No apologies
Julia thinks it takes gumption (I think she wanted to say "balls" ;))to "take on" Dave Winer. To be honest, I'm not so sure.. if I had thought my comment would generate such a response I probably wouldn't have posted it. Which probably means I'm just as much of a wimp as anyone else.. but I really shouldn't be.
It shouldn't have to take guts to disagree with something you know is obviously wrong, unfortunately, more often than not, people tend to attack people.. not their words. Which makes me want to curl into a fetal position and whimper about everyone getting along and love and butterflies and pretty flowers..
So sorry, I'm not gutsy, I don't have balls (physically speaking anyway) but I'm not making apologies either. I don't have anything to apologize for.
Comments
Kasia-I don't think you should apologize! I was saying "hoorah!" and all that!! Just without taking sides technically. Yes "balls"! Or whatever it is that people assume comes only with 'em.
Posted by: julie lerman | November 5, 2003 09:26 PM
Oh, I know :)
I just realized halfway through writng this entry that it sounded almost like an apology.. so I thought I'd clarify the point that it isn't.
Posted by: kasia | November 5, 2003 09:50 PM
Well, reading the rest of the comments that were in that blog post, I must say..one person put it very nicely:
"Notice that Dave doesn't return to the discussion after Jim's completely even-keeled challenge on October 28, 2003 12:20 PM. (Not saying this was the first, but the most complete.)
Dave Winer's M.O.
1. Stir the pot
2. Go to other comment boards, provoke further
3. Ignore legitimate challenges
4. Wait for ad hominem attacks to appear
5. Claim victim hood, ignoring legitimate challenges while
6. Go back to scriptingnews and whine about "personal attacks""
- Sam Balmo
I don't read Dave Winer's blog, (I think A-list blog folk are just out there for the attention, really) but i'm glad as hell that some portion of the internet actually disagrees.
Thank you Kasia. Keep blogging girl. =)
Posted by: David | November 5, 2003 10:52 PM
Why should it take balls to `call` someone when they are talking shit ?
I don't really know who Dave Winer is, I mean I read the posting, but if he talks shit, good on you for slamming him.
Posted by: samh | November 6, 2003 04:53 AM
Good for you and I'm personally glad you aren't backstepping any - you have a right to disagree with whoever you want to! What's scary is the people that backlash at you are so blind that they'll try to trash you just for stating a contrary opinion, without respecting the right to disagree. Mindless drones... bah!
Nevermind the fact that your opinion is actually correct in this case - that hardly comes into play, sadly.
Posted by: Randy | November 6, 2003 09:44 AM
I guess you don't have to be male to have balls ;)
Posted by: Mike Hillyer | November 6, 2003 11:12 AM
Yeah, maybe guts isn't the exact terminology but you did keep your cool and maintained civility in the thread. This is a fantastic earmark of civility and willingness to try to work through problems instead of just exploding and disappearing after failing to defend very half assed claims about an operating system that a lot of us have a lot of blood, sweat, and tears invested in. I have a very hard time answering that kind of mindless rant without dishing up a huge bowl of troll food. Kudos on your restraint and consideration for the other folks involved in the discussion.
Posted by: goneaway | November 8, 2003 03:09 AM
You're a subhuman ID-10-T error.
Posted by: Me | November 9, 2003 10:34 AM
You really should sign your own name when flaming me in my weblog from the same IP you use for your dslr account.. I'd respect your opinion more then.
Posted by: kasia | November 9, 2003 02:33 PM
Oh, but it was such an articulate flame. LOL
Posted by: Ben Langhinrichs | November 10, 2003 01:07 PM