Return of the..Does It Even Amount to Repressed?
So, it's almost fantastical to see Tacticus even bother to be an asshole on my other site, in this thread. More annoyance below the fold.
Despite his unpleasant sorties into Obsidian Wings, I really had thought he was above entering into random blogs linking his entries; I had almost begun thinking of him as a quasi-serious journalist, albeit one with whom I have disagreed with and been annoyed by for years.
If he were comfortably above our criticisms, as I really had thought he should consider himself to be, why the hell would he descend into a comment thread (found via Technorati) about his most recent article to bash about critics with the crassest USENET rhetoric?
As obscure as my sites are, I've on occasion used Technorati or Google to find people who disagreed with my postings. When it's looked as though it wasn't worth being an asshole to defend myself and my positions on foreign turf, I haven't bothered to leave a comment.
I'm in no respects a professional blogger and have no machismo to maintain. Maybe if I picked fights with random people I found via Technorati, it might make sense to look into BlogAds, but as for now, that's really not what I'm about.
Oh, and a year-old evaluation of Tacitus's schlocky style does not an obession make. Still, on reconsideration, his style is schlocky. It's almost interestingly so, given the schlock of our times. Given that he has accused me of being an "unhealthy obsessive, would he care to defend himself against my charge that he has an asinine and schlockly prose style?
What seems most useful to me in the recent dust-up is the contrast in visions for blogging. Tacitus's projects seem to be curiously top-down, bordering on ad-hoc astroturf. Some of those projects have managed to develop into actual communities, despite Tacitus's vaunted diplomatic style.
However, those whom Tacitus currently denounces as "splinter, inner-faction" groups apparently managed to set up non-mission-statement-organized groups. ObWi is a more complex group than is Tacitus.org (are there *any* women posting at Tacitus now?). Liberal bloggers seem rather more accepting and encouraging when former commenters set up other power structures. HoCB really isn't confined to hating on Charles Bird. I'm astonished that I have to spell this out to a conservative, but then, perhaps it's only liberal academics who read Burke carefully.
Cathartic questions to Tacitus to which I don't expect to get meaningful answers:
--What the hell is wrong with a group of commenters setting up a parallel blog?Maybe Tacitus has gotten the wrong idea from the title of the blog. I'm actually rather fond of Charles Bird, who's been short with his detractors and sparse with acknowledgement of his defenders, but a decent sport, for which I'm pretty damned grateful. I'd much sooner vote for Bird than I would for Trevino, or any campaign he was involved in, seeing as I now do how pettily vindictive the latter is.
--Why should that threaten you?
--Why you think that blogs should have a singular mission?
--If you post an essay, why the hell shouldn't you expect it to be criticized?
--Why should you be an asshole towards people talking about it?
--Would you really rather that those who disagree with you shun you, as appears to be the consensus after your appearance on that thread?