe Cambria previously. He's relatively harmless and I certainly never intended to ban him. I suspect what I might have done is to hit the "spam" button on one of his less salubrious comments instead of the "moderate" button thereby banning him. I hope that's what happened anyway, because I'm now trying to do it to Bird quite deliberately.
I think you struck the write note in responding to Birdy's thoughts on trash celebrity chix, Joe:
http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=2217#comment-7982
And even perhaps the right note.
I'm tired!
While Bird may come up with some good ones, the noise-substance ratio is such that I now skip most of what he writes. Especially with his super-long or scatter-gun (half a dozen short posts in a row) approach & constant insults I think he often brings down a good conversation.
I would not put JC or Fyodor in that category at all. I think JC gets unfairly put in the same category as Bird because JC defends Bird... but I often appreciate JC's contribution and even when we disagree he doesn't drive me insane. At least -- not anymore. :)
Damn
I missed reading Trot's comment as I had to get my Xmas haircut.
Trot.
Listen don't get worked up about life. These blogs are sport and meant to be fun and amusing even when it is at one's own expense. I got the scars to prove. look here. and here. and there.
Just chill out and take it easy. I'm sure you're a nice bloodnut.
Cheer up, it's the holiday season. Get into the mirth of the time.
Here's a great one from C.L. A little bitter, but it improves the drink.
John H
"I would not put JC or Fyodor in that category at all"
And you think putting me in the same box with Fyodor is a better fit? John, are you crazy? Putting me in the same box with that miscreant just forced to me to double my use of Zoton (antacids) for the next month. Next you'll be saying Fyds and I should be friends. He turned down an dinner invite I had for a few guys in the big smoke because he told me he hated me. He didn't realize that it would have been more offensive if he had said he liked me.
He probably thought he had to foot his own food and drink bill. The miser.
"I think JC gets unfairly put in the same category as Bird because JC defends Bird"
For future reference, munnkey, it's generally considered bad manners to discuss private correspondence in a public forum. Though you're arguably beyond redemption when it comes to etiquette, I'd still advise against it in future - it can backfire on you. Given your record of cyberstalking hatemail, it's a particularly dumb move on your part. Since you've brought it up, I'll respond.
Given you offered to pay, munnkey, and somewhat strangely made a point of emphasising that you would also pay for "starter and desert [sic]", I can hardly have drawn that conclusion.
It's true that I don't like you, though (I didn't say "hate" - that's your poor grasp of the facts again). The fact that you found this genuinely surprising says a tremendous amount about your interpersonal skills, or lack thereof. As I pointed out to you, I could think of few worse ways to spend my time than at a table in your charmless company. Something tells me I'm not alone in this view.
Alright that's a permissible response from Fyodor give that JC brought up the topic. However any further comments about the JC/Fyodor relationship will be deleted. It's obvious that you blokes find your petty squabbling entertaining, but for the rest of it's tedious in the extreme, not to mention downright rude to inflict it on us. Nick off.
Sorry Ken, point taken.
I blame Humphreys as always.
Tim, that comment by z was a cracker.
I'd like to nominate Aussie Bob for the "putting entire posts in a comment most often" category. Oh, and if that wasn't a category before it should be.
I'd also like to nominate Tim Blair, or someone pretending to be Tim, for this comment on LP with regard to his joint winning this Crikey award. [link]
Yea
Aussie Bob is a good choice, Mick. I've re-nicknamed him baghdad bob in deference to his propaganda hero.
I make a point of reading Baghdad Bob once a week to see what the looney left ( and I do mean the looney left) is up to for that week. He once trid to convince people that Bush's grandad was a secret member of the german nazi party. This is Prescot Bush a former senator of the US and a former partner of the Waspiest, bluebooded Banking firm in existence- Brown Bros. Harriman. Brown Bros made Jp Morgan's firm look like new money. You can hate Bush as much as you like but his grandad wasn't a secret member of the nazi party.
BB is a good choice. it would be good to dig that post up.
