C'est Moi, Vanille

Mostly cut and paste jobs performed by the knife wielding pocket sized fairy, Vanille.

Saturday, January 28, 2006

"Who The Hell Is AD HOMINEM?"

Blog Etiquette
We are fascinated by all the energy being created here. One thing is obvious, we come from a wide variety of backgrounds; a broad spectrum of beliefs, and a myriad of different personality styles. With the name of our site and the nature of our commentary you might think the sky's the limit here and you can say anything you want. Well, to a degree this is true. Although somewhat controversial and offensive at times...we still desire there to be a positive outcome. Our goal, is for people to talk and discuss together what we are sharing and thinking.

However, I felt it was necessary to share with you some Blog Etiquette guidelines we found on another site that I thought were written very well. I have slightly tweaked them for our uses here.

First, here are some great general rules for our purposes (as found on MMIBlog.com and written by Tally Wilgis at his blog):

1. Each blog you visit is the internet "home" of someone.
You wouldn't dare walk into a home and run your mouth at the host. It's inappropriate to do on blogs as well. It's just ugly and you end up looking stupid. Don't do it. It's immature.

2. Any attack on a blog is a public attack.
It's one thing to debate a friend in college where it's you two in a room or sitting out on the grass with no one else around. Imagine if you took some of those debates and broadcasted them to every dorm room on campus. Yeah. Be aware of what you say. You can look stupid, no matter how 'valid' your point may be.

3. It takes time to type so people will judge you a little tougher.
When everyone knows you took time to type your thought it gets a little more scrutiny than if you just said something in a conversation. It's one thing (still dumb) to blurt out something ignorant in a conversation b/c you don't have the facts or you come off as rude but to type it solidifies any thought of you being immature or ignorant. Read what you type. You have time to think it through!

4. A sign of maturity is the ability to delay gratification.
One thing that separates a mature person from the immature is the ability to hold back from immediate gratification. This is true for the blog world. We all have opinions.

If you have a brain you have a thought but not every thought has to be brought forward and presented in the dialogue. I try to operate on terms of 'value added'. When I'm considering posting I ask "Is what I'm about to say going to add value to the conversation?" My "opinion" sometimes means NOTHING to the core of the author's post. Therefore I keep my golden brain to myself no matter how great I think I may be at the time.

5. Watch out for Ad Hominem arguments.
Not to insult all of you fine readers, but I had to look this one up.
An ad hominem argument is a logical fallacy that involves replying to an argument by addressing the person presenting the argument as a basis for the argument being incorrect, as opposed to pointing out a flaw in the argument.

The jest of an Ad hominem is that it's an attack on the person rather than the argument. I see this so much in the blog world it makes me sick.

Don't attack the person. If you disagree and you must get your thought on record, do it in a civil way. Don't go after people. If you must respond, talk about the idea presented.

6. You can be both true and wrong at the same time!
For many immature bloggers they don't understand that perception is reality. Although the context of what they are saying is true, how they are spraying it is wrong. For effective communication both parts must be able to be received.. the saying AND the spraying.

Those who don't want to work to make their communication better received by their audience have lowered themselves to bully status. "I'll say what I want and you WILL listen or else". The 'or else' in blog world is usually "Or else I'll keep posting!"

7. A challenge to your idea is not an attack on you personally. You as the "poster" have to differentiate. It goes both ways. If you feel like your idea is being challenged it is easy to take that personally. I know...trust me. However, I have been guilty of responding as if the person meant their comments towards me personally. It is hard to read voice inflection, etc in comments, so take it all with a grain of salt. This blogging and commenting is great for developing thick skin.

Thanx to the Stupid Church People!!


At 28/1/06 7:14 PM, Blogger Mary said...

These comments are really true, I often right a off comment that I don't even think sounds bad and then I go back and it does...thanks for the reminder....

