Home > Media, Technology > Blogwars

Blogwars

There’s been a bit of kerfuffle about recently in some of the blogs I follow and it appears to have come to a head in the past day or two (for those who don’t already know, it was Gutter Trash and Cafe Whispers).

It has had something for all the family:  trolling, misrepresentation, out-of-context quoting, hurt feelings, moderation, retirement and the big banhammer.  But why did it need to come to that?

To mind blogs are a form of discussion group, a nerdy virtual example of the book club.  As with discussion groups each one has its own personality, so using the blogs mentioned above the Cafe would be closer to the book club variety, whereas GT is closer to blokes hanging around a barbie, or drunk footy players in a locker room.

Now these personalities work for each other…GT revels in the cut and thrust (or actually more likely the bludgeon and smash) of the rough and tumble, whereas the Cafe has a more communal atmosphere.  It also leads to differing outcomes for the various discussions…the Cafe environment allows for people to discuss their points in a more reasoned manner, whereas GT threads often degenerate into talking point regurgitation, wilful ignorance and refusal to accept the underlying logic behind your opponents arguments.

The problem seems to arise when there is some cross-pollination.  From my experience in both blogs, Cafe dwellers can quite easily lob into the Gutter and post away merrily in their own style…as long as they have a thick skin, have a high stupidity tolerance,  and are willing to return fire.  But the converse doesn’t really work quite so well.  When GT posters jump on to the Cafe and try to use their own inimitable style they find they can’t quite get away with their usual antics.  The thread derails, talking points and preciousness don’t really wash and they get called out.  Which is where we are right now.

 

The point is that you need to be mindful of the tone of the place you are posting at.  Attempting the ingrained habits from a more rough and tumble locale will get you rapidly flagged as a troll and treated accordingly.  Conversely, jumping on a blog with more…flexible standards and expecting them to behave to higher standards will rapidly out you as a precious little flower.

Just go with the flow…if you’re one of those types who simply must provoke and incite aggro wherever you go, deal with the fallout and don’t go running to your blog-mummy when you get spanked.

Advertisements
Categories: Media, Technology Tags:
  1. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 3:46 PM

    OK Massive…………..explain this

    on November 2, 2011 at 12:31 am Miglo stated

    “One final thing. I wouldn’t say James (Sancty) is all that bad. He can be a bit vulgar and at times seem unreasonable, but he does have value. Tony is a rude one though. El gordo, while like able, is odd. King Rat is pure scum and I’d suggest there is only one person on the whole blogosphere that likes him, and that is himself.

    Why am I saying all this? Just getting in first. I’m going to be attacked from all sides tomorrow anyway. Nothing surer.”

    So……………..Without me directly provoking him Miglo decides to call me pure scum. Now as you know I’m banned from the café anyway and it was simply coincidence that I was having lunch with a couple of Canberra heavy hitters. So he shit his pants when I mentioned what turned out to be a topic of discussion at that lunch.

    Now I have avoided confrontation with Miglo for quite some time now as you may have observed. With the odd skirmish now and then. So it seems to me that if he wants to dish it out then he just gotta take it. After all in the past he has made veiled threats to all sorts including myself.

    If he wants a gunfight then I’ll roll out a fucking cannon.

    If he wants to restart the peace and quiet between himself and I then fine. He can blog all he likes.

    And as far as blogs discussing other blogs I see no harm in that. But you see the café actively censor comments so dissenting opinions cannot be readily discussed except at GT.

    As far as ToM and reb are concerned they are intelligent enough to defend themselves without my input.

    • November 3, 2011 at 3:54 PM

      Dude, really?? You’re taking offence at one post?

      You have form…everyone knows it, even the GT mob. Anyone who’s even slightly objective will admit that you tend to the abrasive…and revel in it. But that’s your prerogative, just as it is Miglo’s to go off when he’s had enough. He certainly doesn’t make a habit of it, so I would classify it as a snap if anything…not a pattern of behaviour.
      I’m not going to get into the whole “threatening of job” thing…that’s between you two to sort out.
      But from my observations at the Cafe they don’t moderate/ban without first giving ample warning…and they only react to a pattern of behaviour not to one-offs.

