[I] Nearly two years on a blog
8'FED
I've been blogging at http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/ for almost two
years now. It will be two years exactly on Friday 10 October, but
this week is will be busy for me, so I declare that it is close enough
for a party *now*.
There have been joys and disappointments along the way, but one of my
biggest disappointments has always been my failure to get afpers
interested in what I write. [1] I read several afpers' blogs, but to
the best of my knowledge hardly any of them read mine. Certainly most
have never posted a comment, or referenced any of my posts, or even
sent me a comment by email. Kimberley has been known to post a comment
or two on my blog, and more recently John, but overall I give out
*WAY* more than I get back, and that feels deeply unfair.
It feels particularly unfair when some afpers leave comments on each
other's blogs all the time provided those blogs are hosted by
Livejournal, but never on my Wordpress-hosted blog. After all, it's
supposed to be about the people, not the platform. Listed at
http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?userid=13567852&t=I are all
the afpers whose Livejournals *I* read (along with a couple of people
who aren't afpers), and out of those, all who post frequently have
probably received a comment from me at one time or another. How can I
persuade people to return the favour occasionally?
I like comments, because they are a lasting reminder that someone was
interested in something I wrote. Emailed responses are nice too,
though - the important word is "responses". If there are afpers out
there who read my blog regularly but have never told me so, I would
like to hear from you. [2] If there are afpers who have thought about
reading my blog but just never got around to it, the Second Anniversary
is sort of the perfect time, don't you think?
I have tried, time and time again, to attract readers from afp. My
efforts seem to have had very little effect, and I don't know what
more I can do. Perhaps this time it will be different. If you read
blogs, why not visit mine from time to time? Whether it's by feed
reader or bookmark doesn't matter. Whether it's once a week or once a
month doesn't matter. If you have something to say, leave a comment.
If you're bored one day, browse the archives. If you're bored and have
something to say, do both.
I've just published a special anniversarial post, looking back at
the things I wrote about in October 2006 when the blog was new. It
is currently at the top of the page.
http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/
Adrian.
[1] Note to people who don't read blogs: please don't reply in order
to say so, because this isn't about you and that wouldn't be
helpful.
[2] And if "regularly" means about once a month, that's fine, so long
as you usually glance (however briefly) at all the posts I've
written in the intirim.
RuneMaster
> So...
>
> I've been blogging at http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/ for almost two
> years now. It will be two years exactly on Friday 10 October, but
> this week is will be busy for me, so I declare that it is close enough
> for a party *now*.
Good for you! :-)
<edit>
> but overall I give out
> *WAY* more than I get back, and that feels deeply unfair.
Life is, by definition, Unfair
> <more edit>
> How can I persuade people to return the favour occasionally?
>
Actually, you can't. Either people will feel moved to respond, or they
won't. It's nothing to do with you, but everything to do with them. The
trick is not to take a lack of response personally.
> I like comments, because they are a lasting reminder that someone was
> interested in something I wrote. Emailed responses are nice too,
> though - the important word is "responses". If there are afpers out
> there who read my blog regularly but have never told me so, I would
> like to hear from you. [2] If there are afpers who have thought about
> reading my blog but just never got around to it, the Second Anniversary
> is sort of the perfect time, don't you think?
>
Why?
> I have tried, time and time again, to attract readers from afp. My
> efforts seem to have had very little effect, and I don't know what
> more I can do. Perhaps this time it will be different. If you read
> blogs, why not visit mine from time to time? Whether it's by feed
> reader or bookmark doesn't matter. Whether it's once a week or once a
> month doesn't matter. If you have something to say, leave a comment.
> If you're bored one day, browse the archives. If you're bored and have
> something to say, do both.
> I've just published a special anniversarial post, looking back at
> the things I wrote about in October 2006 when the blog was new. It
> is currently at the top of the page.
>
> http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/
>
> Adrian.
>
> [1] Note to people who don't read blogs: please don't reply in order
> to say so, because this isn't about you and that wouldn't be
> helpful.
>
> [2] And if "regularly" means about once a month, that's fine, so long
> as you usually glance (however briefly) at all the posts I've
> written in the intirim.
>
>
And if I *chose* not to, what business is it of yours? What makes your
blog so special (other than your desire to make it appeal to afp-ers), and
why should I contribute if I don't want to?
Are you seeking reassurance that "someone out there cares"?
--
Do you know how to cut them, do you know how to read them?
Do you know how to stain them, do you know how to prove them?
Do you know how to evoke them, do you know how to score them?
Do you know how to send them, do you know how to spend them?
Hávamál, Stanza 145
Esmeraldus
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 23:32:02 +1030, 8'FED <dra...@netyp.com.au> wrote:
>
>> So...
>>
>> I've been blogging at http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/ for almost two
>> years now. It will be two years exactly on Friday 10 October, but
>> this week is will be busy for me, so I declare that it is close
>> enough for a party *now*.
>
> Good for you! :-)
>
>
> <edit>
>> but overall I give out
>> *WAY* more than I get back, and that feels deeply unfair.
>
> Life is, by definition, Unfair
>
>> <more edit>
>
>> How can I persuade people to return the favour occasionally?
>>
>
> Actually, you can't. Either people will feel moved to respond, or
> they won't. It's nothing to do with you, but everything to do with
> them. The trick is not to take a lack of response personally.
I should probably keep my opinion to myself, but this question just came up
on a listserv that I'm not on because it's usually dead.
I *am* on a closely related listserv because I'm on the BoD of the
organization to which it belongs, and the membership has probably a 50%
overlap.
There was a complaint recently that there's no discussion on List X.
So someone posted a very long, detailed post to List X, obviously hoping
(someone else's words, not mine) to elicit the kind of discussion everyone
had been bemoaning a lack of.
It got nothing.
There was a reason it got nothing, and someone (not me) identified the
reason.
The post was so incredibly thorough and detailed that it left no room for
commentary. It was, as the observer noted, a lot like most conference papers
by graduate students--far too polished to generate vigorous discussion.
Long posts are hard to respond to, especially if they're so thorough they
require research.
This might not be what's happening, but I read the post on List X, and I've
read 8FED's blog, and there are striking similarities. That shouldn't be an
insult, considering the person who posted to List X is a respected scholar
in SF studies. Ah, well. I'm in the killfle anyway. But that's my honest
opinion about what's going on, and an angle from which to approach a fix, if
a fix is wanted.
Lesley Weston
<snip>
> I have tried, time and time again, to attract readers from afp. My
> efforts seem to have had very little effect, and I don't know what
> more I can do. Perhaps this time it will be different. If you read
> blogs, why not visit mine from time to time? Whether it's by feed
> reader or bookmark doesn't matter. Whether it's once a week or once a
> month doesn't matter. If you have something to say, leave a comment.
> If you're bored one day, browse the archives. If you're bored and have
> something to say, do both.
>
> I've just published a special anniversarial post, looking back at
> the things I wrote about in October 2006 when the blog was new. It
> is currently at the top of the page.
>
> http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/
>
> Adrian.
>
> [1] Note to people who don't read blogs: please don't reply in order
> to say so, because this isn't about you and that wouldn't be
> helpful.
I know you say not to reply since I don't read blogs, but that's not
really what I'm saying here. I do read them occasionally, usually when
pointed to them by someone on afp, and I've probably read yours more
often than anybody's, but I've never left a comment on yours or anyone
else's. I think this is because posting to a blog feels like a dialogue
between just two people, which is fine of course, but is not what I'm
after with newsgroups. I like a multi-way conversation, with everybody
striking sparks off everybody else; dialogues should happen in private
ways like face-to-face and e-mails.
It looks like more and more people are using blogs and livejournals
rather than newsgroups, so I seem to be in a minority in this opinion,
but I think it's sad. For one thing I like the way that anyone who
finds a newsgroup can join in, so that you get a truly diverse community
rather than a more limited one formed by one person choosing the members.
Lesley.
Arthur Hagen
> So...
>
> I've been blogging at http://outerhoard.wordpress.com/ for almost two
> years now. It will be two years exactly on Friday 10 October, but
> this week is will be busy for me, so I declare that it is close enough
> for a party *now*.
>
> There have been joys and disappointments along the way, but one of my
> biggest disappointments has always been my failure to get afpers
> interested in what I write. [1] I read several afpers' blogs, but to
> the best of my knowledge hardly any of them read mine. Certainly most
> have never posted a comment, or referenced any of my posts, or even
> sent me a comment by email. Kimberley has been known to post a comment
> or two on my blog, and more recently John, but overall I give out
> *WAY* more than I get back, and that feels deeply unfair.
Perhaps it's not about quantity but quality? If you write something
that people would like to read, they might come?
Hint: "Fun" is what most people look for.
> I have tried, time and time again, to attract readers from afp. My
> efforts seem to have had very little effect, and I don't know what
> more I can do.
Try to find readers /anywhere/ and not just on a.f.p.? Take your
readers where they come, and don't try to /make/ certain readers come.
One of the reasons I've never been to a Jehova's Witness service is
because they proselytise and try to /make/ you come. It's not an open
invitation, it's an active effort, which makes me want to reject them up
front.
> Perhaps this time it will be different. If you read
> blogs, why not visit mine from time to time?
Quite frankly, because you sound desperate when you have to plug your
own blog, and blogs by desperate people are seldom any fun.
If there had been anything worth reading on your blog, /others/ would
have recommended it, not you. Yes, there's a chicken-and-egg problem
there, but that's for you to solve, not us.
Also, many people read blogs but don't post on them. I'm one of those.
I think a blog is a too fickle medium, and "here today, gone tomorrow",
unlike Usenet. With censorship too. There's also the question of
ownership of what is written. On Usenet, this is pretty clear, but on a
privately held blog?
Regards,
--
*Art
8'FED
> I know you say not to reply since I don't read blogs, but that's not really
> what I'm saying here. I do read them occasionally, usually when pointed to
> them by someone on afp, and I've probably read yours more often than
> anybody's, but I've never left a comment on yours or anyone else's. I think
> this is because posting to a blog feels like a dialogue between just two
> people, which is fine of course, but is not what I'm after with newsgroups. I
> like a multi-way conversation, with everybody striking sparks off everybody
> else; dialogues should happen in private ways like face-to-face and e-mails.
As I said, comments are just one way to express interest. A nice way,
but not the only way. I appreciate all the other ways, too. :-)
> It looks like more and more people are using blogs and livejournals rather
> than newsgroups, so I seem to be in a minority in this opinion, but I think
> it's sad. For one thing I like the way that anyone who finds a newsgroup can
> join in, so that you get a truly diverse community rather than a more limited
> one formed by one person choosing the members.
I agree that "rather than" is sad.
OTOH, "as well as" ...
Different jobs, different tools.
Adrian.
8'FED
>> I like comments, because they are a lasting reminder that someone was
>> interested in something I wrote. Emailed responses are nice too,
>> though - the important word is "responses". If there are afpers out
>> there who read my blog regularly but have never told me so, I would
>> like to hear from you. [2] If there are afpers who have thought about
>> reading my blog but just never got around to it, the Second Anniversary
>> is sort of the perfect time, don't you think?
>
>
> Why?
Because it seems to me that's how human psychology works. People
connect "getting around to stuff" with special occasions that are
somehow connected to the stuff in question. Cultures all over the
world have customs based on that premise.
>> [2] And if "regularly" means about once a month, that's fine, so long
>> as you usually glance (however briefly) at all the posts I've
>> written in the intirim.
>
> And if I *chose* not to, what business is it of yours? What makes your blog
> so special (other than your desire to make it appeal to afp-ers), and why
> should I contribute if I don't want to?
