Comments on: We the Blogs http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/ Firedoglake weblog Wed, 25 Nov 2009 02:39:31 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: MarcLord http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-311100 MarcLord Tue, 26 Sep 2006 22:02:56 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-311100 <p>Rayne et al @174-177,</p> <p>The platform preconfigures the media, and this is New Media, in which “Blog” and “lurker” are good words. Agreed, they’re not good words in the Old Media, but we can’t get out by re-tracing our steps, we can’t even go back to where we came from.</p> Rayne et al @174-177,

The platform preconfigures the media, and this is New Media, in which “Blog” and “lurker” are good words. Agreed, they’re not good words in the Old Media, but we can’t get out by re-tracing our steps, we can’t even go back to where we came from.

]]> By: Rayne http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310866 Rayne Tue, 26 Sep 2006 18:02:44 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310866 <p>john griffith — your point is taken about the term “lurker”, but unfortunately it’s now a term that’s embedded within internet culture having been used for roughly two decades, starting back in the heady early days of online BBS. It’s not meant as a derogatory term to you or any specific reader; it’s a term of art that was originated by people who would have been considered ultra-nerdy geeks at the time of coinage (when words like nerd or geek wouldn’t have been comfortable fits, either). You’re not part of an “out-crowd”, rather you’re part of a substantive majority, numbering in the millions and possibly tens of millions.</p> <p>Uncle Bug — ditto for you; “web log” became “blog” as so many phrases before have become slang phrases. Younger folks for the most part don’t bat an eye over the word, but many of them don’t realize that the origin of the phrase “web log” actually rose from log records of server and network activity. I suspect we would have had to invent a word for this if it didn’t emerge on its own.</p> john griffith — your point is taken about the term “lurker”, but unfortunately it’s now a term that’s embedded within internet culture having been used for roughly two decades, starting back in the heady early days of online BBS. It’s not meant as a derogatory term to you or any specific reader; it’s a term of art that was originated by people who would have been considered ultra-nerdy geeks at the time of coinage (when words like nerd or geek wouldn’t have been comfortable fits, either). You’re not part of an “out-crowd”, rather you’re part of a substantive majority, numbering in the millions and possibly tens of millions.

Uncle Bug — ditto for you; “web log” became “blog” as so many phrases before have become slang phrases. Younger folks for the most part don’t bat an eye over the word, but many of them don’t realize that the origin of the phrase “web log” actually rose from log records of server and network activity. I suspect we would have had to invent a word for this if it didn’t emerge on its own.

]]> By: john griffith http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310670 john griffith Tue, 26 Sep 2006 15:13:27 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310670 <p>I don’t know why but the comments wouldn’t come up for the previous post so I’ll put it here. I really resent the term “lurker” if you look up the definition it means that the lurker stays quiet and waits for the opportunity to do harm. Nothing could be further from the truth, I spend much time and some of my meager funds to support reality based candidates and causes. I get the feeling that I’m just not one of the in-crowd If I don’t comment, when in reality if I don’t have anything new to add I prefer to leave it to those who do.</p> I don’t know why but the comments wouldn’t come up for the previous post so I’ll put it here. I really resent the term “lurker” if you look up the definition it means that the lurker stays quiet and waits for the opportunity to do harm. Nothing could be further from the truth, I spend much time and some of my meager funds to support reality based candidates and causes. I get the feeling that I’m just not one of the in-crowd If I don’t comment, when in reality if I don’t have anything new to add I prefer to leave it to those who do.

]]> By: Uncle Bug http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310633 Uncle Bug Tue, 26 Sep 2006 14:43:16 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310633 <p>I suspect that many peoples’ initial aversion to blogs is the word “blog.” It sounds like a place where frogs hang out. What an unfortunate name for something so vital.</p> I suspect that many peoples’ initial aversion to blogs is the word “blog.” It sounds like a place where frogs hang out. What an unfortunate name for something so vital.

]]> By: Rayne http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310505 Rayne Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:12:23 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310505 <p>MarcLord 7:58pm — I’d had to sign off last night before you posted; you make an important point about the rising influence of open source and its impact on internet-mediated communications. </p> <p>For those folks not familiar with this seminal work, a link to Eric Raymond’s “<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/">The Cathedral and the Bazaar</a>“, an online treatise discussing the theory of open source development. Perhaps for Jennifer and Jane this text might be of some help; book publishing has not yet become as open source as software, but it could become so.</p> <p>What has appealed to me for the last 11 years on the internet has been its ability to encourage collaboration among disparate participants, as well as its ability to organically enable “swarms”. Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow — as are all corporate media lies and political propaganda. Traditional media cannot compete with these features, and they cannot yet figure out how to co-opt them, either (thank goodness).</p> MarcLord 7:58pm — I’d had to sign off last night before you posted; you make an important point about the rising influence of open source and its impact on internet-mediated communications.