      That’s just my impression though….

  2. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 3:49 PM

    “…………whereas the Cafe has a more communal atmosphere. It also leads to differing outcomes for the various discussions…the Cafe environment allows for people to discuss their points in a more reasoned manner, ”

    Yeah

    Calling someone pure scum seems reasonable to me

    LOL

    • November 3, 2011 at 3:54 PM

      Like I said above, it was a one off not a pattern of behaviour.

  3. Tom of Melbourne
    November 3, 2011 at 4:05 PM

    Interesting MS.

    Re that post by Miglo.

    Anyone who repeated that in a public forum would shunned or arrested. But I suppose there, it’s really just part of the orderly discourse.

    Such behaviour and commentary is apparently acceptable, if you have an excuse.

    And you seem to have set yourself up as an arbiter of excuses.

    • November 3, 2011 at 4:49 PM

      Anyone who repeated that in a public forum would shunned or arrested. But I suppose there, it’s really just part of the orderly discourse.

      Such behaviour and commentary is apparently acceptable, if you have an excuse.

      And you seem to have set yourself up as an arbiter of excuses.

      And you appear to have crowned yourself as the king of the reality disconnect.
      How long would you last in public with your consistent commenting behaviour?
      I expect you would find yourself the recipient of a punch in the face or two…most people wouldn’t give you the leeway that you get at GT in real life….but then that’s the nature of GT isn’t it. Much more forgiving of extreme behaviour.

      And I’m not proferring excuses on behalf on anyone…it’s my opinion based on my observations.

  4. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 4:13 PM

    “…Dude, really?? You’re taking offence at one post?……….”

    No I’m pissed off that the relative peace was destroyed by Miglo because he had an issue with ToM and reb.

    There was no need to drag me in on it.

    Then that startedCU and Jane attacking me yet I’ve never attacked them.

    And yeah I don’t mind some rough and tumble but not from idiots I have yet to tussle with.

    And then we have the cry babies who come over to GT and run off when cornered and then months later they claim they did so when they were abused. One in particular carries on like a child in kindy. The last time “teary eyed” was there was one day when he claimed Germany had the cheapest energy prices in Europe. When it was finally proven to him they were anything but cheap he ran off home to Mama and now he reckions the last time he was there he was bullied

    That is simple Bullshit which he is hoping the passage of time will allow him to get away with.

    So I aint gunna sit and take it when there is no reciprocal rights (due to banning) to respond

  5. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 4:15 PM

    Oh hello ToM, fancy seeing you here.

    Me and MS were just having a quiet discussion if you’d like to join in feel free

  6. Lyn
    November 3, 2011 at 4:17 PM

    Hi Massivespray

    Congratulations Massivespray.

    I always enjoy your articles and consider you a brilliant writer. Whenever I can visit or should I say have time to read, your genuine well thought out comments on Cafe Whispers, I find all your blogs enjoyable.

    This article is “Blogwars” is just another brilliant enjoyable honest genuine, piece of writing by you.

    This para in particular is appropriate, I hope the menacing offenders have enough commonsense to take heed

    (the tone of the place you are posting at. Attempting the ingrained habits from a more rough and tumble locale will get you rapidly flagged as a troll and treated accordingly. Conversely, jumping on a blog with more…flexible standards and expecting them to behave to higher standards will rapidly out you as a precious little flower).

    Thankyou Massivespray

  7. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 4:29 PM

    “………..The point is that you need to be mindful of the tone of the place you are posting at. Attempting the ingrained habits from a more rough and tumble locale will get you rapidly flagged as a troll and treated accordingly. Conversely, jumping on a blog with more…flexible standards and expecting them to behave to higher standards will rapidly out you as a precious little flower……………”

    Which is more or less what I’ve done.

    So if you attack me on ya mummy blog for adhering to that then expect a canon ball back

    • November 3, 2011 at 4:32 PM

      You miss the point…but I’m sure that you meant to,

      Fire back on the “mummy” blog by all means, but don’t take your GT behaviour with you. Respond in kind but don’t overreact.
      Do whatever the hell you like on your own patch, but don’t export your bad behaviour elsewhere.

