So lets see if I can break some more stuff.
In searching up blog sisters on google, I came across a couple of entries I had missed when they were originally posted. Shame.
This one by Ms. Yourish on 3/24 is a response to a post I made in blog sisters' first 24 hours of life (when we were jeered as much as linked to). One of our early critics was Brigitte of eaton web, whom Elaine refers to in this post, which elicited my intense emotion.
Meryl takes exception with what I feel was a valid defense of this blog in her critique on the debate, saying among other things:
-"The defensiveness, the perceived insult and lashing out at having one's intent questioned is what registers."
-"It is also important to note that Brigitte maintains the Eatonweb Portal, one of the most influential portals in Blogdom. I'm not saying she would refuse to list Blogsisters because of the above comment--I doubt she's even read it--but in one short, cutely-titled post, Jeneane Sessum manages to put down both a fellow Blogsister and a woman whose portal lists nearly 4,000 blogs--of which Blogsisters is not yet one. A short trip to look around Eatonweb instead of flinging insults might have been the more constructive thing to do."
-"If bloggers want to be taken more seriously--if bloggers think they should be treated with the same respect as professionals--then they need to start thinking about applying some simple rules of logic and civility to the debates that can rage across blogs."
First of all, I defended this blog and my effort at making it happen and ensuring its successful lanch. Absolutely. Guilty on the "defensive" count. Cop to it. Wouldn't change a thing if I had it to do over again.
Second all, I have looked at the eaton web portal, quite extensively in fact, before, during, and after my response to Brigitte's initial critique. Just so we're straight, I don't temper my voice or my thoughts based on the popularity or influence of the person I'm challenging. Nice that she spends so much time on the portal. Couldn't care less what she thinks of me. Don't know why she has an issue with me, but some of what I've seen after that initial post makes me think she does. And for the record, I don't care.
A response to Meryl's third comment, ya give respect, ya get respect. You mess with my family--online or offline--you get a mess back.
And for the record....
What Meryl doesn't mention is that eaton web posted more on 2/28. Try this on for size:
"...when you follow a link from a good weblog and the content is less than desireable, you feel that you've wasted 5 minutes and have a right to complain about that waste. usually in the form of commentary about the content or poor writing. if i had followed that blog sisters link from doc searls website, i would have been considerably more irritated at the time waste. each weblog has a certain trash factor, the better the weblog and the more your interests coincide with the author's, the lower the trash factor."
"oh wait, nevermind. i have my explanation. it's the 'it's' in a popular weblog so it must be interesting, important, exciting, new, attention worthy,
Now let's remember, the blog's like a day and a half old at this point, having zoomed to number 3 on daypop. I'm working like hell to get everyone on the team who wants to be, to fix the template, to add all the links, to hurry hurry, to thank those who linked to us. And some of the first WOMAN blogged feedback I read was eaton web's initial jab:
"I look at Blog Sisters. at first, i thought it's purpose was to link to all the current female webloggers. but, i couldn't believe that someone would be attempting to list ten's of thousands, if not hundred's of thousands, of people. so i spent the next 15 minutes scanning through all the posts trying to figure out the purpose of the site. all i could gather was that it was a weblog devoted to women's issues. why is this so highly linked? there's 2 day's worth of content. half of which are posts about who linked to them and how high they are on daypop. what am i missing?"
How would you feel? How would you react? And be honest.