As Nick used THREE of my quotes in his blog, I think I have SOME right to point out the blatantly obvious failing of blogs.
Nick is the author, and oversees the blog. HE writes the original posting, (which will always be the first posting, and the one posters refer to - so it should be factually correct, or, it loses credibility).
Nick starts HIS blog with the following comment..
So niclaramartin got annoyed when she discovered that Danelle Nagler had been talking to people about DOGS on BBC HD on the Internet blog:
Heads of Department at BBC, should get their butts over to the messageboards and talk to US too"
So why aren't BBC executives eagerly piling on to the Points of View message boards and talking to people there?Quoted from
this message
BUT, doesn't address the reason WHY niclaramartin (me) got annoyed - the fact that Danielle Nagler has been holding blogs with a minimal number of bloggers who were complaining about DOGS, whilst at the SAME time, NO-ONE from BBC was addressing the THOUSANDS of postings on SEVERAL threads on the SAME topic. Why should I NOT be annoyed that bloggers appear to be receiving input/preferential treatment from BBC staff, whilst messageboarders are left complaining (and THEY wonder why some threads turn very angry), with NO-ONE from BBC giving US the courtesy of such attention.
Nick's second quote from me is
If, as niclaramartin again puts it
Blogging is for footballers, messageboarding is for rugby players"
... then people should have a choice about what game they play. Some don't want to play rugby. Some want to play golfQuoted from
this message
BUT, he cherry-picked the part of THAT comment he wanted, to highlight HIS view of messageboards.
The actual quote should have been...
What I am saying is, Blogging is for footballers, messageboarding is for rugby players (much more robust, a bit rowdy at times, but basically a team/community who will support each other in the scrum). Quoted from
this message
He CHOSE to leave out the VERY IMPORTANT comment
but basically a team/community who will support each other in the scrumQuoted from
this message
WHY quote the "sexy" part of the quote, BUT, leave out the actual point of the sentence - that messageboards are very much a community, who WILL support each other - in a way bloggers don't appear to.
So, just picking TWO of the quotes from me which Nick chose to include in HIS blog, I have to say, that he has cherry-picked PARTS of the comments (whilst leaving out the core of the comment), AND, didn't address the "so niclaramartin got annoyed" (when I discovered the second class treatment of messageboarders). Instead, he chose to quote from me, but, address something at a tangent. Why quote from my comment, if you are not going to address it, but simply use it to get on YOUR bandwagon about messageboards against blogs (although you say it is not a competition, YOU are making it one)?
From these two quotes, it is obvious how an author can misquote comments to slant it in the direction THEY want the blog to go (why let the truth get in the way). It also shows the ultimate failure of blogs. The original blog remains NO. 1 - any response correcting these misquotes from the quoted poster will appear further down the blog (no. 5, 10, 20 etc). In effect, the equivalent of the Author's posting being like a front page on the Sun, and the misquoted poster's comment being like a snippet lost in the body of the paper.
In blogs, the Author's posting is SUPPOSED to have more authority, as the original posting, than the subsequent ones. In messageboards, NO-ONE, whether they be Original Poster, or someone posting later in the thread, has THAT kudos.
It is therefore, beholden on the Author of a blog, to be scrupulously open-minded and write blogs where quotes are comprehensive and reflect the quoted poster's views. Also, if they quote from a comment, they should ADDRESS the comment, and not use it simply to get on their soapbox about THEIR opinion. In effect, what you did, Nick, was simply say that "niclaramartin was annoyed", and separately saying that BBC staff wouldn't open themselves up to strong questioning. That begs the question - "WHY?" They should be able to defend ANY decision they make, and to link to my other quote you linked to....
www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/...If, you/they choose to go through life in a tank, then, you shouldn't be surprised if the plebs think you are isolating yourselves, or fear contact with us viewers.
It is also interesting that you linked to a BLOG where you were receiving grief (and I would say from more posters and of a more sustained nature than the ONE posting on the messageboard you linked to). You also know that postings (from the far smaller number of bloggers) ARE pulled. So there are vocal/combative posters on both, blogs and messageboards, just that there are MORE messageboard posters - NOT more aggressive.
I am posting here, as I, like most messageboarders will NOT be returning to your blog.
Home
How to 
Are you being