  8. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 4:35 PM

    Hang on you forget…….I cant…………….I’m banned

    • November 3, 2011 at 4:42 PM

      I did forget that in your particular situation…but the general rule still applies.

  9. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 4:36 PM

    Or do you mean fire back at the Mummy Blog using Mummy language ?

  10. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 4:39 PM

    But if you want consistency Miglo should have phrased it as

    “King Rat is a rather unsavourory character I must say. Seems like a chappie who only has eyes for himself. A most distasteful chap in my judgement……………..Pass me a G and T please”

    LOL

  11. patriciawa
    November 3, 2011 at 4:42 PM

    Exactly. Well said. But I’d go a bit further. It is like visiting someone else’s place and if you don’t behave yourself and make mischief you be should be shown the door, not just tolerated and ignored.

  12. Tom of Melbourne
    November 3, 2011 at 4:54 PM

    Just to make sure that MS is able to support his contention that “ the Cafe has a more communal atmosphere. It also leads to differing outcomes for the various discussions…the Cafe environment allows for people to discuss their points in a more reasoned manner”…, introducing the “reasoned manner” of owner of the Cafe…

    http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2011/11/02/24-hour-news-cycle-or-24-hour-opinion-cycle/#comment-42954

    • November 3, 2011 at 4:56 PM

      Gee YomM…that wouldn’t be that example of a snap that I mentioned earlier as opposed to a pattern of behaviour would it?

      I know your raison-de-etre is cherry picking and out of context snippets, but you’ll need to do better than that.

      • Tom of Melbourne
        November 3, 2011 at 5:12 PM

        I don’t particularly care that I’m called difficult, my style is annoying, I don’t even respond to the RWDB stuff.

        I object to a couple of comments – including when I make a valid political observation and it’s called “trolling”, and when my discussion style is called bulling of women.

        Are you a woman MS? Because I think I use exactly the same tone and manner with you.

  13. King Rat
    November 3, 2011 at 4:58 PM

    “…I did forget that in your particular situation…but the general rule still applies.”

    Which is fine

    And is what I have basically been doing.

    Hangin’ out in the Gutter that is.

  14. Tom of Melbourne
    November 3, 2011 at 5:37 PM

    Patricia fits in well to the centre of orderly discourse…

    http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/2011/11/03/nothing-to-see-here/#comment-43107

    “Murdoch in bed with Abbott?
    Surely not with a fellah?
    I’d never pick him as a f…ot,
    I think he’d prefer Mirabella”

    Patricia is a proven (again) to be a homophobe, but is popular and well looked after there.

    I suppose she has an excuse too.

  15. November 3, 2011 at 5:57 PM

    I agree with some of what you’ve said, MS, but this type of thing teaches me that there are just as many pig ignorant drones on the left (not meaning your good self, of course) as there are on the right; that is disappointing.

    I genuinely believe that a good many hide behind airs & fancies, supposing that if ‘manners’ are used they somehow hold the moral highground. All the while they refuse to accept the blatantly fucking obvious faults in their side of politics & react like cornered cats when it gets pointed out to them.
    In my opinion, this makes them just as prone to being labelled ‘cattle’ as the rightards that they spend most of their days ‘safely’ (without fear of legitimate challenge, just like at the Bolt Blog…only with more airs) pillorying.

    From what I observe they are utterly oblivious to this trait within themselves & think it only prevalent in their ideological enemies.

    I say all of this as somebody who largely shares their political outlook…up to a point, and who isn’t afraid to be confronted by the opposition- who are correct every so often.

    Pretending YomM is a Liberal supporter, for instance, because he harps on about the ALP, is just intellectually lazy.

  16. reb
    November 3, 2011 at 6:14 PM

    I would simply like an answer to this question:

    Miglo wrote to me personally informing me that the reason he set up the cafe was to be as a support group for vulnerable gay youth.

    That is commendable I thought.