1. It's not clear what text you're referring to. If it's the footnote,
did you check what text the footnote refers to? If so, you'll know
that it refers to people who /already/ read my blog, but have just
never let me know they're there.
2. You are being unnecessarily antagonistic by using "I" instead of
the anonymous "one". This isn't about any particular individual,
though it's aimed more at some than at others. Mostly I was aiming it
at those people who would certainly read my blog if it were hosted by
Livejournal, but who don't cross the floor to other platforms.
3. Indeed, what *does* make my blog so special? What makes my blog and
mine alone so mind-numbingly dull that no-one wants to read it? So far
as I can tell, the answer is that it's not hosted by Livejournal, but
that is my choice and I feel I shouldn't be discriminated against for
it.
4. Of course any given /individual/ can choose not to read my blog,
or not to contribute, and I don't have a problem with that. There are
afpers whose blogs *I* don't read. But I don't see why the sum total
of regular readers, after each individual has made their own choice,
shouldn't be roughly the same as everyone else gets.
> Are you seeking reassurance that "someone out there cares"?
I'm only seeking what other people get without effort: to know that
when I write something, there are people out there who *notice*. I
don't want to be a dead end in the social network of afpers' blogs.
Sincere thanks to those people who /did/ leave a comment last night.
I hope you'll be back from time to time. :-)
Adrian.
SteveD
>It feels particularly unfair when some afpers leave comments on each
>other's blogs all the time provided those blogs are hosted by
>Livejournal, but never on my Wordpress-hosted blog.
It's a matter of signing up. Livejournal just happens to have collected
the lion's share of bloggers at an earlier date, and even though many
people have left and many other services have started up, it's still very
difficult to convince people to use a service which duplicates the one
they already have extensive established social networks on.
If you don't have an LJ feed, people aren't going to link to you from
within the network of afp blogs. Which means you won't get many hits for
people searching for new afper blogs, especially if they're searching
exclusively inside LJ (which is very possible).
In short, if you're on Wordpress, your audience is other Wordpress users
and casual websurfers. If you want attention from afp, get an LJ feed.
It's not fair, it's not equitable, and it probably won't become so until
someone figures out a way to easily enable ubiquitous cross-service
friending/posting. I've heard good things about Google Reader, but not
everyone uses it. Blogging is still getting its underlying delivery
platforms sorted out, and there are going to be compromises in the early
days.
For now, there's http://lj-xp.com/ .
-SteveD
Esmeraldus
> On Sun, 5 Oct 2008 23:32:02 +1030, "8'FED" <dra...@netyp.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> It feels particularly unfair when some afpers leave comments on each
>> other's blogs all the time provided those blogs are hosted by
>> Livejournal, but never on my Wordpress-hosted blog.
>
> It's a matter of signing up. Livejournal just happens to have
> collected the lion's share of bloggers at an earlier date, and even
> though many people have left and many other services have started up,
> it's still very difficult to convince people to use a service which
> duplicates the one they already have extensive established social
> networks on.
LJ has a convenient "friends page" that collects all the posts I'm
interested in reading, plus the feeds of half a dozen or more webcomics, and
another half dozen newsfeeds I read on a daily basis.
I don't have to skip around all over the web looking for what I want. Going
to Blogspot and Wordpress for other stuff is just too much trouble. But I
still come to Usenet, because that's a different thing.
Also, because I teach at a university, I need a degree of privacy if I want
to post personal information, and LJ has the capacity to lock journals so
that only people on your friends list can read it. Blogspot didn't have
that. I don't know about Wordpress. Not everyone on LJ is looking for a
"gated community," but that's one function. Some posts are public, most are
locked.
8'FED
> Livejournal just happens to have collected the lion's share of
> bloggers at an earlier date, and even though many people have left
> and many other services have started up, it's still very difficult
> to convince people to use a service which duplicates the one they
> already have extensive established social networks on.
In this case, the "service which duplicates" would be a multi-platform
thingy such as Google Reader, and not a competing platform as such.
Personally I don't understand why anyone would choose to limit
themselves to blogs from one particular platform, when it's so easy to
follow blogs from all platforms at once. Logically, you're either
interested in the content of a particular blog or you're not, and
which platform it happens to be on has absolutely nothing to do with
that decision.
Depending on individual temperament, you might:
- Use Livejournal for Livejournal blogs and Google Reader or
equivalent for everything else. Check both regularly.
- Use Livejournal for Livejournal blogs, and store links for
everything else, either in browser bookmarks or somewhere online.
Divide blog bookmarks into (a) those you read at the beginning of
each day, (b) those you read later in the same day, (c) those you
read once a month or so when things are quiet to see if there's
anything new, (d) those you read several of each day, cycling
through them alphabetically and usually getting back to the A's
at the beginning of the next week, (e) whatever other categories
are convenient for you.
- Whatever works.
In no circumstance does reading blogs from multiple platforms involve
signing up for more than one platform, so there's no reason not to do
the former.
> If you don't have an LJ feed, people aren't going to link to you from
> within the network of afp blogs.
Any blogging platform that doesn't allow easy linking to arbitrary
URLs is seriously broken, and I'm certain LJ isn't *that* broken.
> In short, if you're on Wordpress, your audience is other Wordpress users
> and casual websurfers.
That's not true, because Wordpress users are true global citizens!
Honestly, from what I've seen, there is no tendency among Wordpress
users to give priority to other Wordpress blogs. I think you'd be more
accurate if you s/Wordpress users/Google Reader users etc/.
> It's not fair, it's not equitable, and it probably won't become so until
> someone figures out a way to easily enable ubiquitous cross-service
> friending/posting. I've heard good things about Google Reader, but not
> everyone uses it.
I don't use it either, but likewise I've heard good things about it.
Among the nice things I've heard (which are definitely not true of all
multi-platform feed readers, which is why I specifically asked about
these points) are:
- That you can create multiple feeds per account, with as many blogs
per feed as you like. For example, I could create one feed for all
afper blogs, one feed for all science blogs, one feed for all
linguistics blogs, and whatever else pleases me.
- That you can arbitrarily set each feed to be either public or
private.
The main reason I haven't signed up for Google Reader is because so
far I've been able to handle all the blogs I want to quite adequately
using old-fashioned bookmarks. But if that changed for some reason,
I'd sign up.
> Blogging is still getting its underlying delivery
> platforms sorted out, and there are going to be compromises in the early
> days.
I don't think these are really the early days. More competitors for
Google Reader might be a good thing, but other than that ISTM the
underlying delivery platforms are already pretty good.
> For now, there's http://lj-xp.com/ .
Um ... you are aware that "wordpress.com" and "wordpress.org" are two
different (but related) things, aren't you? One of the differences is
that only wordpress.org supports plugins.
Adrian.
Mary-MKS
> Personally I don't understand why anyone would choose to limit
> themselves to blogs from one particular platform, when it's so easy to
> follow blogs from all platforms at once. Logically, you're either
> interested in the content of a particular blog or you're not, and
> which platform it happens to be on has absolutely nothing to do with
> that decision.
Adrian...
You do know that shaking your finger at people and going "tsk tsk tsk"
is *not* the best way to get them to like you and want to read your blog?
I don't read blogs (or leave comments) out of some sense of social
obligation. I do it from a desire to be entertained. Convince me that
your blog is entertaining, and maybe I'll add it to my bloglines
subscriptions... Or maybe I won't. You shouldn't mind either way. I have
a blog too (http://viewfromthecorner.blogspot.com) that hardly anyone
reads. My RL friends and family know it exists, but aren't particulary
interested. I'm OK with that. I write it for my own amusement, and I
know that most blogs don't actually get many readers. Most I read are
lucky to get two or three comments per posts.
Anyway, this sense of grievance and this attempt to chastize people for
not paying enough attention to you is very counterproductive.
Oh -- and put a link in your sig!
-Mary (does not care what platform a blog is on.)
--
I'm running the Chicago marathon to benefit the local Boys & Girls Club,
who offer sports, music, art, dance, theater, a place to get hot meals,
a place to get homework help, tutoring, job training, and more. Please
support me at: ~~ http://www.active.com/donate/ulbgcmarathonteam/mks ~~
8'FED
> You do know that shaking your finger at people and going "tsk tsk tsk" is
> *not* the best way to get them to like you and want to read your blog?
Honestly, I don't feel that's what I was doing. But I've tried
everything else (including links in my sig and the whole works) and
sometimes, well, there's nothing left but to just be honest and say
how you feel. I'm not trying to chastise anyone, as such. Just make
them aware of my feelings.
The people that I have foremost in mind are people who have my
complete respect and who know that. I don't believe for a second that
any of those people would be so childish as to avoid my blog to spite
me after I've said that I feel socially excluded.
Trust me, I thought /that/ much through before I posted.
> I don't read blogs (or leave comments) out of some sense of social obligation.
> I do it from a desire to be entertained. Convince me that your blog is
> entertaining, and maybe I'll add it to my bloglines subscriptions... Or maybe
> I won't. You shouldn't mind either way.
I don't. But I reckon that, if you read it once a month and
glanced at the title of each post, you'd find at least one
entertaining thing there most months... :-)
> I have a blog too (http://viewfromthecorner.blogspot.com) that hardly anyone
> reads.
I remember that you used to post some interesting stuff there, for
example I vaguely remember some posts you wrote trying to explain
the cultural basis of American political attitudes to the rest of the
world.
However, last I heard you'd stopped blogging for the time being. I
had no idea that you'd started again, and I'll check it out when I
have more time to browse through the archives.
Adrian.
ingenious paradox
wrote:
>at those people who would certainly read my blog if it were hosted by
>Livejournal, but who don't cross the floor to other platforms.
>
>3. Indeed, what *does* make my blog so special? What makes my blog and
>mine alone so mind-numbingly dull that no-one wants to read it? So far
>as I can tell, the answer is that it's not hosted by Livejournal, but
>that is my choice and I feel I shouldn't be discriminated against for
>it.
I don't think it's got anything to do with livejournal.
I have a lj blog, and most of its posts aren't commented on. Ailbhe,
Lindsay and a couple of people I know IRL are probably the only repeat
contributors.
I have a list of bookmarked blogs on my toolbar, some lj, some not.
If I'm directed to a blog I think might be interesting, it goes on no
matter what platform it's on.
Initially I tried reading the lj stuff through my friends page, which
is the only reason I can think of for a reader bias, but found I got
confused (easily done) and commenting was less straightforward, so
settled for making my own list.
As to why, therefore, you don't get comments: I don't know. I *do*
know that on previous occasions you have plugged your blog I've
thought "hm, sounds deep; or convoluted; or abstruse" and haven't
read. This time I had a bit more webtime available, and looked at a
few posts; but as Esmeraldus said, some of them don't seem to be of
the type that particularly invite comment. They're your thoughts on a
subject presented in a neat little package, rather like an essay,
which may well be very interesting but doesn't call for a response.
[Other times, like when you talked about the language you were making
up, I *did* think "nah, bored with all that" - but that's going to
happen to everyone at some point.]
Julie
who appears to be back
>
>
Esmeraldus
> I have a lj blog, and most of its posts aren't commented on. Ailbhe,
> Lindsay and a couple of people I know IRL are probably the only repeat
> contributors.
Oh? What's it called?
ingenious paradox
I should point out that it's not particularly erudite, being largely
an account of my life with children (and the occasional mention of
husband). Oh, and I haven't posted for months.
Julie
bracing for the influx
Esmeraldus
Well, I have a child, too. He's ten years old, and thinks he's a cat.