At 28/1/06 8:45 PM, Blogger Bird said...

so now i'm thinking, pictures are sometimes ad hominem attacks. (bush picking his nose?) and yet I think totally acceptable. they operate in a different way than written discussion of ideas - still - pretty close to ad hominem.

i agree to a certain extent that a blog is someone's internet home, but it is by nature very public and you open up the door to any thing (unless you're monitoring and controlling the comments). i figure it's a risk you take. and the anonymity(spelling?) also opens up the door for off-the-cuff, shoot-from-the-hip comments that carry more weight in print than in a verbal exchange. every community has its discourse conventions - i think the blog world's conventions are evolving.

At 28/1/06 9:41 PM, Blogger Reverend X said...

Ad hominem... Do not attack the messenger, attack the validity of the message. "2+2=4, well you failed algebra" is such attack. But if the message is the opinion of the messenger, "Cry havoc and let loose the dogs of war!". You see, if the message is the conclusion of the messenger, then the messenger's mental state, experience, intelligence, logical ability and, especially AND their judgement is not only open to debate, but actually required information of the debate. Most of the primary logical fallacies have been oversimplified and taught poorly. The logical negative, for instance is used entirely wrong all the time. It covers the "I've never seen a dog therefore there are no dogs", but is commonly used to argue against provable negatives like "Subject A was in Toronto on Monday at 9am therefore not in Guam at the same time".
Sorry, I see that one all the time. And I hate half assed academia repeated rote.
So, if the argument starts with:
I think, I believe, I learned, I saw, or any other personal testimony based on perception, experience, knowledge, the list goes on.... basically if they involve themselves as a part of the argument ad hominem does not apply, but be careful not to beg the question when taking them apart. i.e. "I hear you and wonder how long you've been back on crack." only works if crack has been proven in their past and evidenced in their current behavior.

At 28/1/06 10:00 PM, Blogger Reverend X said...

One more thing. A blog is not a person's home on the internet. It is their billboard on the info superhighway. If they choose to splash debatable rhetoric or advert their viewpoints there then they are fair game for opposing billboards and graffiti. I put theories of my own and ones I support up there for all to see. I damn well better be able to defend those points. If beaten and invalidated, then I must accept reality and support the valid argument. I am fallible I will err and be wrong. I want to know when I am and I want to show when I am right. Without interaction one can not grow. Of course there are going to be belligerents, but no more here than in the real world. This is practice. If you submit to taunts and jibes here, what value do you have in real life where the confrontation is in real time. Sure, anyone can memorize witty talking points and sound smart and right, but can they do so in the face of an informed opposition? No.

At 28/1/06 11:01 PM, Blogger mad malva blue said...

like the rulz ... thanx for reminding us all how to play nice in this blogging sandbox ...

i do think that a person's blog is more like their home, than a billboard ... most bloggers are not trying to sell something or even draw attention to themselves (i.e as in billboard), but seeking a refuge ...a home away from home ...

a blog is a reflection of the person creating/hosting it ... and so its content reflects the beliefs-values-opinions of that person ... i don't, personally, really think i should HAVE to defend my opinion about something simply because i wrote about it in my blog ...sure we can disagree ... but ... words like "beaten ...invalidated ...fair game ..." hey, man ... them's fightin' words ... i ain't here to fight, just to connect and discuss

"Sure, anyone can memorize witty talking points and sound smart and right, but can they do so in the face of an informed opposition? No."

what, exactly, is "right" ...? truth? reality? well ... what's real, true, right for one ... may not be for another ... and ... DOES IT REALLY MATTER ... who's right? and ... CAN ANYONE BE RIGHT?

anyway ...i'll get off my soapbox, right after i just say that i think people in www-land may find it easier to write flaming comments to other bloggers, as opposed to facing a person and saying the same thing ... you know what i mean ...?

is this your new blog home, or just an "add-on" ...?

At 29/1/06 1:50 AM, Blogger infinitesimal said...

Mary: Thanks. I ripped them off of someone else's site. (That's why I carry such a big knife.) You are welcome

Bird: I once saw a man taking a shit on the middle of the sidewalk in NYC. If one views society as one's toilet, and/or picks one's nose next to one's wife at a sporting event while acting as the owner and not to mention the Gov. of Texas.... [fact check Pint Face?]