    So why is it that, with this in mind, Patricia can call people “faggots” and get away with it without any recourse from Miglo nor Min, and yet when I point out such hypcrisy I’m slammed as a “troll” who is “attacking” and “insulting” them?

  17. Tom of Melbourne
    November 3, 2011 at 7:01 PM

    Patty is a sniper and a stirrer, Miglo should be ashamed of his blog.

  18. patriciawa
    November 3, 2011 at 7:28 PM

    Thanks for the publicity guys!

    • Tom of Melbourne
      November 3, 2011 at 7:30 PM

      Troll

  19. November 3, 2011 at 7:44 PM

    What a stupid pissing contest to get into, but if you want to acknowledge ‘publicity’ I can tell you that since yesterday The Gutter has had around 3000 hits compared to 1650. This trend has been well established & rarely differs as far as proportionality goes.

    Who knows why, but plenty of ‘readers’ evidently find non-consensus interesting enough to keep reading. Around half as many prefer polite agreement.

  20. Tom of Melbourne
    November 3, 2011 at 8:09 PM

    Yes and it’s interesting that Patricia proved MS’s opinion wrong so quickly and so comprehensively.

  21. Tom of Melbourne
    November 4, 2011 at 8:33 AM

    It’s an interesting reflection on their maturity and intellect that they make stuff up, attribute it to a dissenter, and have one of the authors post it on their site.

    Apparently that’s how you run a blog where everyone agrees. But first you have to ban annoying dissenters.

    • November 4, 2011 at 8:57 AM

      Must be lonely up there on that crucifix with the rest of the unjustly persecuted YomM.

      Getting enough sun? Nice view?

      • Tom of Melbourne
        November 4, 2011 at 9:29 AM

        Maybe the view is great!

        But it’s hilarious to see Patricia so quickly ruin your view of that blog…and then Miglo starts using sock puppets to continue to participate!

        It’s an interesting way to get everyone agreeing with the orientation of the Cafe!

  22. November 4, 2011 at 9:01 AM

    All the while they refuse to accept the blatantly fucking obvious faults in their side of politics & react like cornered cats when it gets pointed out to them.

    I’m with you on this toilet.
    If you can’t accept it when your “side” fucks up and can’t cop the return serve, then you shouldn’t bother.
    This is true of both sides, but from my sojourns on the Gutter I’ve found the rightards are more likely to ignore fact, logic and basically reality in order to excuse their side/slam the other side.

    I’ve often wonder if you break down any complex issue into a series of factual yes/no questions whether they would actually follow the logic to the correct conclusion or if their heads would explode trying to twist it to their viewpoint.

    • November 4, 2011 at 6:28 PM

      “I’ve found the rightards are more likely to ignore fact, logic and basically reality in order to excuse their side/slam the other side.”

      I dunno that it’s more prevalent in rightards, to be sure.
      I think that drawing that conclusion is more a function of a personal bias which I suffer too. Essentially, we generally respond positively to arguments which echo our own opinions & are reflexively dubious & critical of those that don’t.

      It’s a bit of a case of ‘hearing what we want to hear’. I think this is why YoM, for example, is regularly accused, by his more simpleminded detractors, of being a Liberal plant. If you actually read what he says (at times) it is obvious that that is not true.
      I don’t even consider him to be a rightard, per se. An anti-government pest who routinely labours a (often legitimate) point, but not a rightard.

      Anyhow, he can defend himself with aplomb. Also, I believe people are free to run their own blogs however they choose to do so. But…pointing out their cognitive dissonance is not off limits in my book.

      I think too many strive to maintain a ‘My Team Right or Wrong’ approach to blogging. This isn’t something which is easy to credibly sustain. It means they are committed apologists for mistakes which they’d be rabid about, had the ‘other side’ perpetrated them. Such behaviour is disingenouos & compromising, imo.

      For what it’s worth.

  23. November 4, 2011 at 9:56 AM

    Maybe the view is great!

    But it’s hilarious to see Patricia so quickly ruin your view of that blog…and then Miglo starts using sock puppets to continue to participate!