SteveD
Of course, you will now immediately get a million zillion comments on your
posts, causing Adrian to seriously consider throwing in the towel and
becoming a monk :)
-SteveD
SteveD
>Personally I don't understand why anyone would choose to limit
>themselves to blogs from one particular platform, when it's so easy to
>follow blogs from all platforms at once. Logically, you're either
>interested in the content of a particular blog or you're not, and
>which platform it happens to be on has absolutely nothing to do with
>that decision.
Logic has nothing to do with how people operate en masse. Your assertation
might be true for those of us who view technical requirements as little
more than speedbumps, but most people simply won't go to the trouble.
>> If you don't have an LJ feed, people aren't going to link to you from
>> within the network of afp blogs.
>Any blogging platform that doesn't allow easy linking to arbitrary
>URLs is seriously broken, and I'm certain LJ isn't *that* broken.
It's not that it's technically difficult, it's that people won't do it.
There's an insularity in blogging services. 99.9% of links to other blogs,
at least from LiveJournal, will be to other LJ blogs. LJ's presentation is
carefully cultivated to enhance and play on people's natural sense of
community. This, in turn, keeps websurfing eyeballs within the LJ walled
city and increases its value.
>> For now, there's http://lj-xp.com/ .
>
>Um ... you are aware that "wordpress.com" and "wordpress.org" are two
>different (but related) things, aren't you?
The service and the software? It's only a matter of switching to a new
platform and being your own sysadmin. Barely worth mentioning!
-SteveD
Rocky Frisco
Possibly chasing a Butterfly who thinks he's Chuang Tzu?
-Rock
--
Esmeraldus
> On Mon, 6 Oct 2008 23:12:42 +1030, "8'FED" <dra...@netyp.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> Personally I don't understand why anyone would choose to limit
>> themselves to blogs from one particular platform, when it's so easy
>> to follow blogs from all platforms at once. Logically, you're either
>> interested in the content of a particular blog or you're not, and
>> which platform it happens to be on has absolutely nothing to do with
>> that decision.
>
> Logic has nothing to do with how people operate en masse. Your
> assertation might be true for those of us who view technical
> requirements as little more than speedbumps, but most people simply
> won't go to the trouble.
[sigh]
This is an interesting discussion, even though I'm in 8'FED's killfile.
Because my time is not unlimited, that insularity is a *feature*, not a bug.
I can't read all the books I'd like to read, either.
So that ssense of community LJ has carefully cultivated is what I like about
it. I left Blogspot, where I originally started my own blog, because a
certain friend was using LJ more than she was using Blogspot--and her use of
Blogspot was why I originally chose it, too.
Of course, paid LJ accounts carry the ability to create syndicated feeds for
blogs on other platforms. It would be a trivial matter to create a feed for
any non-LJ blog, but then that brings back the question of content, and
that's something I don't feel I can address past what I've already said WRT
the graduate essay syndrome.
This was probably a liberty, but since I have a paid account, I can creat
syndicated feeds. Now The Outer Hoard is available to hardcore Lj users:
http://syndicated.livejournal.com/the_outer_hoard/
(Someone syndicated my blog, back in the day. That's why I couldn't use
"esmeraldus" as my LJ username--it was already taken.)
SteveD
>Honestly, I don't feel that's what I was doing. But I've tried
>everything else (including links in my sig and the whole works) and
>sometimes, well, there's nothing left but to just be honest and say
>how you feel. I'm not trying to chastise anyone, as such. Just make
>them aware of my feelings.
I wouldn't feel too bad about it. I've been blogging for nearly four years
at slightly over one post per day, and the average number of comments I
get is less than two. And one of those is probably my reply to the one
comment I get from someone else. The majority of the time, I get nothing.
*Once* in four years, I got over 30 comments - and four of those were
mine, so you could probably be justified in saying that I've _never_
gotten 30. Ever.
And then I go read a dozen and a half blogs where every second post lands
several hundred comments. It's ever so slightly irritating.
Take, for example, mistful.livejournal.com. Sarah Rees has recently become
a published author, but the blog goes back before that. She's also a
screamingly funny writer, which is probably why the comment numbers on her
most recent posts currently stand at 387-542-78-114-132-429-274-268-430.
The difference is that my posts don't have the appeal of a professional
writer. I don't even mention 95% of what happens to me from day to day,
much less be able to effortlessly turn it into a rollercoaster ride of
thrills and comedy. My writing is *boring*. Pedestrian. Littered with the
debris of convoluted sentence structure from a life in the civil service.
If I really, desperately wanted to get more readers, I'd go read the
archives of high-volume personal blogs and try to get a feel for the
elements which made them so engaging and accessible. Or look for
well-known writers who have blogs. Neil Gaiman. P.J. O'Rourke. Try
authorsblogs.com. These guys automatically get ten times as many comments
purely because they're already famous, but it's their writing style which
got them there.
http://www.wikihow.com/Write-a-Famous-Blog gives a number of interesting
tips for raising traffic and comments. Among them is "Comment on a lot of
other blogs," which makes sense if you think about it.
There are also plenty of other blogging resources around. See if any of
them resonate with you, or spark ideas.
-SteveD
Esmeraldus
> On Tue, 7 Oct 2008 01:34:43 +1030, "8'FED" <dra...@netyp.com.au>
> wrote:
>
>> Honestly, I don't feel that's what I was doing. But I've tried
>> everything else (including links in my sig and the whole works) and
>> sometimes, well, there's nothing left but to just be honest and say
>> how you feel. I'm not trying to chastise anyone, as such. Just make
>> them aware of my feelings.
>
> I wouldn't feel too bad about it. I've been blogging for nearly four
> years at slightly over one post per day, and the average number of
> comments I get is less than two. And one of those is probably my
> reply to the one comment I get from someone else. The majority of the
> time, I get nothing.
>
> *Once* in four years, I got over 30 comments - and four of those were
> mine, so you could probably be justified in saying that I've _never_
> gotten 30. Ever.
MOST of my posts get no comments.
That's because most of them are my daily exercise report.
But what gets the occasional spatter of real dialogue are the teaching
posts, and the literature posts.
Sometimes personal stuff, and my photos.
But the comments almost never come on the posts where I would expect them.
The ones that generate the comments have never, ever been the ones that I
thought "awwwwright, now this will stir them up." Not once.
But I do know that people read and enjoy, because I get the occasional
[giggle] comment.
My LJ can be divided into roughly these categories: exercise log, funny
personal stories, serious personal stories, comments about politics, photos,
teaching, dissertation, television, books, memes & quizzes.
Most of them are short.
Yesterday I posted nine times.
1. One sentence and a Tina Fey video parody of Sarah Palin
2. A reflection that my "couchsurfer" would be leaving later that day.
3. Two sentences about dissertation progress.
4. Three observations about frozen grapes, coming down in favor of them.
5. Long post. Pasted in the day's dissertation progress, which had to do
with Percy Shelley's preface to Frankenstein.
6. Something I found on StumbleUpon. A multi-search website.
7. A brief post about the last episode of "Six Feet Under"
8. daily exercise log
9. post about being glad to be alone after my houseguest left
The Tina Fey video is the only one that got comments, mainly to tell me it
was working. There had been some doubt that people outside the US could
watch it.
But yesterday was pretty prolific. I don't always post that much.
8'FED
> 8'FED wrote:
> I wouldn't feel too bad about it. I've been blogging for nearly four years
> at slightly over one post per day, and the average number of comments I
> get is less than two. And one of those is probably my reply to the one
> comment I get from someone else. The majority of the time, I get nothing.
Can I re-emphasise the point that comments, per se, are not the point
here? Comments are valuable in that they prove someone not only read
the post but was in some way inspired by it. Similar evidence includes
(a) email responses and (b) blog references (as in, "I read an
interesting article on Steve's blog the other day".)
I don't seek comments for their own sake. Nor do I aspire to get a
comment on every post, or even half of them.
But I'd like to believe that at least several afpers are as interested
in me as an individual as I am in them. However, given that some of
those people _certainly_ follow some blogs, and given that my posts
are fairly eclectic in subject matter, then surely if people were
reading /at all/ then they'd feel inspired, at least once in a while,
to say something. The fact that almost all /never have/ leaves me
feeling a bit empty.
Also, I don't do Internet memes and suchlike (with rare exceptions
like the cannibal one). But I'd feel better for knowing that if I
*did*, I wouldn't be a dead end as far as passing it on is concerned.
* *** ***** *** *
Anyway, I will shortly be going offline for a couple of days. Because
I'm getting my carpet replaced with floating cork tiles tomorrow, I
want to get this computer out of the way of the workers who'll be
moving furniture around. You see, if I don't pack things away neatly,
they'll only put everything back *wrong* when they've finished, and
I'd like to avoid that. I've got a few other jobs to do yet, but
sometime this afternoon it'll be disconnecting the computer and packing
it away on the kitchen bench. Expect quietness.
Adrian.
Thomas Zahr
...
> who appears to be back
Hola!
Did you bring any chocolate? Because we are out of chocolate, as opposed
to the alligator who seems to be out cold and the cat, who just seems to
be out.
Cheers,
Thomas =:-)
--
<still haven't figured out the random sig-thing on thunderbird>
Ed Weatherup
[snip]
> This is an interesting discussion, even though I'm in 8'FED's
> killfile.
YOU are? Or is this an obscure in-joke that goes over my head?
[snip]
--
Ed.
CCA
wrote:
> I have a lj blog, and most of its posts aren't commented on.
You do? What's your username?
CCA
Larry Moore
'Struth. Two noble houses, alike in honour, through misadventure,
estranged.
--
God is our guide! from field, from wave, From plough, from anvil, and from loom;
We come, our country's rights to save, And speak a tyrant faction's doom:
We raise the watch-word liberty; We will, we will, we will be free!
George Loveless
Esmeraldus
I really am.
CCA
> years now. It will be two years exactly on Friday 10 October, but
> this week is will be busy for me, so I declare that it is close enough
> for a party *now*.
I notice your blog is now syndicated on Livejournal, therefore
Livejournal users can go to the_outer_hoard and add it to their
friends list.
Regarding interest in your blog, I know there are many afpers (and
#afpers) who don't read mine, regardless of whether they have
livejournals or not. This may just be because we don't know each
other well, or because we have little or nothing in common, or
whatever, but it's all fair enough. There are many afpers' blogs
(Livejournal or otherwise) that I don't read either. People have
different interests, after all.
CCA
ciciaye on Livejournal, if anyone's interested
8'FED
> Esmeraldus wrote:
>
>> killfile.
>
> YOU are? Or is this an obscure in-joke that goes over my head?
Let's just say that I've told her exactly what it would take to get
out.
Nothing unreasonable. I just want her to do what Jon Pertwee's Doctor
does near the end of _Planet of the Spiders_. And, yeah, sure, I know
it killed him, but I'm convinced that it wouldn't actually be fatal
for Esmeraldus. (I'm not sure if she knows that, though.)
Adrian.
SteveD
>Nothing unreasonable. I just want her to do what Jon Pertwee's Doctor
>does near the end of _Planet of the Spiders_.
Turn into Tom Baker?
-SteveD
The Stainless Steel Cat
"8'FED" <dra...@netyp.com.au> wrote:
I feel like I've wandered into an episode of "Big Bang Theory".
Cat.
--
Jazz-Loving Soul Mate and Tolerable Frog to CCA
Leonard: We need to widen our circle.
Sheldon: I have a very wide circle. I have 212 friends on myspace.
Leonard: Yes, and you’ve never met one of them.
Sheldon: That’s the beauty of it.
Ed Weatherup
Esmeraldus in long her black coat ... with a long multi-coloured scarf? And
jelly babies?
Nothing wrong with that notion :-)
--
Ed.