The OzBlogosphere never manages to rise above it's own petty bitchiness, does it. This comments thread proves that sad fact beyond any possible doubt.
Now......where's that 'off' button M'sieur Parish?
Oh for chrissakes Bannerman you frequently come on here and prattle on like a sanctimonous old maid. Lighten up. Things here could have got a lot nastier and it didn't and people have settled into a little equilibrium of light repartee. And before you then go on about how bloggers should 'rise above it all' and all the other sanctimonous twaddle you like to spout - tell me, you can't walk and chew gum at the same time? Many of the people playing in the mud here write deep and meaningful stuff too. Lighten up and if this doesn't interest you go on another thread. What great intellectual breakthroughs with your 24/7 sanctimony have you achieved, party pooper?
JC, I'm not bagging AB I'm actually a fan.
Mick
Seriously, So am I. That's why I make a point of reading AB (AKA) BB once a week.
His hatred of Howard and Bush is so visceral, so deep that it's almost like hate filled lust....... like those quasi rape scenes in old movies that were supposed to be about love.
I wouldn't miss him for the world. It's a treat and free.
Mick, The Devil Drink's response to little tim's comment was even funnier.
I'd certainly nominate him, her, it or whatever vintage/expression/effusion/deity as the best new Aus blogosphere comments player for 2006.
And my favourite personally involved comments exchange in 2006?
JC: "Kids my read these blogs!!"
Nabakov: "Not if they're homeschooled."
Source:http://www.roadtosurfdom.com/2006/02/28/backwards-bush/#comment-10730
Love The Devil Drink's work.
I'm nominating Fyodor for best pithy evocation of the stoushes of yesteryear:
http://rob1.wordpress.com/2006/11/28/has-lp-nixed-cl-per-ep/#comment-1144
We all kissed and made up after that. It'd be nice if that spirit prevailed more these days.
Messed up the link, apologies:
http://rob1.wordpress.com/2006/11/28/has-lp-nixed-cl-per-ep/#comment-1115
Nabs, The DD's response was killer.
Oh Birdy Birdy Birdy you're now so desperate for attention you'll even tout your wares amongst those you've publically announced you despise?
You poor sad needy little fat man. But I'm sure poor little old joe will nominate you for something, anything.
So why don't you just have your own awards? But do let us know when the awards ceremony happens though. There's few in the blogosphere that wouldn't enjoy the spectacle of you responding to your own acceptance speech while poor little old joe, lurking stage right in a saggy bikini, sags under the weight of holding up the inaugural GMB trophy for the best post by GMB.
(Ken, please don't delete Birdy's last post or we'll lose the funny here.)
"(Ken, please don't delete Birdy's last post or we'll lose the funny here.)"
Oh fuck it, I meant #80. Obviously Ken you'll want to delete the rest of his bilious barking for attention.
Yes, I'm humbled and crushed by a riposte that involves nothing but typing 'H' and 'A' eighty eight or so times. Incidentally there was a typo in your third ALL CAPS scream of bitter frustation.
And this'll really get your goat Birdy. I've never asked to be nominated for anything in my life unlike some frantically flaunting their wares and begging for attention from those they claim they despise.
Man, I really hated those subscription emails from Troppo until I got a bag full of uncensored Birdy
dumbgoodness this morning.Nabs, I salute thee.
That little checkbox really should read "Club Troppo: Uncut/European Edition".
I'm nominating that comment, Haiku.
Tim Lambert:
http://catallaxyfiles.com/?p=2224#comment-8168
Goodness me, Jason.....methinks there's been a raw nerve struck, eh? Bannerman walks and chews gum just fine, young man. Can you?
Nabs' comment has been linked to by blogs in New Zealand and Canada, as well as quite a few Australian ones. It seems that he's won the international Australian comment of the year award.
http://norightturn.blogspot.com/2006/12/questions-they-wont-ask-you-in.html
http://panglossiannotes.blogs.com/panglossian_notes/2006/12/a_dumb_idea_pro.html