Well then one's privacy has been nulled. If a guy shits on sidewalks, I WANNA KNOW!! If a guy picks his nose in a place where there are cameras watching him: That is arrogant and a character flaw, and goes into X's point.

The doctored photo of Bush in a Gstring in a gayman's club I found that I did not print...THAT is an Ad Hominem attack by way of photo. (I think?)

Although, I disgusted my own bitchy self when I found myself thinking about the cut and paste job....Hmmmmm if Bush had a body that fine....I'd do him. (Shudder) But you can see how fond I am of the cut n paste job. I think you can also calculate when's the last time I got laid according to the previous.

REV X: RYC #1 How did YOU know I failed algebra?
(you're right) My point still stands:

A) K9 attacked WCH Ad Hominem more than once. He was pissed by the word suffering, by WCH's vanilla tone, and I think attracted to the attention.

B) WCH did not launch his own attack in return. Instead he took a few days, reflected and responded in the least offensive way possible: an invitation to forum. One that would not leave his own blog littered with "steaming hot browns."

C) WCH also may have intended to co-create the blog to ensure the voice of K9 was heard. Had he asked him to start his own blog, he would have been demanding something, an investment of time. WCH could have easily said: "If you do not fuck right off, I will have you as my teacup poodle bitch." but he did not. Similarly, K9 could have said: "No I will NOT create my own blog for you!! HOW can you be so motherfucking arrogant?"

D) K9 owes apology out of principle alone, and he know it. He launched what unfolds to read as a racist attack, and he knows it. WCH gave him respect where he gave none in return, and he knows that too.

X: RYC #2 See Forest Nymph. Thanks for fielding that one WFN.

WFNymph: I concur.

All of us would not be here waiting to see the latest from K9 if it were not for WCH compassion. We were all ready to eject the anonymous poster as an asshole idiot. Oh Ye of baited breath.

But he IS hilarious and a great daily character, and we all just adore him but, he did warn us in his last message.

A sly practicioner of the psy knows to heed personal warnings especially concerning character types.

At 29/1/06 5:56 AM, Blogger K9 said...

/ bark bark bark

the bird's points are right on. She also correctly, I think, states the written word is missing the tones and inflections of speech, thus making what might be a funny or benign comment read much harsher.
To lay yourself out for public consumption is to be open for anything to come your way, and as Bird notes, there are controls available if one decides they cannot roll with it.

Now, miss vanille, here is some blog ettiquette for ya: how could you be so unkind as to let me wake up and log on to see that hideous escapee from the cirque de soliel in place of the original green eyes or even the white haired cartoon gal? For God's sake!

At 29/1/06 6:12 AM, Blogger K9 said...

/bark bark bark

I posted before I read that YET AGAIN you are ragging on and on about me and WCH. Here is the invitation from his own masthead, vanille:

"Start a Fire

if you like what you read here (or even better, if you don't) leave a comment of almost any sort, send an email or pass the url on to your friends so they can disagree with you.

read, respond, provoke, connect."

/ (sharp) grrrrrrrrrrrrrrruuuuuffffffffff!

At 29/1/06 6:24 AM, Blogger Pete Bogs said...

have I been bad?

At 29/1/06 6:47 AM, Blogger K9 said...

/bark bark bark


did you ever read post #16 under "teacup poodle" by "the others?" That comment makes the same case I do about WCH's tone. See if this more controlled post helps you understand what I have failed to do.
*whew* good bye scary circus girl. yuck!


"have i been bad?"
the the bone brutha, to the bone.


At 29/1/06 10:50 AM, Blogger Pete Bogs said...

re: the Bush finger photo... my sources say it's from when he was governor of TX... you can tell by his hair that it's not from the last five years...

TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Bush giving the finger, on tape:

» america, the beautiful from mamamusings
The people have spoken. Four more years. (Video via of David Weinberger, whose sources say it’s from a taping of an Austin tv show late in Bush’s term as governor of Texas.)... [Read More]


Post a Comment

<< Home