Esmeraldus
Uh, no. Basically, apologize for what he considers unreasonable behavior. He
asked me to listen to a list of things I've done wrong, and I said no.
Elliott Grasett
Well, the good news is: confession is good for the soul.
And the bad news is: I don't believe that souls exist.
--
Cheers,
Elliott
Esmeraldus
Ah, but the requirement wasn't that I confess what I thought I had done
wrong, but submit to an annotated list of thing *he* thought I had done
wrong.
I find it annoying that he keeps talking about how unreasonabe my behavior
was, and how reasonable his requirements are. And for the record, I don't
think this is something for a newsgroup. So I'll be the first to shut up
about this subtopic.
Arthur Hagen
I think the problem is with jurisdiction, i.e. he doesn't have the right
to list the charges.
Regards,
--
*Art
8'FED
> Esmeraldus wrote:
>> SteveD wrote:
>>>
>>>> Nothing unreasonable. I just want her to do what Jon Pertwee's Doctor
>>>> does near the end of _Planet of the Spiders_.
>>> Turn into Tom Baker?
>>
>> Uh, no. Basically, apologize for what he considers unreasonable behavior. He
>> asked me to listen to a list of things I've done wrong, and I said no.
>
> Well, the good news is: confession is good for the soul.
> And the bad news is: I don't believe that souls exist.
It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
feel and what makes me feel it.
Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from a
very severe depression, so that's not secret. I did my best to take
that into account and to tell myself that when she was behaving
irrationally, it was the mental illness talking.
However, even after a twelve month grace period (approximately
December 2006 to December 2007) she not only hadn't got over the
symptoms I found most troubling, but made it abundantly clear that she
didn't even *want* to get over them, or even acknowledge that they
were symptoms at all. There was a part of her that I was fond of, and
a part of her that I hated, and she chose to embrace the latter. I
couldn't handle that any longer, and I ran out of patience. It
actually got harder to handle towards the end of 2007 when she was
clearly getting over the classical depression symptoms, as it became
harder to rationalise that as a mitigating circumstance.
One thing that infuriated me was her attitude that she's entitled to
be protected from anything that upsets her. With Esmeraldus, it's
always *everyone else's* responsibility to keep her safe and shielded
from anything she doesn't want to hear, and never her responsibility
to make an effort to face reality. A psychologically healthy person
knows that sometimes you have to accept and even embrace a little pain
in the short term, so that issues can be dealt with and overcome in the
long term. Running away and hiding is counterproductive. Until
Esmeraldus is strong enough to accept this and handle my criticism, it
is better for all creation if she and I keep well away from each other.
Otherwise, sparks *will* fly.
Which brings me to what Jon Pertwee's Doctor does in Planet of the
Spiders. The following excerpts of dialogue are quoted from memory,
but the gist is definitely correct.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
K'Anpo: You know what you have to do?
Doctor: No, I ...
K'Anpo: I think you do, my son. What is it you most fear?
<snip flashback>
Doctor: Is ... is there no other way?
K'Anpo: None.
Doctor: Very well. Give me the crystal.
Sarah: What are you going to do?
Doctor: Return the crystal to the Great One.
Sarah: But you said that if you went back there, the cave of
crystal would destroy you!
Doctor: Nevertheless, I have to go.
<The Doctor returns goes off and returns the crystal to the
Great One, who is a megalomaniac giant spider living in a cave full
of lethal radiation. Eventually he returns in the TARDIS, and
stumbles out of the door. He is near death.>
Sarah: But why did you have to go back?
Doctor: Had to ... had to face my fear, Sarah. That was more
important than just going on living.
<Jon Pertwee turns into Tom Baker>
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Now, I realise that posting this may (probably will) cause friction.
However, I have been very careful to stick to a very restrained
version of events and not mention anything of a private nature. I
know it's a grey area, but I've honestly tried my best not to cross
any lines here. The lines are subjective anyway, and it's hard to
predict where other people might think they are.
I will be away this weekend, so I probably won't be able to deal with
the fallout until Monday. Please, no megathread while I'm away.
Adrian.
Esmeraldus
> Elliott Grasett wrote:
>> Esmeraldus wrote:
>>> SteveD wrote:
>>>> 8'FED wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Nothing unreasonable. I just want her to do what Jon Pertwee's
>>>>> Doctor does near the end of _Planet of the Spiders_.
>>>> Turn into Tom Baker?
>>>
>>> Uh, no. Basically, apologize for what he considers unreasonable
>>> behavior. He asked me to listen to a list of things I've done
>>> wrong, and I said no.
>>
>> Well, the good news is: confession is good for the soul.
>> And the bad news is: I don't believe that souls exist.
>
> It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
> over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
> enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
> feel and what makes me feel it.
>
> Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from a
> very severe depression, so that's not secret. I did my best to take
> that into account and to tell myself that when she was behaving
> irrationally, it was the mental illness talking.
Look, it's not your call to give these details on a newsgroup. Knock it off.
Sabremeister Brian
Indeed. And, unless Esmeraldus and 8'FED entered into a private
correspondence not revealed to the newsgroup, I have to say that
my recollection of events over the stated time period is somewhat
different. And as a sufferer from Depression myself, I have some
insight as to what is and is not acceptable/appropriate when Down,
both to the sufferer, and those around him/her.
--
www.sabremeister.me.uk
www.livejournal.com/users/sabremeister/
Use brian at sabremeister dot me dot uk to reply
"You move with the eloquence of disintegrating fuselage."
Courtesy of The Surrealist Compliment Generator.
Peter Davies
> [schnip]
>
> There was a complaint recently that there's no discussion on List X.
>
> So someone posted a very long, detailed post to List X, obviously hoping
> (someone else's words, not mine) to elicit the kind of discussion everyone
> had been bemoaning a lack of.
>
> It got nothing.
>
> There was a reason it got nothing, and someone (not me) identified the
> reason.
>
> The post was so incredibly thorough and detailed that it left no room for
> commentary. It was, as the observer noted, a lot like most conference papers
> by graduate students--far too polished to generate vigorous discussion.
>
> Long posts are hard to respond to, especially if they're so thorough they
> require research.
>
> This might not be what's happening, but I read the post on List X, and I've
> read 8FED's blog, and there are striking similarities. That shouldn't be an
> insult, considering the person who posted to List X is a respected scholar
> in SF studies. Ah, well. I'm in the killfle anyway. But that's my honest
> opinion about what's going on, and an angle from which to approach a fix, if
> a fix is wanted.
I have to agree with Stacy here. If you want oodles of comments on
your blogs, you're going to have to talk about the health of your cat
and the most recent breakdown in your relationship.
..PeterH
Larry Moore
> In a speech called gcmact$12pg$1...@mud.stack.nl,
> correspondence not revealed to the newsgroup, I have to say that
> my recollection of events over the stated time period is somewhat
> different. And as a sufferer from Depression myself, I have some
> insight as to what is and is not acceptable/appropriate when Down,
> both to the sufferer, and those around him/her.
>
>
Diagnosis being best left to professionals,
I am always disappointed when I see untrained people
attempting it.
Therapy, ditto. Mis-diagnosis and improper treatment can be unhelpful.
The Black Dog is a bitch.
--
"Society is an insane asylum run by the inmates." - Erving Goffman
Peter Ellis
>
> It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
> over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
> enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
> feel and what makes me feel it.
Piss off, you selfish prat. It is not your business to force discussion
with someone that doesn't want it. That includes Esmeraldus, and
certainly includes a.f.p as a whole.
>
> I did my best to take
> that into account and to tell myself that when she was behaving
> irrationally, it was the mental illness talking.
How very generous of you. I suppose public insult is all part of the
cure?
>
> However, even after a twelve month grace period (approximately
> December 2006 to December 2007) she not only hadn't got over the
> symptoms I found most troubling, but made it abundantly clear that she
> didn't even *want* to get over them, or even acknowledge that they
> were symptoms at all.
Have you ever considered that maybe *you're* the asshole?
>
> It
> actually got harder to handle towards the end of 2007 when she was
> clearly getting over the classical depression symptoms, as it became
> harder to rationalise that as a mitigating circumstance.
i.e. you had to face up to the fact that your assessment was wrong, and
that your patronising lies to yourself were in fact lies?
>
> Now, I realise that posting this may (probably will) cause friction.
> However, I have been very careful to stick to a very restrained
> version of events and not mention anything of a private nature.
The fucking scary thing is that you actually believe this.
>
> I will be away this weekend, so I probably won't be able to deal with
> the fallout until Monday. Please, no megathread while I'm away.
Yes, of *course* you have the right to tell people how to react and how to
behave, and what's acceptable. That's got nothing to do with this whole
mess at all.
Peter
Arthur Hagen
>
> I have to agree with [...] here. If you want oodles of comments on
> your blogs, you're going to have to talk about the health of your cat
> and the most recent breakdown in your relationship.
Having an over-the-head angle shot of yourself, preferably with emo
make-up and showing off some cleavage, also helps.
Regards,
--
*Art
CCA
> Elliott Grasett wrote:
> > Esmeraldus wrote:
> >> SteveD wrote:
> >>> 8'FED wrote:
> >>>> Nothing unreasonable. I just want her to do what Jon Pertwee's Doctor
> >>>> does near the end of _Planet of the Spiders_.
> >>> Turn into Tom Baker?
> >> Uh, no. Basically, apologize for what he considers unreasonable behavior. He
> >> asked me to listen to a list of things I've done wrong, and I said no.
Aaaarrrghh. Lists.
> > Well, the good news is: confession is good for the soul.
> > And the bad news is: I don't believe that souls exist.
> It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
> over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
> enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
> feel and what makes me feel it.
Maybe she doesn't want to discuss it, and certainly not here.
> Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from a
> very severe depression, so that's not secret.
However, she did choose to stop talking about it here, most likely for
reasons of her own privacy. I suggest you have some regard for
Esmeraldus and do the same.
> However, even after a twelve month grace period (approximately
> December 2006 to December 2007)
Er...hang on a moment...grace period?
First of all, depression does not have a prescribed length of time,
after which you 'must get better'. Secondly, the only person
qualified to give a person with depression a 'grace period' is the
person themselves
(snip quite a lot of private details of Esmeraldus's life, which have
no place on this newsgroup she chooses to put them there)
> Which brings me to what Jon Pertwee's Doctor does in Planet of the
> Spiders. The following excerpts of dialogue are quoted from memory,
> but the gist is definitely correct.
No matter how much you love Doctor Who, attempting to rationalise a
real-life situation is not a good idea
> Now, I realise that posting this may (probably will) cause friction.
I think that's very probable. In fact, I think you've left yourself
way open to it.
> However, I have been very careful to stick to a very restrained
> version of events and not mention anything of a private nature.
Er...what? Look above at what you've written. Do you honestly think
Esmeraldus would have wanted any of that posted on afp for all to
see? It's all private stuff, and it's *not* your place to make it
public. Those are really not the actions of a friend, or someone who
cares about her.
> I
> know it's a grey area, but I've honestly tried my best not to cross
> any lines here. The lines are subjective anyway, and it's hard to
> predict where other people might think they are.
> I will be away this weekend, so I probably won't be able to deal with
> the fallout until Monday. Please, no megathread while I'm away.
Unfortunately, you can't tell people how to react to your post. I
would also be pleased not to see a megathread, for the sake of both
Esmeraldus and the group, but I think it's quite likely
CCA
Rocky Frisco
> Elliott Grasett wrote:
>> Esmeraldus wrote:
>>> SteveD wrote:
>>>> 8'FED wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Nothing unreasonable. I just want her to do what Jon Pertwee's Doctor
>>>>> does near the end of _Planet of the Spiders_.