For those folks not familiar with this seminal work, a link to Eric Raymond’s “The Cathedral and the Bazaar“, an online treatise discussing the theory of open source development. Perhaps for Jennifer and Jane this text might be of some help; book publishing has not yet become as open source as software, but it could become so.

What has appealed to me for the last 11 years on the internet has been its ability to encourage collaboration among disparate participants, as well as its ability to organically enable “swarms”. Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow — as are all corporate media lies and political propaganda. Traditional media cannot compete with these features, and they cannot yet figure out how to co-opt them, either (thank goodness).

]]> By: Rayne http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310494 Rayne Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:56:37 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310494 <p>Jeffrey Feldman — thanks for stopping by to check out this thread, nice to know you’re on top of your game at the early hour of 7:26 am EDT.</p> <p>;-)</p> Jeffrey Feldman — thanks for stopping by to check out this thread, nice to know you’re on top of your game at the early hour of 7:26 am EDT.

;-)

]]> By: Jeffrey Feldman http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310477 Jeffrey Feldman Tue, 26 Sep 2006 11:26:53 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310477 <p><a href="#comment-309785"><em>NorskeFlamethrower @<br /> 37 </em></a></p> <blockquote><p>I wonder if it has occurred to people like Jeff Feldman that maybe the “big folks” with money will never be excited about electing progressives…maybe in fact, we progressives should be aiming to create a system where money and the “big folks” have only one person one vote.</p></blockquote> <p>Good question/observation.</p> <p>I’d say we can and must do both: work to innovate at the level of institutions and practices, as well as work to bring about change in what is already out there. How we marshal our efforts towards these two ends will depend, as Jennifer points out, on how much each of us is willing to push ourselves past our previous limits of involvement.</p> NorskeFlamethrower @
37

I wonder if it has occurred to people like Jeff Feldman that maybe the “big folks” with money will never be excited about electing progressives…maybe in fact, we progressives should be aiming to create a system where money and the “big folks” have only one person one vote.

Good question/observation.

I’d say we can and must do both: work to innovate at the level of institutions and practices, as well as work to bring about change in what is already out there. How we marshal our efforts towards these two ends will depend, as Jennifer points out, on how much each of us is willing to push ourselves past our previous limits of involvement.

]]> By: druidbros http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310433 druidbros Tue, 26 Sep 2006 09:15:16 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310433 <p>Massive change, when it occurs, is usually ignored or denigrated by the institution which is being coopted. The MSM is no different. The viral nature of the internet is not something most MSM outlets want to think about. It threatens the very way they have to think about information distribution. And it scares them. They perceive the loss of control. Like most things in life, it will become a self fullfilling prophecy.</p> Massive change, when it occurs, is usually ignored or denigrated by the institution which is being coopted. The MSM is no different. The viral nature of the internet is not something most MSM outlets want to think about. It threatens the very way they have to think about information distribution. And it scares them. They perceive the loss of control. Like most things in life, it will become a self fullfilling prophecy.

]]> By: Miller http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310322 Miller Tue, 26 Sep 2006 05:52:45 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310322 <p>Interesting that when the traditional media refer to ‘blogs’ that they almost always mean left-leaning blogs. Back in 1999/2000, the right wingers dominated on the internets (Drudge, Instapundit).</p> <p>I take it as an indication of the huge power shift that has occurred with the base that’s being built by participatory lefty blogs. Give yourselves a pat on the back FDL,lefty bloggers, and readers!</p> Interesting that when the traditional media refer to ‘blogs’ that they almost always mean left-leaning blogs. Back in 1999/2000, the right wingers dominated on the internets (Drudge, Instapundit).

I take it as an indication of the huge power shift that has occurred with the base that’s being built by participatory lefty blogs. Give yourselves a pat on the back FDL,lefty bloggers, and readers!

]]> By: burnspbesq http://firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310300 burnspbesq Tue, 26 Sep 2006 05:42:10 +0000 http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/09/25/we-the-blogs/#comment-310300 <p>Enjoy Keith’s commentary while you can. If Tuesday’s WaPo accurately describes the new stautory definition of “enemy combatant” that was supposedly agreed on between the regime and the Republican leadership of the Senate over the weekend, KO will be on his way to Guantanamo right quick.</p> <p>The Constitution of the United States, 1789-2006. R.I.P.</p> Enjoy Keith’s commentary while you can. If Tuesday’s WaPo accurately describes the new stautory definition of “enemy combatant” that was supposedly agreed on between the regime and the Republican leadership of the Senate over the weekend, KO will be on his way to Guantanamo right quick.

The Constitution of the United States, 1789-2006. R.I.P.

]]>