Friday, March 11, 2005

Blogging and the Unabomber

If a blogger blogs in the woods, and no one reads their post(s), does that make them the Unabomber?

Numerous folks have complained about the misleading and genuinely bigoted slant to a number of blogs out there. I have an extended list of folks I don't read (eg: caosblog.com and his/her misleading adverts on the BE banners), unless I am looking for a good laugh and to see what the reichwing is thinking. This leads me to the question posted above.

Anyone have an answer?

3 comments:

ManicBlu said...

"Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality."

It's hard to believe there are people that think like this and then have the temerity to write it and share it with the world.

Yes, I know this doesn't answer your question. ;)

Anonymous said...

A firm grip on unreality

Ted Kaczynski was insane. The question is, Does virtual activity; blogs, and first-person shooters (video games); release tension that might otherwise accumulate to real-world earthquakes? Gamers know the game is played in their world. Words have power. Bloggers are playing in our world.

Kaczynski has a host of pygmy action-figure imitators, terrorists all. Better loony bloggers should think they're changing our world than act on their fantasies.

Most people are objective enough to notice that the crazies are shouting ''Theater'' at a crowded fire.

Ken Grandlund said...

If a blogger blogs in the woods and no one hears him, he is not the Unabomber. He is either crazy and just conversing with trees or he was too rational and was exiled to the forest by those afraid of his common sense.

If he is crazy, then he will stay with the trees and glower in their silent affirmation of his genious. If he is rational, he will keep blogging despite his lack of an audience, with the knowledge that his work deserves to be heard and the hope that someday it will be.