>>>> Turn into Tom Baker?
>>> Uh, no. Basically, apologize for what he considers unreasonable behavior. He
>>> asked me to listen to a list of things I've done wrong, and I said no.
>> Well, the good news is: confession is good for the soul.
>> And the bad news is: I don't believe that souls exist.
>
> It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
> over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
> enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
> feel and what makes me feel it.
Why in HELL should she give even a tiny shit what you think???
> Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from a
> very severe depression, so that's not secret. I did my best to take
> that into account and to tell myself that when she was behaving
> irrationally, it was the mental illness talking.
If this had been written about or to me, I would be literally mad as
hell. I get the impression you have no idea how self-righteous or
insulting and arrogant this sounds. I have never read anything from
her I would characterize as irrational and I think calling depression
"mental illness," which is a euphemism for "crazy," is ill-advised,
stupid and insulting.
> However, even after a twelve month grace period (approximately
> December 2006 to December 2007) she not only hadn't got over the
> symptoms I found most troubling, but made it abundantly clear that she
> didn't even *want* to get over them, or even acknowledge that they
> were symptoms at all. There was a part of her that I was fond of, and
> a part of her that I hated, and she chose to embrace the latter. I
> couldn't handle that any longer, and I ran out of patience. It
> actually got harder to handle towards the end of 2007 when she was
> clearly getting over the classical depression symptoms, as it became
> harder to rationalise that as a mitigating circumstance.
Who the fuck made you a judge? The above paragraph is so full of shit
and self-congratulatory lack of balance and character, I think you are
an asshole who should quit sullying a newsgroup like this one. My own
sincere opinion is that this swill proves that you are the one with
"mental illness."
> One thing that infuriated me was her attitude that she's entitled to
> be protected from anything that upsets her. With Esmeraldus, it's
> always *everyone else's* responsibility to keep her safe and shielded
> from anything she doesn't want to hear, and never her responsibility
> to make an effort to face reality. A psychologically healthy person
> knows that sometimes you have to accept and even embrace a little pain
> in the short term, so that issues can be dealt with and overcome in the
> long term. Running away and hiding is counterproductive. Until
> Esmeraldus is strong enough to accept this and handle my criticism, it
> is better for all creation if she and I keep well away from each other.
> Otherwise, sparks *will* fly.
Fuck you and the mangy fucking ass you rode in on. Is that candid
enough? Do you consider yourself "psychologically healthy?" I think
you are crazy as a fucking loon. Better stay away from me too, then,
or a lot more than sparks will be flying.
You know, this may develop into a reason for me to abandon this group
forever. I don't give a damn about your "lines" but you have crossed
mine with all four feet. Whether I leave or not is up to the group,
but there's no way I could ever let your attitude and statements go
without comment and I assure you I did, in fact, censor and limit
myself in this message. I have only said what I feel sincerely.
Most human social error can be traced to an inflated opinion of
oneself. I think you have a near-terminal case thereof.
-Rock
--
Esmeraldus
> You know, this may develop into a reason for me to abandon this group
> forever.
Well, Rock, I really hope you don't leave indirectly because of me. It's
been nice having you back.
Rocky Frisco
Dear lady, I just noticed that I'm not the only one here who was at
least mildly enraged. It appears that I have company. Since returning,
I have really tried to be "nice," but I was not able to do that in
this case. I guess I could just killfile him, but I would much rather
that he just bugger the hell off and go annoy the cretins at
alt.config. You know I love you, but frankly, if I didn't I would
still have expressed the same opinion of his gratuitous codswallop.
-Rock
--
Nigel Stapley
> I guess I could just killfile him...
Then please do so. At least as an alternative to your leaving us again.
Ornery as you sometimes are, you're valued here.
FWIW, after long consideration (because it's a thing I have never done
lightly on *this* group) I have decided to kf Adrian, at least for the
time being. His posts to this thread have been so far out of order as to
be beyond repair.
--
Regards
Nigel Stapley
<reply-to will bounce>
Arthur Hagen
I second that. I like Rocky because he's a person I can disagree with,
and agree to disagree with, but whose views I respect even when they're
diametrically opposite to my own views. And I sure as hell will defend
his right to have them.
If Rocky gets scared away from voicing his opinions here, something is
very wrong.
Regards,
--
*Art
Daibhid Ceanaideach
> There was a part of her that I was fond of, and
> a part of her that I hated, and she chose to embrace the latter.
Ironically, after reading that post, this is a very good summation of my
current feelings about you.
You aren't *always* sanctimonious, self-righteous and convinced that you
know other people better than they know themselves, but you seem to be
choosing that side of yourself more lately.
(I never said anything when you k'filed Esmeraldus because it was so
completely unexpected I couldn't predict whether you'd k'file me as well.
Cowardly, but true. After this, though, I honestly don't care.)
--
Dave
So I looked, and behold, a pale horse.
And the name of him who sat on it was Death.
And the name of the horse was Binky.
CCA
> Rocky Frisco wrote:
> > I guess I could just killfile him...
> Then please do so. At least as an alternative to your leaving us again.
> Ornery as you sometimes are, you're valued here.
What Nigel said. Rocky, it's good to see you back - don't go leaving
over stuff like this, will you?
CCA
Bonzai Kitten
Totally agree.
So rather than string all this out any further- I'm torn between
moving to the middle of nowhere in the country, and inner city
melbourne. Both have so much to recommend them, and I just can't think
straight on the subject. Anyone wanna give me some pros and cons?
Lesley Weston
> Rocky Frisco wrote:
>> I guess I could just killfile him...
>
> Then please do so. At least as an alternative to your leaving us again.
> Ornery as you sometimes are, you're valued here.
Yes indeed!
>
> FWIW, after long consideration (because it's a thing I have never done
> lightly on *this* group) I have decided to kf Adrian, at least for the
> time being. His posts to this thread have been so far out of order as to
> be beyond repair.
>
I don't killfile people and I like Adrian just as much as I do
Esmeraldus, but I do agree that his recent posts about her are way over
the line.
Lesley.
v$af$...@i-m-t.demon.co.uk
Rocky Frisco <rockn...@gmail.com> waxed increasing nice:
> Esmeraldus wrote:
>> Rocky Frisco wrote:
>>
>>>You know, this may develop into a reason for me to abandon this group
>>>forever.
>>
>>Well, Rock, I really hope you don't leave indirectly because of me. It's
>> been nice having you back.
>
>Dear lady, I just noticed that I'm not the only one here who was at
>least mildly enraged. It appears that I have company. Since returning,
>I have really tried to be "nice," but I was not able to do that in
>this case.
- this happens. from time to time, this happens. sometimes
with you; and sometimes even (difficult though it may be to
credit) with me - or, rather, with words _we_'ve afposted.
- most people who've read your articles here (and preferably
more of the thread preceding them) will by now have worked
out that you were (and quite possibly are yet) outraged by
the sense and implications of the words he posted, and why.
- but i would hazard the guess that he does _not_ understand
why: and also that he may quite possibly not be able to. [a]
- presuming this to be the case (which it may not be), this
offence was almost certainly *not* meant personally, and it
quite possily was not intended _at all_ - and, if it should
prove that this was indeed the case, it would be an offence
that might be repeated at any time towards anyone else, in
approximately similar circumstances and still not be meant
to offend, nor to offend that particular person in any way -
without a clear set of rules or guidelines being provided,
that may be used by him to identify such situations and the
topics that he should avoid, in order to not give offence
of this kind, unintended.
[- which is an amount of work greater than i should be pre-
pared to undertake with anyone for whose behaviour i was
not, or did not feel in some way, responsible; especially
not if the person concerned was not desirous to attempt to
understand, or learn rules for avoiding, such offence; and
i should also wish to be assured that my work in such an
event (i.e. for someone, not a close friend, for whose be-
haviour i was not responsible) would be remunerated upon a
scale approaching that of the relevant profession...][ymmv.]
>I guess I could just killfile him,
- an alternative option is to read, at least enough to be
sure of appreciating no disproportionate or undue hurt is
being caused; and in any case, to refrain from any public
direct and personal response. [b]
>but I would much rather that he just bugger the hell off and go annoy
>the cretins at alt.config.
- oh, why not wish him upon the denizens of demon.local? [c]
>You know I love you, but frankly, if I didn't I would still have
>expressed the same opinion of his gratuitous codswallop.
- "but what shall we do, when the herring is gone?"
- love, a ppint. happy to have two thrids IMT back open
[the address from which this was posted bounces e-mail;
please change the "f" to a "g" and drop the "v" if you
wish to cc. or e-mail me.]
[a] - my reading of adrian from previous afpthreads and
from previous e-correspondence; i could be wrong.
[b] - this does not rule out a wide range of private re-
sponses - preferably non-physical, and definitely
non-fatal *g*; nor public discussion of any & all
more general point[s] which may be raised.
[it may sometimes require the biting back of words
one might wish to use, or the composition, and then
the deletion, of the response one is first inclined
to make.] [best done _off_-line - just in case *g*]
--
[c] - "I like rhetorical questions;
I usually get them right."
- joann l.dominik, 6/95
April Goodwin-Smith
<snip post of bad taste, bad manners, and bad judgment>
*POOOF*
I have made you invisible.
April.
SteveD
<The.Bonz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>I'm torn between
>moving to the middle of nowhere in the country, and inner city
>melbourne. Both have so much to recommend them, and I just can't think
>straight on the subject. Anyone wanna give me some pros and cons?
Well, I'm something of a city boy myself, so this may be biased, but:
CITY:
- Culture close at hand
- Shopping close at hand
- 24/7 retail for some things
- Usually better infrastructure, like faster internet
- Faster and cheaper to get to a larger variety of businesses, services
and people
COUNTRY:
- Heathier atmosphere, generally less pollution
- Less noise
- Less 'bustle', including things like in-your-face advertising, crowds
etc
- Cheaper land prices and rent
- Depending on where you choose, may have lower crime rates etc
Some of it is personal preference, of course. You may prefer the energy of
crowds or the room to think of the countryside. You may have a lot of
personal possessions, making the larger/cheaper options of the country
more attractive. You may have a preference for the company of cityfolk or
countryfolk, or know whether it feels better at 3am to be able to hit the
supermarket or count every star in the sky.
Additionally, some jobs or careers might be more suited to one location or
the other, if that's a factor.
And of course, pros and cons have a large subjective factor. We may miss
aspects which are particularly important to you, or rattle on about
options you couldn't give a rat's for. :)
-SteveD
The Stainless Steel Cat
SteveD <use...@vo.id.au> wrote:
Also, transport. Do you drive? If not, getting around rural areas can be
quite difficult. Even if you do, if you have to commute regularly, then do
you want to spend 2-3 hours a day just driving back and forth?
Cat.
--
Jazz-Loving Soul Mate and Tolerable Frog to CCA
Lolloping landlubbers, look at the loot! There's enough booty there to bury
a brontosaurus!
Thomas Zahr
You see, Shaw just wanted to shield you from unpleasentness ...
Cheers,
Thomas =:-)
Bonzai Kitten
Cat) wrote:
> In article <ha43f4919rb8t24t82jahf6bmgirsjs...@4ax.com>,
Ah, I don't drive. New factor to consider.
Some excellent points there. At the moment, I'm small medium sized
country town dwelling. But rent here is now far too high, and both
city and proper country are cheaper.
Julia Jones
writes
>
>It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
>over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
>enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
>feel and what makes me feel it.
