Comment Cont from Joi Ito's site
I'm part of an interesting discussion over at Joi Ito's website. Go read that first or this below won't make sense.....
----------------------------------------------------
Shelly and others...I think it best if I quote Shelly's fine response to my earlier comments. (Shelly in italics)
I have to respectfully disagree with you -----, on the issue of publication and party. One of the advantages of weblogging has always been that we aren't writing in a vacuum. We may not have comments, but we do, directly or indirectly, receive feedback primarily because of being a 'weblogger'.
That's not unique to webloggers. It's true of everyone who has ever published. That includes everyone who has made a website. Before I was a blogger I designed and wrote a website that brought me in contact with people worldwide. They sent emails, letters and sought me out at conventions. But, I could have remained isolated -- ignored the emails, burned the letters unopened, and stayed home. I could do so with my blog. The spectrum from publication to party is broad.
Now some webloggers may focus more on community, others less, but there is no strong dichotomy between the two
My apologies. I didn't mean to suggest a dichotomy. I see it as a continuum. My poor sentence structure is to blame. I wrote "I think Dave Winer is correct. Blogs are publications and parties." I was agreeing with Dave's (supposed) view of blogs as publications and extending it to the other end of the spectrum as "online parties."
Your definition of a 'publication only' doesn't support Dave's separation of 'party' and blogging, but is, instead, a description of the relative degree of isolation that the weblogger wishes to write within. Some of us may welcome feedback from the community more than others, but that doesn't mean that the feedback automatically degenerates into a testosterone laden slugfest. And that doesn't mean that those of us who welcome community feedback are no longer 'bloggers'.
I never said "feedback automatically degenerates into a testosterone laden slugfest." I said some bulletin boards turned in their version of Slashdot and some stayed professional. And god knows I never said "those of us who welcome community feedback are no longer 'bloggers'" Where did that come from? I firmly believe that a blogger is anyone who calls his or herself a blogger.
In fact, there really is no such thing as 'publication only' because even major publications have letters to the editor, and others are free to make comments of the writing.
In reality, some publications are "publication only." You can completely ignore your readers. I know of at least two websites that do so. They are written for the writers and allow no method for contact or comment.
What confused me, though, is you sequed into a discussion on BBS, separating old BBS into into the new 'professional BBS' and slashdot. This makes little sense in connection with this conversation. Both, according to your definition, are 'parties' because both are open to comments. But somehow you've separated out a professional context and associated this with 'publication only', as separated by the 'amateurs' who allow comments?
My poor writing skills are to blame. The paragraph's point was: "This argument is not new. In the 1980s people on Bulletin Board Systems argued about popularity. They were concerned about the promotion of other boards in posts (comments). For example, I hosted a popular board. If I allowed you to advertise your board on a post -- was I lending my reputation to your board? Many believed I was. After all, why would I allow you to do so unless I agreed with the purpose of your board? Others felt that your comments built your reputation and it didn't matter who advertised on your board and whose boards you advertised. As an aside, the boards in the 80s seemed to spread along a spectrum of use -- some moved to free-for-all discussions and others allowed no discussion but only an individual's professional information. I see this happening with blogs and other websites."
Finally, I'd love to discuss off-site your comments regarding attempts to force some blogs "into a void where they are not considered 'weblogs'. If you don't mind pointing me to some examples please drop by my site or allow me to comment on yours (when you have the opportunity to re-enable comments.)
I hope I have made myself more clear.
