Though posting has been light recently, due to being, as they say, 'time poor' at the moment, I never-the-less feel moved to mention the latest ufortunate post by Baht At. Part of a series of quite personal attacks on Blogpower Bloggers, particularly Crushed.
Blogpower is a pretty ‘broad church’ and we mostly get along without launching vitriolic, puritanical, attacks on each other.
One wonders why, if Baht At finds membership of Blogpower so tedious, he does not simply resign and disassociate from it.
I shan’t because of time get into the issue of if drugs should, or should not be legal, what moral right the state has to prescribe them in any event, a hunt through previous posts should enlighten and increase my traffic ;-)or issues relating to holding someone’s past against them for ever and ever and ever…
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I'm not going to comment on the Baht At issue, because obviously that's moved on a bit.
But thanks for your support, it's appreciated.
I wonder over and over why he does not resign since he holds us all in such contempt. Lucky you, you're not on the mailing list.
Granny.
Well said Phil. I am not sure what is being gained here. I found his attacks on jmb particularly unsavoury
The whole thing is against the basic idea behind Blogpower. The personal aspect of it is indeed unpleasant and unsavoury.
Sorry I should have said "what is to be gained by his actions".
I agree wholeheartedly that it runs counter to the ethos of Blogpower
pmsl
the reason I hold you all in contempt is you sign up to "defend the blog" but the moment that involves criticism of one of JMBs favourites it a resounding cry of "burn the witch"
Either live up to your aims or disband the group.
Baht At, I already mostly said my piece. One of the main points of the group is to support each other, not attack.
If you have a problem with Crushed then you should have addressed it in a more restrained, less personal manner. Not insult anyone who disagrees with you.
You are still being unpleasantly personal.
You are clearly not an advocate of free speech - unless that is, you entirely agree with what is being said ;-)
Free speech doesn't include letting lunatics like cushed run their mouths off.
The point of blogpower was never to support lunatics. It was simply to visit other blogs and leave comments. For which the quid pro quo must surely be to accept those comments and when crushed started censoring his comments section I decided that I wasn't prepared to link to a lunatic who wouldn't allow people to dissect his nutjob views.
Baht At, Judging by the tone of your responses here I suspect that you might drift into intemperate comment that could provoke censorship. I also reserve the right to remove spam and what I would consider excessively offensive comments myself. Reasonably civilised debate is preferable.
I suspect I believe free speech stretches a lot further than you appear to. If something actually is irrational, or just wrong, then there is noting wrong with politely pointing it out and letting people make their own minds up. That is one of the main things this blog does. Personally I prefer to make my own mind up and not have someone else’s opinions forced upon me.
I am unmoved in my opinion that you are in the wrong in this case. Not necessarily for holding the opinions you clearly do, but certainly for the way you promoted them, particularly within the bounds of the Blogpower group – that you signed up to.
No one forced you. Do you regard other commitments you make so flexibly?
The only commitment made in joining blogpower is to display the banner, blogroll and visit other blogs.
There never was any requirement to brown-nose other members or even to moderate your views on them - that seems to be something that has been sneaked in by the Ian Grey freemasonry faction.
I joined blogpower because of James and in the end I left because without him there was no incentive to put up with those in blogpower who expected their membership to grant them favours.
Post a Comment