<massive snippage>
Adrian. You have severe Asperger's syndrome. Amongst other things, this
means that you are frequently a dick, usually without any intention of
being a dick. Right now you are being a very big dick indeed, to more
people than Esmeraldus. Go away, and consider whether the number of
people telling you that you are being a dick might be indicative of
something. Then I suggest you come back and apologise for being a dick,
even if you do not think you have done anything that needs apologising
for. If you are lucky, some of the people you need to apologise to will
not yet have killfiled you, and will see the apology.
This is the fourth attempt at this post. I think I've managed to tone
the flame level down to something I can live with once I've calmed down.
And yes, I will be using my killfile, because otherwise you are likely
to find out what "full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
feel and what makes me feel it" feels like on the receiving end.
--
Julia Jones
8'FED
> 8'FED wrote:
>> Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from a
>> very severe depression, so that's not secret.
>
> However, she did choose to stop talking about it here, most likely for
> reasons of her own privacy. I suggest you have some regard for
> Esmeraldus and do the same.
If she did choose to stop talking about it, then I apologise. I was
not aware that she'd made any decision to avoid mentioning that topic,
and I assure you that I would *NEVER* have mentioned it if I had
known.
Certainly, just because something has already been revealed in public
doesn't necessarily justify drawing attention to it, which is why I
said that it's a grey area. But I thought that, because she *has*
mentioned it herself not once, not twice, but several times in the
past, it was OK to do likewise.
> (snip quite a lot of private details of Esmeraldus's life, which have
> no place on this newsgroup she chooses to put them there)
I would ask you to re-read what I wrote, and try to find a *single*
private detail about Esmeraldus that I mentioned, other than the fact
of the depression (of which, see above). I don't think you can,
because I was actually very careful about that, and I've read my post
again just now to be sure.
What I *did* mention are my opinions and interpretations. I can't see
how these can be an invasion of Esmeraldus's privacy, because they're
*mine*, and because I didn't mention any of the facts they are based
on. They are actually based mostly on things that happened right here
in this newsgroup and are therefore technically public, but I decided
*not* to mention those events because I didn't actually want to open
old wounds. As I said above, just because something is technically
public doesn't justify drawing attention to it.
*Some* of the opinions etc that I mentioned are based on private
communication, but because I didn't mention any details of what that
private communication was *about* (except that it ended in
December 2007) I don't see how alluding to it violates her privacy in
any way.
I'll sleep on everything else. I hope this goes some way to finding
common ground.
Adrian.
Lizzy Taylor
> What I *did* mention are my opinions and interpretations. I can't see
> how these can be an invasion of Esmeraldus's privacy, because they're
> *mine*, and because I didn't mention any of the facts they are based
> on. They are actually based mostly on things that happened right here
> in this newsgroup and are therefore technically public, but I decided
> *not* to mention those events because I didn't actually want to open
> old wounds. As I said above, just because something is technically
> public doesn't justify drawing attention to it.
The net effect is though that someone like me, who knew nothing of past
happenings, now has unwanted knowledge of if not hard facts, certainly
personal issues and views that IMNSHO should have been left to rest and
not re-aired so publicly. Just because past postings are public domain
does not mean it is a good idea to risk re-opening old wounds by pushing
your "opinions and interpretations" so vociferously.
Lizzy
Andrew Nevill
<Snip most of a post that made me very Angry>
Not got a lot to add. other people have already said most of what I
would say - and a whole lot better than I would.
>One thing that infuriated me was her attitude that she's entitled to
>be protected from anything that upsets her. With Esmeraldus, it's
>always *everyone else's* responsibility to keep her safe and shielded
>from anything she doesn't want to hear, and never her responsibility
>to make an effort to face reality. Running away and hiding is
>counterproductive.
I respectfully disagree. I fully admit to being biased. I read
Esmeraldus' blog we exchange correspondence, I have met her at meets and
cons, she has stayed at my flat. I consider her a close friend. But that
also means, if she'll forgive the presumption, that I like to think I
know her just a little.
And I know this above all else. Esmeraldus is a fighter. She does not
ask anyone to shield her or protect her and she does not run away from
anything. There have I think been times when she has thought about it,
when she has wanted to. But she hasn't. She has resisted the urge to
flee and stood and fought her ground and she doesn't ask anyone to
shield or protect her from it (She may ask for help but that's being
sensible IMNSHO) She's one of the strongest and bravest people I know.
I am honoured to know her
>Otherwise, sparks *will* fly.
Sparks. You lit a bonfire. And methinks, you're the Guy.
And finally. You, Sir, are a - the word to describe you is yet to be
found within human vocabulary. But you are the definition of that, as
yet, undiscovered word.
You also hurt my friend.
<PLONK>
--
Andrew Nevill B.F. D.W. FdV. Reply address: ane...@ntlworld.com
AFPWorshipper to Spooky, AFPfiance to Sarah (Nanny Ogg) pia & Esmeraldus.
AFPUncle to James Vaughan. You cannot value friends as pennies,
nor can you replace them as easily (Spooky in email, Aug 2001.)
Rocky Frisco
> I would ask you to re-read what I wrote, and try to find a *single*
> private detail about Esmeraldus that I mentioned, other than the fact
> of the depression (of which, see above). I don't think you can,
> because I was actually very careful about that, and I've read my post
> again just now to be sure.
sorry, but *plonk*
CCA
> CCA wrote:
> > 8'FED wrote:
> >> Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from a
> >> very severe depression, so that's not secret.
> > However, she did choose to stop talking about it here, most likely for
> > reasons of her own privacy. �I suggest you have some regard for
> > Esmeraldus and do the same.
> If she did choose to stop talking about it, then I apologise. I was
> not aware that she'd made any decision to avoid mentioning that topic,
> and I assure you that I would *NEVER* have mentioned it if I had
> known.
Since you claim to know Esmeraldus well, you probably noticed the way
she shifted personal discussions off afp onto her Livejournal. Since
she is no longer talking about her depression here, I really don't
think you're being a friend by bringing it up, and certainly not by
talking about it in such a challenging way.
> Certainly, just because something has already been revealed in public
> doesn't necessarily justify drawing attention to it, which is why I
> said that it's a grey area. But I thought that, because she *has*
> mentioned it herself not once, not twice, but several times in the
> past, it was OK to do likewise.
*She* has mentioned it *herself*. *She* chose to mention those things
*herself*. This doesn't give you the right to do so too, especially
as (as I mention above) she hasn't spoken about her depression here
for a long time.
> > (snip quite a lot of private details of Esmeraldus's life, which have
> > no place on this newsgroup she chooses to put them there)
> I would ask you to re-read what I wrote, and try to find a *single*
> private detail about Esmeraldus that I mentioned, other than the fact
> of the depression (of which, see above). I don't think you can,
> because I was actually very careful about that, and I've read my post
> again just now to be sure.
Yes, I can. You talked about her depression in a very open way, and
mentioned a lot of things I expect she would have preferred to keep
off afp.
> What I *did* mention are my opinions and interpretations. I can't see
> how these can be an invasion of Esmeraldus's privacy, because they're
> *mine*, and because I didn't mention any of the facts they are based
> on.
Your own opinions and interpretations *of something Esmeraldus is
choosing not to talk about here*! Please try to understand this!
> *Some* of the opinions etc that I mentioned are based on private
> communication, but because I didn't mention any details of what that
> private communication was *about* (except that it ended in
> December 2007) I don't see how alluding to it violates her privacy in
> any way.
The fact that it was based on private communication is bad enough.
Esmeraldus had chosen to tell you about her feelings in confidence,
and you talked about your reaction to them here, on a public
newsgroup.
> I'll sleep on everything else. I hope this goes some way to finding
> common ground.
Unlikely. As far as I can see, you chose to say several very
challenging things about the personality of someone you profess to
care about, here on a public newsgroup. I can't imagine Esmeraldus
doing the same to you in a million years.
CCA
Esmeraldus
> On Oct 12, 3:14?pm, "8'FED" <dra...@netyp.com.au> wrote:
>> CCA wrote:
>>> 8'FED wrote:
>>>> Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from
>>>> a very severe depression, so that's not secret.
>
>>> However, she did choose to stop talking about it here, most likely
>>> Esmeraldus and do the same.
>
>> If she did choose to stop talking about it, then I apologise. I was
>> not aware that she'd made any decision to avoid mentioning that
>> topic, and I assure you that I would *NEVER* have mentioned it if I
>> had known.
>
> Since you claim to know Esmeraldus well, you probably noticed the way
> she shifted personal discussions off afp onto her Livejournal. Since
> she is no longer talking about her depression here, I really don't
> think you're being a friend by bringing it up, and certainly not by
> talking about it in such a challenging way.
He'd know it if I weren't in the killfile, of course, on account of me
asking him to shut up about it twice since June.
Catja Pafort
> There have been joys and disappointments along the way, but one of my
> biggest disappointments has always been my failure to get afpers
> interested in what I write.
That might have something to do with the fact that I had no idea you had
a blog. Put it in your sig line. Comment on other people's blogs.
>[1] I read several afpers' blogs, but to
> the best of my knowledge hardly any of them read mine.
I don't think I've seen you commenting on livejournal anywhere, and I
read several afpers. Accounts are free - even if you only comment with
it - and you can point people to your blog and your blog's feed.
Complaining that nobody visits you when you haven't told people your
address is a bit silly. That doesn't mean you should spam the world with
it - that will *also* turn people off - just that blog readers are
accumulated slowly and mostly by interacting with them.
> overall I give out
> *WAY* more than I get back, and that feels deeply unfair.
It's not a competition, and nobody in their right mind would keep track.
If nobody ever replied to me, I'd consider whether I am writing crap, or
writing in a style that annoys people; but whether interaction takes
place on my own blog or in somebody else's doesn't concern me much.
I'm on livejournal, so I get replies to my LJ comments emailed, which
means I don't have to go around and read long threads to see whether
someone has replied, but get them delivered to my inbox, which makes it
easier for me to reply to *them.*
> It feels particularly unfair when some afpers leave comments on each
> other's blogs all the time provided those blogs are hosted by
> Livejournal, but never on my Wordpress-hosted blog.
I only have a limited amount of time each day, and jumping through the
extra hoops to comment on Wordpress or blogger is a much greater effort
than livejournal. You have to navigate away from the site, you have to
sign up, and you don't get feedback for your comments - so yes, I need
to have more to say before I go away.
And I read a lot of blogs through RSS feeds - on my livejournal
friendslist - that I rarely comment on.
You can make it easier for people to comment by allowing them to comment
on the livejournal feed.
> After all, it's
> supposed to be about the people, not the platform. Listed at
> http://www.livejournal.com/userinfo.bml?userid=13567852&t=I are all
> the afpers whose Livejournals *I* read (along with a couple of people
> who aren't afpers), and out of those, all who post frequently have
> probably received a comment from me at one time or another. How can I
> persuade people to return the favour occasionally?
You get people to interact with you by a) interacting with them, and b)
writing posts that are a little open and that contain things people want
to comment on. I've been suprised which of my posts get comments and
which don't, but I also know that a) a lot of people are simply too busy
to comment specifically, but they are reading, and b) when I need them,
people are there for me. So my default reaction to seeing no or very few
comments has switched from 'nobody loves me' to 'guess everybody is
busy.'
> I have tried, time and time again, to attract readers from afp. My
> efforts seem to have had very little effect, and I don't know what
> more I can do.
I blog to air my thoughts, to keep my friends up to date with my life,
and to chronicle all the weird and wonderful things that happen to me. I
read blogs to be informed and entertained and to keep up with my
friends.
If you are looking for an audience or validation, I think you're setting
yourself up for failure - blogs, in my experience, rarely work like
that, and the people who gain a large following solely through their
writing tend to be very talented indeed.
I enjoy *writing* my livejournal. If nobody read it, I'd still enjoy
writing it.