    It’s an interesting way to get everyone agreeing with the orientation of the Cafe!

    Wow…I don’t even know where to start with this sack full of crazy.
    Patrica didn’t ruin my view of anything…and point out the sock puppets if you can.

    I think you need to give your persecution complex a bit of fresh air…it’s obviously been pent up so long it needs to release some how. Anywhere but here is fine..

    • Tom of Melbourne
      November 4, 2011 at 10:09 AM

      There’s a comment there as “Tom of Melbourne”, that I didn’t write, that apologises for the behaviour.

      I don’t suppose that’s sock puppetry?

      It’s funny though, if only Miglo had maintained that attitude and humour throughout.

      But do you find rhymes about “faggots” appropriate?

      • November 4, 2011 at 10:15 AM

        So it was Miglo that wrote it was it? Sure it wasn’t Neil of Sydney…he’s mental enough to back you up.

        But do you find rhymes about “faggots” appropriate?

        I have no opinion nor do I need to provide one…get your strawman the hell out of here.

      • Min
        November 4, 2011 at 10:25 AM

        What ToM fails to mention is that he once again attempted to post abusive comments to the Cafe. The blogmaster therefore did a little ‘creative writing’ on his comment. Creative writing yes, sock puppeting no.

      • Tom of Melbourne
        November 4, 2011 at 10:41 AM

        Thank you to both MS and Min for proving my points.

        Min for saying that using someone else’s name to write a comment isn’t sock puppetry!

        And MS for objecting to my blogging style, thereby proving that it has nothing to do with the gender of the person I’m having the exchange with!

        Thank you both once again.

      • Min
        November 4, 2011 at 11:06 AM

        No ToM, it was your attempt to post yet another abusive comment on a blog where you have been banned. You deserved what you got IMO.

  24. AntonyG
    November 4, 2011 at 10:06 AM

    I believe that the Cafe has this Category, http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/category/gay-issues/ but never let a round of abuse get in the way of factual information.

  25. November 4, 2011 at 11:08 AM

    And MS for objecting to my blogging style, thereby proving that it has nothing to do with the gender of the person I’m having the exchange with!

    Seriously TomM, you are a dead-set moron.

    I don’t object to your style, I object to your inability to admit that you are wrong. You will contort and spin anything and everything in your attempts to prove that you are right and everyone else is wrong, no matter how inane your justifications are.

    You wouldn’t be nearly so objectionable if you accept that other people have valid points, instead it’s all about you and how you are always the one in the right.

    • Tom of Melbourne
      November 4, 2011 at 11:15 AM

      It’s your thread MS, and so far I don’t think I’m off the subject.

      It’s nice that personal abuse is acceptable here too!

      It’s great because it proves that my commentary style is merely obnoxious and very annoying, and not bullying of women, as some have stupidly suggested!

      Thanks for this thread.
      ————-
      Min, just to provide clarity, my comment at the Café started – “One for your wastepaper basket…”, it then simply pasted a comment I’d made here.

      I’d prefer anyone who reads this to understand that it wasn’t more than routinely offensive.

      But the sock puppetry at the Café is very funny, it’s a great way of ensuring veryone agrees with each other!

      • November 4, 2011 at 11:44 AM

        It’s nice that personal abuse is acceptable here too!

        It’s great because it proves that my commentary style is merely obnoxious and very annoying, and not bullying of women, as some have stupidly suggested!

        If you’re being a dick I’ll call you a dick…you should be used to that now.

        It also proves nothing about your bullying behaviour…that was in a different environment in different circumstances.

  26. November 4, 2011 at 1:37 PM

    Dare I suggest that bad internet behaviour from both sides of the political divide is very much a function of easy anonymity?
    In my (sadly) long experience of blog wars (that goes back years) the worst behaved internet identities use pseudonyms in an effort to escape responsibility for their actions. Frankly there is a lot to be said for making people post under their real and verifiable name so they can be held responsible for their actions.
    Strangely the trouble makers tend to dislike being exposed in the real world.

