A house divided

— The Olsen family is divided on the Instapundit question. Wife Dawn questions his judgment in resurrecting Adam Curry: What was Glenn Reynolds thinking when he resurrected this relic from the 80’s, who in his heyday was an uncool – disconnected from anything remotely cool, without one fucking ounce of coolness in him – helplessly … Continue reading “A house divided”

— The Olsen family is divided on the Instapundit question. Wife Dawn questions his judgment in resurrecting Adam Curry:

What was Glenn Reynolds thinking when he resurrected this relic from the 80’s, who in his heyday was an uncool – disconnected from anything remotely cool, without one fucking ounce of coolness in him – helplessly rejected,
bad-hair-life-having, sphincter-plug?

And husband Eric kisses-up, calling me a troll for using the Professor as an example of the limits of manual indexing:

Bennett’s statements there pretty much confirm the troll nature of his post: he asserts that the post wasn’t really about Reynolds at all, that Glenn was merely the “hook”

Like Del, Eric relies on Glenn’s summary of my post, and not on the post itself.

Reading comprehension seems in short supply in the Blogosphere, which probably says something about the importance of intepreters and indexers: they don’t just tell us what to read, they tell us what we read.

5 thoughts on “A house divided”

  1. I am not sure if either portrayal is accurate. I merely felt that Glenn was obviously unaware of how pointless Adam Curry is at ANYTHING, but Eric is not what I would call and “asskisser.” He merely states his side with a bit more sophistication than I do. He seeks to be balanced and I just don’t care either way.

    🙂

  2. Richard, A couple of things: first I read the whole thing, swear, and I get your point that not one individual will be able to direct traffic as the blogosphere continues to grow and diversify. No disagreement there. I disagree that the most important function of Glenn, or any blog, is to create links and direct traffic – as I think is clear. I would never comment on something I hadn’t read – too dangerous.

    Second, I didn’t say that you are a “troll,” I said your post was a “troll,” i.e. an extreme statement begging for an extreme response, which was verified when you said Glenn wasn’t the story, just the hook.

    Thanks for noticing though, EO

  3. Jesus Christ, Eric, are you a man or a mouse? If you want to call me a troll, call me a troll, but don’t do it and then claim you didn’t — Dawn will lose all respect for you.

    All blogs are not the same, Eric – some are heavy on content and light on links, like Sullivan, while others are light on (original) content, and heavy on links. Glenn has chosen the second path, which isn’t going to last long, as I see it.

    And why would I aspire to Scalzi’s position when I’ve been on the web so much longer than he? Get your facts straight, man, and apply your intellect. I’m pulling for you.

  4. Links, schminks. Me and my $400 eMachine will still be blogging no matter what high-falutin’ fancypants software app you guys come out with. Just call me the John Henry of the Bloggers!

    And be honest, Richard — you meant to stir up this kind of a flurry, and get people talking about your mysterious new software app. Which is cool with me. I just want to know if it’s what I think it is.

  5. Weekends are slow, Glenn, so we do what we can to keep the interest level high, and thanks for doing your part.

    But what do you think my app is, anyhow? One guy says little windows that show you who’s talking about what you’re reading, and another guy says personal spiders that look for cool stuff; which would you buy, or something completely different?

Comments are closed.