Catja
--
writing blog @ http://beyond-elechan.livejournal.com
Catja Pafort
> The post was so incredibly thorough and detailed that it left no room for
> commentary. It was, as the observer noted, a lot like most conference papers
> by graduate students--far too polished to generate vigorous discussion.
>
> Long posts are hard to respond to, especially if they're so thorough they
> require research.
I've had the same experience with some of my posts. There is no failsafe
style of posting to generate responses, and even being controversial
isn't foolproof, but posts that pick out smaller aspects and involve
readers tend to generate more comments than self-contained essays.
Catja Pafort
> Personally I don't understand why anyone would choose to limit
> themselves to blogs from one particular platform, when it's so easy to
> follow blogs from all platforms at once.
I don't limit myself. I add syndicated feeds to my friendslist, and
since I have a paid account, I can syndicate anything with an RSS feed,
and frequently do.
> In no circumstance does reading blogs from multiple platforms involve
> signing up for more than one platform, so there's no reason not to do
> the former.
Reading doesn't, commenting does. I've got a blogger account solely for
commenting on those blogs, I've got a Wordpress account for some
Wordpress accounts, but many blogs - Wordpress ones included - make it
necessary for you to sign up especially or to log in.
Also, I like LJs icons, threaded commenting, and e-mail notification.
All of these make commenting easier and more fun.
> > If you don't have an LJ feed, people aren't going to link to you from
> > within the network of afp blogs.
>
> Any blogging platform that doesn't allow easy linking to arbitrary
> URLs is seriously broken, and I'm certain LJ isn't *that* broken.
Livejournal users have the habit of referring to other users - or feeds
- by using a livejournal tag: <lj user=whatever> when they refer to that
person. So when you write about something you've seen on another blog,
you might say <lj user=whatever> had an interesting post yesterday where
they talked about x, and that got me thinking: what if- and you go off
on a rant of your own. But the fact that blog users are frequently
mentioned and you get the clickable link makes it very easy to follow
thorugh and check out new people, and ditto for the links that appear on
your comments. If you look at Blogger, you get taken to the profile page
and have to jump through extra hoops in order to read a portion of
someone's blog.
So it's not that LJ is broken, but that it makes it easier. I've
followed commenters from other blogs once or twice, but I do it
frequently on Livejournal.
Catja Pafort
>I think calling depression "mental illness," which is a euphemism for
>"crazy," is ill-advised, stupid and insulting.
This is where I would disagree - I think mental illness is something one
does not choose any more than one chooses to have a physical illness.
> You know, this may develop into a reason for me to abandon this group
> forever. I don't give a damn about your "lines" but you have crossed
> mine with all four feet. Whether I leave or not is up to the group,
> but there's no way I could ever let your attitude and statements go
> without comment and I assure you I did, in fact, censor and limit
> myself in this message. I have only said what I feel sincerely.
I know I haven't been taking part a great deal lately, although I do dip
into threads in the quietness of my room, but I hate to see decent
people leave because others are insensitive and rude.
I don't think Adrian is acting intentionally, but the effect is just the
same.
> Most human social error can be traced to an inflated opinion of
> oneself.
That's a very astute observation.
Catja Pafort
> It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
> over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
> enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
> feel and what makes me feel it.
I don't think anybody should assume they have a right to demand this of
anybody else. Why would she *want* to have this kind of discussion with
someone who makes unreasonable demands from the outset?
> Anyone who on afp in 2007 knows that Esmeraldus was suffering from a
> very severe depression, so that's not secret. I did my best to take
> that into account and to tell myself that when she was behaving
> irrationally, it was the mental illness talking.
>
> However, even after a twelve month grace period (approximately
> December 2006 to December 2007) she not only hadn't got over the
> symptoms I found most troubling,
People don't choose to be mentally ill anymore than they choose to break
a leg or to catch pneumonia. I find the idea that you are arbitrarily
assigning a 'grace period' to anyone - get better in this period of time
or else - *deeply* disturbing.
> but made it abundantly clear that she
> didn't even *want* to get over them, or even acknowledge that they
> were symptoms at all. There was a part of her that I was fond of, and
> a part of her that I hated, and she chose to embrace the latter. I
> couldn't handle that any longer, and I ran out of patience.
So walk away. You don't have to engage with anyone you don't like.
What you write here is all about you - what you feel, how you think
other people should engage with you. It has no compassion for the rest
of the world who might not conform to your ideals and might not wish to
adopt them.
That you have had a private exchange with someone does not give you a
right to sulk and carry your differences into public; and with every
demand you make on someone who owes you nothing other than courtesy
(which she has shown in this thread), you're painting yourself in a bad
light.
This might be part of an answer you are not looking for. For me to want
to spend time with people - whether in the flesh, on their blogs, or by
reading the book they are a character in - they have to be people I
*want* to spend time with. With this post, you have crossed a personal
line for me. Too many people I know suffer from depression for me to
consider your behaviour in any way, shape, or form reasonable; and I,
for one, am much less inclined to check out your blog now.
If you're asking why you have so few friends - which you were, in fact,
even though you did not formulate it like that - then you have to be
prepared for a possible answer to be 'because you're not acting as a
friend towards others.' It doesn't matter how loose that connection is -
what people get out of blogs isn't just entertainment and learning
experiences, but social interaction; and if that interaction is with
someone who is rude or otherwise acting unpleasantly, they are much less
likely to invest their time and effort into making, and keeping up that
connection.
And it's up to you to do something about it, even if it involves saying
'I suffer from depression/Asberger's syndrome/whatever, so if I
inadvertendly offend you, please give me a chance to fix it' - *and then
follow up on it.*
It's much easier if someone states 'these are my personal buttons,
please do not push' than for bystanders to stumble across them.
> It
> actually got harder to handle towards the end of 2007 when she was
> clearly getting over the classical depression symptoms, as it became
> harder to rationalise that as a mitigating circumstance.
Are you suffering from depression? Have you any first-hand experience
with it?
Depression is for life, not just for Christmas. For most people, it has
to get *really bad* for the outside world to realise; but just because
someone appears completely normal to you does never mean that they do
not suffer from depression - they might simply have it better under
control and have fewer depressive phases, but it might still lurk under
the surface to break out any moment.
You don't know that.
> One thing that infuriated me was her attitude that she's entitled to
> be protected from anything that upsets her. With Esmeraldus, it's
> always *everyone else's* responsibility to keep her safe and shielded
> from anything she doesn't want to hear, and never her responsibility
> to make an effort to face reality.
That hasn't been my experience, and you know what? Admitting to be
vulnerable takes a lot of guts, and I admire anyone who can do it.
> A psychologically healthy person
which does not describe someone who suffers from severe depression
> knows that sometimes you have to accept and even embrace a little pain
> in the short term, so that issues can be dealt with and overcome in the
> long term.
There are ways to face issues that are not painful, but when you're
vulnerable and depressed is not necessarily the right time to address
them.
Nor is it your place to demand that anyone else should face up to
anything.
> Running away and hiding is counterproductive. Until
> Esmeraldus is strong enough to accept this and handle my criticism, it
> is better for all creation if she and I keep well away from each other.
> Otherwise, sparks *will* fly.
So why are you treading this out on usenet? You could, y'know, just
quietly have kept your distance and ignored her, and that would have
been it.
<snip Dr. Who excerpt>
>Doctor: Had to ... had to face my fear, Sarah. That was more
> important than just going on living.
It might have been great drama, but it's pretty silly, too: a Timelord
has responsibilities that are greater than merely satisfying his own
needs. His death was not his to choose.
> Now, I realise that posting this may (probably will) cause friction.
Then ask yourself why you posted it, and posted it in such great detail.
Catja Pafort
> What I *did* mention are my opinions and interpretations. I can't see
> how these can be an invasion of Esmeraldus's privacy, because they're
> *mine*
It's all about you in your opinion.
This is part of the problem.
Jeff Howell
Alla what she said.
I won't be killfiling anybody, and I do hope that Adrian doesn't decide
to exile himself either, but I also really hope he (and everyone else)
just drops this subject entirely.
--
Jeff
Esmeraldus
> I also really hope he (and
> everyone else) just drops this subject entirely.
We can keep talking about blogs. That's interesting.
CCA
Pafort) wrote:
(snip)
Nice to see you back on afp, Catja. I hope you'll stay around for a
bit :-)
CCA
CCA
We can talk about cake, maybe. There hasn't been a decent cake thread
here since goodness-knows-when.
CCA
Lizzy Taylor
> We can talk about cake, maybe. There hasn't been a decent cake thread
> here since goodness-knows-when.
I must admit is is nearly time I made a rich fruit cake so that it can
mature in time for Christmas. I usually make it during the October
half-term holiday and the boys "help" me by eating dried fruit and then
stirring the mix and making a wish.
Lizzy
Ed Weatherup
I have an important piece of information to impart:-
It is possible to eat too many glace cherries.
It is possible to eat so many glace cherries that one is sick.
It is possible to vomit little pieces of glace cherry out of one's nose.
Your boys may wish to find out for themselves but I *strongly* advise
against it.
--
Ed.
Esmeraldus
> I have an important piece of information to impart:-
>
> It is possible to eat too many glace cherries.
> It is possible to eat so many glace cherries that one is sick.
> It is possible to vomit little pieces of glace cherry out of one's
> nose.
Green, red, or a combination?
Rozagy, artistic Autistic
> In article <gcm7rc$10h...@mud.stack.nl>, 8'FED <dra...@netyp.com.au>
> writes
>
>
>
> >It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
> >over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
> >enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
> >feel and what makes me feel it.
>
> <massive snippage>
>
> means that you are frequently a dick, usually without any intention of
> being a dick. Right now you are being a very big dick indeed, to more
> people than Esmeraldus. Go away, and consider whether the number of
> people telling you that you are being a dick might be indicative of
> something. Then I suggest you come back and apologise for being a dick,
> even if you do not think you have done anything that needs apologising
> for. If you are lucky, some of the people you need to apologise to will
> not yet have killfiled you, and will see the apology.
>
> This is the fourth attempt at this post. I think I've managed to tone
> the flame level down to something I can live with once I've calmed down.
> And yes, I will be using my killfile, because otherwise you are likely
> to find out what "full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how I
> feel and what makes me feel it" feels like on the receiving end.
> --
> Julia Jones
Julia Jones,
DON'T KEEP UP with the Jones' and DON'T jump on a bandwagon with your
DIY Asperger's diagnosis of someone you DON'T KNOW!
You're no autism expert (nobody who considers themselves professional
would ever say such a thing, especially suing Asperger's in a
derogatoty way).
You owe that man an apology.
You seem to think you're superior to him in some way and you're NOT!
You're offending all of our Autistic community with your ignorant
remarks.
I have Asperger's and I don't piss off people. Unless they put
themselves above others and go about things in an arrogant,
patronising manner and get mad for the truth being pointed out. In
that case, they shouldn't be putting themselves above others in the
first place.
If you are only interested in lies and ass-kissing - don't go anywhere
near Autistics because we tell it how it is and don't lie.
Either way, you have no right to use Asperger's as means to insult
somebody the way you did.
Rozagy,
Autistic and proud
Fighting for the equal rights of Autistic people everywhere!
Join me in the fight,
Jeff Howell
> We can keep talking about blogs. That's interesting.
Depends on the blog, I find. I've never been terribly interested in
'this is my life and everything in it' blogs, but some of the more
subject-specific stuff can be worthwhile. The only ones I read
regularly are a couple of gaming-related blogs and GeekDad.