    • November 4, 2011 at 1:44 PM

      I disagree Iain…anonymity can be a boon to blogging.
      As we’ve seen with Grog’s case, anonymity can provide a shield to insulate bloggers from potential repercussions in their professional and personal lives…think of it in a whistleblower scenario.

      I think trouble makers are trouble makers regardless of their anonymity. They have the personality type that revels in conflict and aggression and wouldn’t care if it was their real identity or not. There’s only so far you can take role-playing on the internet…you can’t consistently act contrary to your basic personality.

  27. Min
    November 4, 2011 at 2:03 PM

    Massive, just to clarify. The vast majority of hits to the Café come in via Migs’ Facebook group Australians for an Honest Media. Reb has been a member for well over a year but he did a dummy spit and left when challenged on some of his opinions by the contributors on Australians for an Honest Media (who are not Cafe contributors). The Cafe does attract occasional people, who come in via Migs’ Facebook group..and if ToM wants to call these people sock puppets, then that’s his problem.

    • November 4, 2011 at 2:18 PM

      Thanks for the clarification.

      I don’t use Facebook so I don’t have access to that page.

      • Min
        November 4, 2011 at 2:32 PM

        Massive, you will have to join us..yes I know, it’s Facebook but Migs’ members include Political Tarot, Wixxy, Catherine Deveny, Bob Gosford from Crikey and quite a number of other names that you would recognise. A great bunch of people..all working together for an Honest Media.

    • reb
      November 4, 2011 at 2:25 PM

      Who cares?

    • Tom of Melbourne
      November 4, 2011 at 2:45 PM

      But Min, you’ve already admitted that comments are fabricated in the name of others, which is how I thought most people define sock puppetry.

      Do you have a different definition?

      Are you certain that this is the only case of a sock puppet? It’s really not my concern if tehr are others, posting as Tom of Melbourne though is quite a step. Fortunately no one woud have been fooled – too inarticulate.

      ————–
      Min, do you seriously consider ridiculing marginalised minorities funny?

  28. Min
    November 4, 2011 at 2:52 PM

    No ToM, the comment was yours when you tried to post a comment which was quite unsavoury I believe.

    I stand by my record ToM: http://cafewhispers.wordpress.com/category/gay-issues/ And who is the author? Surely not moi.

  29. Tom of Melbourne
    November 4, 2011 at 3:25 PM

    Min, as long as you don’t attempt to convey the impression that my comment headed “to be assigned to the wastepaper basket” was no different in its level of offensiveness to the ones that I’ve posted here.
    ——————–
    And we agree that there is sock puppetry at the cafe, you’re just arguing that it is not very common, or that some circumstances justify it.

    That’s nice.

    But who knows?
    ———————-
    And it is so very fun to (humorously) ridicule the marginalised, isn’t it?

    • Min
      November 4, 2011 at 3:35 PM

      ToM, your attempt to post to the Cafe long after you knew that you had been banned could be consider to be nothing more than an attempt to provoke a reaction. Perhaps instead of sock-puppeting for you know who, you might like to read the many topics on gay issues published at the Cafe and form your own conclusions. I have provided a link above. I await your feedback on these topics.

  30. Tom of Melbourne
    November 4, 2011 at 3:52 PM

    Min, I’ve posted plenty of support on both indigenous and gay issues.

    I have no need to defend my credentials in respect of those specific issues.

    You however, have participated in the (“humorous”) ridicule of a marginalised group. I suppose that’s a matter for you, but it doesn’t fit well with your attempts to take the high moral ground.
    ————
    And I realised my comment wouldn’t be published; I sent it through because I don’t talk behind people’s backs. So please don’t pretend that it was any different of offensive than anything here.
    ——————
    Sock puppetry – does making up commentary on behalf of someone else qualify?

  31. reb
    November 4, 2011 at 4:45 PM

    “it doesn’t fit well with your attempts to take the high moral ground.”

    No it doesn’t does it.

    On one hand declaring that they’re all about “gay issues” and then in the next breath, making and laughing at “faggot” jokes, and then trying to assert that gay people shouldn’t be offended.

    The “offend and then play the victim” card is straight out of the Andrew Bolt handbook.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: