The Shu wonders if my standards for whom I link to in my recommended sites might have political implications....
"Tell me David, if you get elected, will you give less weight to a letter from a constituent with a valid concern who can’t spell or write as well as, oh, I don’t know, a land developer? If you’ve set standards like this for your blogging as to who’s important and who’s not, why should we have any reason to expect any differently from Candidate Hoggard?"
I initially missed his January 6th post about his concerns for the future of the local blogosphere which had received 13 comments by the time I ran across it. The post was clearly aimed at my statements about who I place on my blogroll and why, so I went in and added to the conversation a couple of days ago. I really wasn't expecting him to go all personal and political in his reply to me, but so be it.
The answer to your question, Shu, of whether or not I would discard a citizen's concern because it was communicated with bad grammar or bad spelling is a resounding no. Why should you have reason believe me? Because I just told you that you are wrong, dead wrong - even for suggesting it. Your leap in logic and reasoning is simply astounding.
To suggest that my statement, "....all blogs are not equal, nor are all blogs deservant of equal access to my readers." might somehow be translated into something like, '...is it possible that Hoggard thinks opinions and concerns are not equal and might not get equal consideration depending on grammar and spelling', is ludicrous and an affront to everything I believe and practice in matters of democracy.
My blogroll is a list of blogs I recommend based on some loose standards which I clearly laid out, not a political statement nor a quelling of divergent viewpoints. Equating the two suggests something way outside of the truth of the matter and I resent the twisted spin of my intent.
Hell, Shu... I haven't even linked to Tom Phillips because I'm not yet convinced he will stick to it. Jerry McClough will probably be my next addition in spite of his horrendous spelling, because he's delved into some interesting stuff and is working hard at blogging. ACC Hoops? Nope... not there, even though I count Ed and Sam as friends - it just doesn't interest me. Tara Sue has been on my roll forever because she earned the slot years ago and I certainly don't agree with everything she has to say. Local blogger Woody Cavenaugh has been at it for years longer than some "pioneers" and I read him religiously, he earned a spot on my blogroll, too. Yvonne Johnson's blog doesn't link to me, and didn't even before I dropped her link due to her very sporadic posting. Is she making a statement of idea/viewpoint exclusion? Of course not.
Lighten up Shu.
11:39:31 AM 
|