--
Jeff
Esmeraldus
> On Oct 12, 10:35?am, Julia Jones <julia.jo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> In article <gcm7rc$10h...@mud.stack.nl>, 8'FED <dra...@netyp.com.au>
>> writes
>>
>>
>>
>>> It's not about apologising, really, but rather confirming that she's
>>> over certain issues and proving that she's psychologically strong
>>> enough to handle a full and frank no-holds-barred discussion of how
>>> I feel and what makes me feel it.
>>
>> <massive snippage>
<snip>
> You're no autism expert (nobody who considers themselves professional
> would ever say such a thing, especially suing Asperger's in a
> derogatoty way).
>
> You owe that man an apology.
>
> You seem to think you're superior to him in some way and you're NOT!
>
> You're offending all of our Autistic community with your ignorant
> remarks.
>
> I have Asperger's and I don't piss off people. Unless they put
> themselves above others and go about things in an arrogant,
> patronising manner and get mad for the truth being pointed out. In
> that case, they shouldn't be putting themselves above others in the
> first place.
Maybe you missed where he made himself the mental health professional for
me, and decided when I was over my depression. He doesn't have the whole
story--he only thinks he does. He's no psychiatrist, and he has no idea
whether I'm really over anything or not.
The issue here is that the poster you are defending has done everything you
list there, to me. In public. Here. None of it was lies, but he made my
depression all about him, and it hurt. It's none of his business, especially
not to bring private things here.
> If you are only interested in lies and ass-kissing - don't go anywhere
> near Autistics because we tell it how it is and don't lie.
I don't think you have the background here. So I suggest this stop NOW.
> Either way, you have no right to use Asperger's as means to insult
> somebody the way you did.
Adrian has crossed boundaries with his posts about me. He needs to stop.
Jeff Howell
<snip>
>
> Julia Jones,
> DON'T KEEP UP with the Jones' and DON'T jump on a bandwagon with your
> DIY Asperger's diagnosis of someone you DON'T KNOW!
Not that I feel that Julia needs defending here, but... you may want to
be careful jumping to the attack against someone *you* don't know...
Adrian's on record in this newsgroup as having been diagnosed with
Asperger's. Whether this is relevant is entirely a different question,
but Julia hasn't simply come up with it out of the blue.
Welcome to the newsgroup, btw. Have you been lurking long?
<snip>
--
Jeff
Sabremeister Brian
b38753bd-6678-4230...@k16g2000hsf.googlegroups.com,
Rozagy, artistic Autistic <Roz...@aol.com> said:
And who are you to jump in here and say that to someone you don't
know?
> You're no autism expert (nobody who considers themselves
> professional would ever say such a thing, especially suing
> Asperger's in a derogatoty way).
She's not being deregatory about the Asperger's
> You owe that man an apology.
No she doesn't. You owe her an apology, though.
> You seem to think you're superior to him in some way and you're
> NOT!
>
> You're offending all of our Autistic community with your
> ignorant remarks.
News for you, pal - I'm an aspie, and I'm right behind Julia here.
> I have Asperger's and I don't piss off people.
Are you sure? 'Cos you've just pissed me off.
> Unless they put
> themselves above others and go about things in an arrogant,
> patronising manner and get mad for the truth being pointed out.
Ah, you're talking about Adrian (aka 8'FED)
> In that case, they shouldn't be putting themselves above others
> in the first place.
What, like you are here, you mean?
> If you are only interested in lies and ass-kissing - don't go
> anywhere near Autistics because we tell it how it is and don't
> lie.
If you are only interested in lies and ass-kissing - don't come to
AFP, because we tell it like it is, and we *will* fry your arse if
you act like a troll.
Guess what you've just done?
> Either way, you have no right to use Asperger's as means to
> insult somebody the way you did.
The Asperger's wasn't the insult. Calling 8'FED a dick was the
insult. Being an aspie is not an excuse to be a dick. Anyone,
aspie or NT, can be a dick, and expect to be called on it. And if
you'd read the thread instead of just trolling for your favourite
subject to rant on, you'd see exactly how much of dick Adrian has
been. And, in case you hadn't guessed, you are also being a dick.
> Rozagy,
> Autistic twat and proud
^^^^
>
> Fighting for the equal rights of Autistic people everywhere!
> Join me in the fight,
You're not doing yourself any favours, you know.
I will now step back and don my asbestos shirt, to allow the more
practiced flame warriors to respond.
--
www.sabremeister.me.uk
www.livejournal.com/users/sabremeister/
Use brian at sabremeister dot me dot uk to reply
"I'm not a spy, I'm a shepherd!"
"Ah - shepherd's pie!"
- A fragment of the late great Spike Milligna's brain
Ssirienna
"CCA" <sphir...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:34450194-a387-4bac...@v56g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
Mmmmmm Cake!
There's a program on some time this week called "Ace of cake", which
I may be tempted to watch. It's the latest in a line of this is my job doing
over the top things to my (bike/car/home) and you're able to film it.
Normally these don't appeal as a program I watch by choice (very
occasionally I'm channel surfing and stop because what they're creating
is SO OTT) but these cakes were unbelievable!!
One of these days I'm going to make my own Christmas cake .... from scratch!
Ssirienna
--
Glibido: All talk and no action
Esmeraldus
> "CCA" <sphir...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:34450194-a387-4bac...@v56g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Oct 13, 4:27?pm, "Esmeraldus" <mucluc59...@mypacks.net> wrote:
>> Jeff Howell wrote:
>
>>> I also really hope he (and
>>> everyone else) just drops this subject entirely.
>
>> We can keep talking about blogs. That's interesting.
>
> We can talk about cake, maybe. There hasn't been a decent cake thread
> here since goodness-knows-when.
>
> Mmmmmm Cake!
>
> There's a program on some time this week called "Ace of cake", which
> I may be tempted to watch. It's the latest in a line of this is my
> job doing over the top things to my (bike/car/home) and you're able
> to film it.
Once I came in second in a 4-H baking competition. I made Lemon Tea Cake.
The top was a tiny bit overdone, forecasting my entire future as a cook, in
which nearly everything I make goes a bit...Cajun.[1]
I would be happier about coming in second, had there been more than two
entrants in that category. Alas, I am the Granny Weatherwax of cookery.
[1] Blackened
Daibhid Ceanaideach
I've always thought one of the problems with my blog is I'm not sure what
it's *about*. I don't like to drone on about my life, because I don't see
why anyone else would find it any more interesting than I do, so it's
mostly half-thought out TV reviews and the occasional rant. And memes.
OTOH, people seem to read it, so maybe I shouldn't be second-guessing
myself.
--
Dave
So I looked, and behold, a pale horse.
And the name of him who sat on it was Death.
And the name of the horse was Binky.
Thomas Zahr
Couple of weeks ago I made an Apfelstreuselkuchen, which was pretty
good, even if I say so myself.
Cheers,
Thomas =:-)
Esmeraldus
> On 13 Oct 2008, Jeff Howell <notan...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Esmeraldus wrote:
>>
>>> We can keep talking about blogs. That's interesting.
>>
>> Depends on the blog, I find. I've never been terribly interested in
>> 'this is my life and everything in it' blogs, but some of the more
>> subject-specific stuff can be worthwhile. The only ones I read
>> regularly are a couple of gaming-related blogs and GeekDad.
Mines half personal and half pretty academic about literature and teaching.
If that floats your boat, then sometimes there's pretty good stuff on mine.
But you might not be interested in how many sets of bench press I do every
day.
But there's the daily exercise report, and then there's when I post the
day's dissertation progress, which I tend to think is more interesting.
> I've always thought one of the problems with my blog is I'm not sure
> what it's *about*. I don't like to drone on about my life, because I
> don't see why anyone else would find it any more interesting than I
> do, so it's mostly half-thought out TV reviews and the occasional
> rant. And memes.
>
> OTOH, people seem to read it, so maybe I shouldn't be second-guessing
> myself.
Well, the memes can be fun, and those of us who read it are interested in
you.
Elliott Grasett
call vomiting the "Technicolour yawn".
--
Cheers,
Elliott
Julia Jones
<b38753bd-6678-4230...@k16g2000hsf.googlegroups.com>,
"Rozagy, artistic Autistic" <Roz...@aol.com> writes
>DON'T KEEP UP with the Jones' and DON'T jump on a bandwagon with your
>DIY Asperger's diagnosis of someone you DON'T KNOW!
I'm not using Asperger's as an insult or making a diagnosis of someone I
don't know -- I am repeating back to someone I've known for years
something he himself has said on a number of occasions over the many
years we have both been members of this group.
Adrian has said himself on multiple occasions that he has been diagnosed
with Asperger's, and has used it a number of times as an explanation for
his behaviour. (Note -- usually it's an explanation, not an excuse.)
That is why I tried to dial back the flame level, as I believe that he
genuinely doesn't understand why his post is so offensive.
You will note that I am doing this to someone who thinks it perfectly
acceptable to discuss other people's medical histories on the basis that
he is only repeating what they themselves have said on the group.
Someone who has in fact gone a good deal further than that. There are
two aspects to this. One is that sauce for the goose is sauce for the
gander, and the other is that as far as I can tell he really does need
and sometimes wants to be told when he has crossed social boundaries
that he himself is unaware of.
So no, I don't owe him any apology, and you can take your trolling
elsewhere. I care about Adrian, enough to explicitly tell him when he's
being a dick and needs to modify his behaviour if he doesn't want to end
up in the killfiles of a lot of people whose opinion he cares about. I
don't have any reason to care about some troll who claims that being
Aspie gives people a free pass to be dicks.
--
Julia Jones
Julia Jones
<li...@thetaylorfamily.org.uk> writes
I usually make my own Christmas cake, but this year I may be defeated by
the very small kitchen in this very small flat. We were supposed to have
been out of here by now, but with the way the property market has been
going we've decided that we will put off buying and watch the prices go
down still further. So it may well be a Marks&Spencers finest for us.
Definitely not making my own mincemeat for mince pies this year. I'm not
chopping the fruit by hand, not with my RSI getting worse, and I don't
have room in this very small kitchen for a food processor.
--
Julia Jones
"There are people in the world who believe that Elvis did not die
but was abducted by aliens. Most of these people have the vote
and many own guns." Terry Pratchett
Joyce Haslam
Thanks for the reminder! I intend to get a cake from Collin St
Bakery in Corsicana again this year, and have that much of a Texas
Christmas. Dieting can happen the other 11 months of the year.
Joyce.
--
"The spear in the Other's heart is in your own: you are he." -- Surak
Orjan
news:6lhe76F...@mid.individual.net...
>
> Couple of weeks ago I made an Apfelstreuselkuchen, which was pretty
> good, even if I say so myself.
You know you've been reading afp too long (or have a brain-deading cold)
when you parse the above as "Annotated Pratchet File Elstreuselkuchen" and
tries to work out what the last word means.
Orjan
Lizzy Taylor
>> Lizzy
>
> I have an important piece of information to impart:-
>
> It is possible to eat too many glace cherries.
> It is possible to eat so many glace cherries that one is sick.
> It is possible to vomit little pieces of glace cherry out of one's nose.
>
> Your boys may wish to find out for themselves but I *strongly* advise
> against it.
They can find that out (or not) when they buy the glace cherries themselves!
Lizzy
Ed Weatherup
In my case only red ones -- green were a great rarity seldom seen.
There are even orange ones these days.
--
Ed.
Ed Weatherup
That was where I went wrong ... my mum's stock was one pot, perhaps one
spare. I spent a large proportion of ten shillings on my stash: cleaned out
the village shop!
--
Ed.
Ed Weatherup
People run out into the street to give you a spare pot of peach preserve
that no one in the family liked very much?
:-)
--
Ed.