On Aug 13, 2009, at 1:02 AM, Concerned Blogger wrote:

From: Con­cerned Blog­ger
Sub­ject: Your “Blog“
Date: August 13, 2009 1:02:51 AM PDT

Hello Julius,

I’ve read over your small piece of the inter­net coin­ci­den­tally. I though I would take the time to let you know my thoughts. Firstly, I think you are rather con­de­scend­ing in some parts and often speak as though you are omnipo­tent. Of course, I real­ize this is prob­a­bly some small attempt at being clever/funny in your cor­ner of the uni­verse, but I don’t think many peo­ple enjoy this type of ego­cen­tric cyber bab­ble. I know I didn’t. How­ever, this brings me to my sec­ond point. Com­ments are com­pletely dis­abled. This befud­dled me at first, but I didn’t won­der for long why you wouldn’t want other peo­ples com­ments dis­played pub­licly. This makes it hard for other blog­gers to even com­mu­ni­cate with you, and takes away from any sort of com­mu­nity feel and reader input/collaboration, leav­ing the reader even more suf­fo­cated in your thoughts and ideas, giv­ing them no room to for­mu­late their own.

You cer­tainly are no Julius Cae­sar, and you haven’t done much pleas­ing either.

In this web 2.0 era, cyber savvy indi­vid­u­als such as you and me strive to make the inter­net a bet­ter place for every­one, but in this case, I really think it’s all about you.

Sorry to have been a bother,
Con­cerned Blogger

Con­cerned Blogger,

If you’re going to try to make a point and take a stand, be sure to plant your feet firmly in the ground. End­ing with an unnec­es­sary apol­ogy negated the 202 words that pre­ceded said apol­ogy. Rather than dis­miss your effort, though, I’ll indulge. I enjoy debat­ing and con­sider myself a cun­ning linguist.

You should already know, when I walk in the do’, that it ain’t no use in fron­tin’ on me.

T. Pain, “Hustler’s Anthem ’09″

I must say, I had a hearty laugh when you called me con­de­scend­ing con­sid­er­ing you were imme­di­ately super­cil­ious with your sub­ject. “Your ‘Blog’”? Nice. “Small attempt at being clever”? “Ego­cen­tric cyber bab­ble”? Pot? Ket­tle? Black. To put it col­lo­qui­ally, you bet­ter check your­self before you wreck yourself.

But let’s con­tinue with this whole “blog” busi­ness. This site makes absolutely no claim at being a blog. Far from it, it’s an advice col­umn with top­ics rang­ing from the pre­puce to pop music, sprin­kled with ele­ments of an edi­to­r­ial. You made a hor­ri­bly grand assump­tion and that is entirely your own fault. As a good friend of mine likes to say, “expec­ta­tions are the build­ing blocks to resent­ment.” Or, as they say on Sesame Street, “that fish is not gonna bring that stick back to you.”

Com­ments are, indeed, dis­abled and done so with intent. You’re not the first per­son to notice or ask about it, so I fig­ure I’ll take this oppor­tu­nity to ref­er­ence a recent con­ver­sa­tion I had over instant message.

Them: Any rea­son why you close com­ments?
Me: Because it’s _my_ fuck­ing col­umn.
Them: :D

Once again, we revisit the fact that this is an advice col­umn, a place for my opin­ions. Amaz­ingly enough, this con­cept is not far-fetched. There are quite a few web­sites that I read on a reg­u­lar basis which offer no mech­a­nism for com­ment­ing directly on each post, notably John Gruber’s Dar­ing Fire­ball. There is no dif­fi­cultly in com­mu­ni­cat­ing with Gru­ber, for exam­ple. I’ve writ­ten to him on a few occa­sions, some­times receiv­ing a reply and other times not. Avenues exist and com­ments are not the only road. By dis­abling com­ments, I have not made it dif­fi­cult for peo­ple to com­mu­ni­cate with me. Case in point? You. You wrote this let­ter and I received it with lit­tle effort.

I find it dif­fi­cult to believe that I leave “the reader even more suf­fo­cated in [my] thoughts and ideas, giv­ing them no room to for­mu­late their own”. You seem to have done well enough on your own—or are you imply­ing that you’re of a class greater than my cur­rent read­er­ship, peo­ple who do seem to enjoy my “ego­cen­tric cyber bab­ble”, an increas­ingly grow­ing group. Why, this week alone, vis­its have gone up 515.38% on this web­site accord­ing to Google Ana­lyt­ics. That’s not includ­ing peo­ple who read the RSS feed or view the posts on the Hail Pleasar Face­book Fan Page.

This is not a pub­lic forum. An advice col­umn works like this:

  1. Some­one finds them­self in a predicament.
  2. Said per­son is unable to make sense of this predicament.
  3. This per­son then decides to seek assistance.
  4. They write an e-mail to ask­ing me for my opinion.
  5. I read their e-mail and give it some thought.
  6. I pub­lish my reply on this web­site, which gets syn­di­cated to the Hail Pleasar Face­book Fan Page and notices go out on Twit­ter.
  7. I send an e-mail to the per­son, thank­ing them and let­ting them know that I’ve pub­lished my response and that they are more than wel­come to ask any follow-up ques­tions should they have any.

Con­trary to what you would like to believe, it is not all about me. At the end of the day, though, it’s juliuspleasar.com and not letsallholdhandsandshareourfeelingsinapublicforum.com/emocorner. Your under­stand­ing of what’s going on here can only be described with one word[1].

Julius Pleasar

[1] Photo by Shut­terthug and linked to with per­mis­sion. Spe­cial thanks to Marina del RAGE.

Comments are disabled for this post