Stoush-watch
Posted by jason on 20 May 2008
UPDATE: I missed Tim Lambert’s contribution to the Quiggin/Young bout.
First in a new series offering links to fresh and robust stoushing. I’ll try a longer post about snark and stoushing later this week!
BANG!!!
John Quiggin replies to Graham Young’s On Line Opinion piece on warming “bullying” with an invocation of Godwin’s law. (Look down the comments for a further reply from Graham)
THUMP!!!
Grods issues a new entry in a snarky series on Alexander Downer: Blogger.
THWACK!!!
Jeremy Sear takes on Guy Rundle’s arguments (locked up in yesterday’s Crikey) on gay marriage.
Be careful out there, and remember, it’s all fun and games until someone loses an eye, etc.
Awesome, Jason. I look forward to your thoughts on blogospheric battles. I think they’re a very unique part of blogging that, while they have some negatives, actually contribute something to overall debate and make blogs much more attractive and readable.
Editor - thanks. I think you’re pretty much right in all you say there. I’ll go into in more depth later on, but my only reservation is that some people might just get too intimidated the first time they’re taken on, and give the game away. It’s not pleasant to be targeted by certain big-name bloggers, and it can give rise to a climate of fear that some bloggers, I’m sure, struggle to get past.
Having said that, as long as everyone in the discussion is robust enough to handle it, I think it can be great - I think sometimes its a bit like student or grassroots politics - everyone gets to try out and sharpen their arguments and rhetoric in public.
It’s also entertaining for readers I have enjoyed being a spectator in some of your blog’s stoushes with my fellow Queenslander Iain Hall, and I reckon that some unpleasantness aside, you guys and Iain have probably had some fun, too (Though I’m aware that there is a truce of sorts now). I also like the Bolt/Boltwatch dynamic.
Anyway, thanks for the comment, and like I said, more to come.
Actually, I’m tired of this kind of thing. I wrote to Graham Young to try to persuade him to pull the article or at least tone down his attacks, but he wasn’t interested. He offered a reply on OLO, but 800 words of “I am not a brownshirt” did not seem like it would make for good reading, so I went for the Godwin’s law win on my own blog.
Although I’m bored with this kind of stuff, I have had plenty of practice, so I’m confident of giving as good as I get, and more.
Hi John - thanks for the comment. The key thing is, I suppose, that now prominent bloggers such as yourself do have a good forum for replying on your own blogs.
I am sorry if I’ve misread the tone of the discussion and have added fuel to something that’s actually unpleasant for you both.
I suppose that if you have been in a number of these things, it may get a little tiresome. Still I hope that you guys will be able to sort it out if you now have genuine grievances.
A lively discussion can be fun, but Graham Young style name-calling isn’t.
I think the vicious abuse from Young and his supporters (see the OLO comment thread) is just going to drive people away from on-line forums.
Hi Tim - thanks for visiting and thanks for your comment. I appreciate you recording your view, but I’m afraid I can’t buy very far into this one in any partisan way.
I note that both sides are throwing around accusations of name-calling and bullying/intimidation. I agree that some minimum forms of civility are preferable to any of that, if that’s what’s occurring.
I’m pretty confident though that, as John hints, all the main players in this one are able to take care of themselves, and well-practiced in online controversy. The rest of us will be interested to see whether any new light is thrown on the topic at hand as a result of this latest discussion.