The Situation:

The world of the tech-blogging elite has been somewhat rocked of late by none other than scandal. With people throwing around words like “mysogeny,” “sexism ” and various words that shouldn’t be printed, all hell has broken lose. Has the reaction been an over reaction? We’ll see!

Calling for a bloggers’ code of conduct, on the other hand is pretty much a wasted effort.

Almost invariably, when people put themselves “out there” in the public eye, they are looking for recognition. In the case of tech-bloggers that recognition is going to come in two forms, acceptance and respect, and without doubt dissention and clique driven opposition.

In the Kathy Sierra situation, where Kathy feels she was threatened by a group of people who were making, in the words of some “mysogenistic” remarks and literally threatening her life, it seems to me there has been over-reaction. After reading the back and forth diatribes from many of the principal characters in this matter, the conclusion can be made that there is a big uproar over nothing.

Kathy puts herself out there on her site Creating Passionate Users. Her opinions are her own. I have enjoyed reading her articles. Not always agreeing with her theories, it has never entered my mind to insult her, publicly humiliate her, or call her names. Not once have I disagreed with her opining based whatsoever on her gender.

This isn’t always the case. There is definitely a group of people in the blogoshpere, as anywhere else in society who, will disagree with people based solely on the target’s gender, nationality, religion or even simply their side of an issue. Indeed there are msygonists out there. There are racists out there. The blogsphere is no more than an electronic extension of society where there are millions of opinions, agreements and disagreements. Unfortunately, the blogosphere is becoming segregationist. We have the “haves” and the “have nots.” The elite (”haves”) refer to their detractors as “trolls” (”have-nots”). Anyone who doesn’t agree with them or publicly calls them out can be taken down by the powerful and mighty. This doesn’t differ a whit to REAL WORLD society.

So, when I read that mysogeny runs wild on the net, I think to myself, “mysogeny runs wild in society as a whole. Or does it?” When Don Imus makes a comment that is construed by the media, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton to be racist and mysogenistic, he is a racist and a mysogenist. When Chris Rock makes the same type of comment he is funny!

When someone disagrees with or creates parody with Kathy Sierra as the target they are mysogenists. It is hilarious to me that the creator of the original image in the Kathy Sierra affair was a woman who was creating a picto-parody.

I don’t want this image to have the negative and frightning connotations it is now at risk of having. I want undies on the head to be happy and fun and silly and laugh-inducing. So… if you have some time this weekend, go put some undies on your head and take a picture. Put it on flickr. Put it on your blog. Put it wherever you can and address the issue of cyberbullying. Please tag it with “stopcyberbullying” and feel free to post a small version of your pic here in the comments. Source: Lasadh

After reading much of the brew-ha-ha between the principles in this matter, I have come to the conclusion that there was an attempt to hurt Kathy’s feelings. This agreeably is wrong, but not illegal. For whatever reason, and I don’t believe for a minute that it was out of fear or there would have been police search warrants instead of geeks doing web searches Kathy and Bert Bates (Kathy’s business partner) have gone to great lengths to make it appear that the “mysogeny, parodies, and off-colour jokes were threats on Kathy’s life. What they have accomplished is the creation of an even bigger non-issue, issue. If they really wanted it to go away, would Bert Bates keep entering into debate with Joey?

They successfully orchestrated the demise of meankids and unclebobism, both sites that made no bones about their dislike of Kathy or her opinions. Big deal. The bigger picture here is they woke up the elitist bloggers on both sides of the issue.

As I have said before: “There is a time to be tolerant and there is a time to draw lines. If you don’t draw those lines, bullies will be emboldened.” Michelle Malkin

Michelle Malkin, a respected and very outspoken blogger hits the nail on the head in her article regarding the Sierra affair. She points out that mysogeny, hatred and death threats are nothing new in the world of the blogging elite. It doesn’t behoove me to reiterate Michelle’s entire article here. Suffice it to say, she makes a sane and valuable argument.

While it isn’t right, attacks on the blogging elite, and female bloggers in general are going to continue. Society isn’t ready to play nice, in the real world or in the blogosphere. Kathy and Michelle are going to be targets based upon who they are, not solely based upon what the write, though Michelle’s articles definitely go to the heart of some very contentious matters. Other women are attacked based upon who their husbands are. Maryam Scoble, wife of tech-blogger Robert Scoble has been faced with attacks after blogging about her pregnancy. Would anyone have cared if it was Jane Doe, wife of a trucker in Ohio blogging about her pregnancy? Not in the least. It just proves if you are the elite, married to the elite, or can name the elite you are open to attack.

Maryam sums up this whole affair quite nicely. Although, when you are married to someone who is as public as Robert Scoble is, sometimes the stray dung will land on your shoes:

I don’t want my name, my family’s name, or my friends’ names dragged into a public fight. It’s hard to want that and still lead a public life. I just have to do my best not to get emotional when I am attacked. If you see me losing it on this blog, go ahead and call me on it. Don’t let me make a fool of myself I can’t control others’ actions, but I should always be able to control my reaction to them. That said, if it is my family or my friends who are being attacked, I will do my best to stand up for them. I can’t help it. I am very emotional when it comes to my family and friends. As long as I am not making them look bad, I am always willing to look the fool for them Source: Maryam Scoble

The Outcry:

This past week I spent countless hours listening to the folks at Fox News and Court TV living and reliving the Don Imus affair over and over and over again. Imus opened his big mouth, which in my opinion is the job of a “shock jock.” The net result of his remarks served to awaken the holier than thou anti-racist movement. Rob Hyndman, on his site wrote an article which started to glean some interesting responses. Rob closed it down. He closed it before I was able to interject my two cents worth. DAMN! Of course I emailed him.

The whole Don Imus affair irked me. Why? His comments served to wake up the Rev’s Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. One is stupid, the other can’t speak English. I’m not sure which is which. All I know is when they are awoken my head spins. I can’t afford a Rev’ Jesse “ebonics” dictionary, and Sharpton is the last person who should be spewing forth about people making stupid comments. Of course these guys fuel racism, for if there were no racism they would both be unemployed. Yet wake up they did, and then the spewing started.

No, this is not digression on my part. The analogy works. Imus woke up the anti-racist racist movement. Likewise Kathy Sierra, and her situation woke up the “Censor the Blogosphere” movement. Perhaps censor is too harsh a word, however, when I started reading the outcry from the likes of Tim O’Reilly, an internet technologies guru, the first thing that entered my mind was “here we go, not again but ad nauseum.”

So with all the hubub surrounding the Kathy Sierra scare, some of the elite bloggers are calling, yet again for a code of conduct. Personally, I am not certain exactly what a code of conduct is, whether or not such a thing would be enforceable, or just exactly the ramifications of not subscribing to one would be.

I was quoted in a BBC article a few days ago and a San Francisco Chronicle article on Thursday calling for a “Blogger’s Code of Conduct” in response to the firestorm that has arisen as a result of Kathy Sierra’s revelation that she’s been targeted by a series of increasingly violent and disturbing anonymous comments on her blog and on a series of weblogs that appeared to have been created for the purpose of celebrating cyber-bullying. (Tim loves being quoted This doesn’t necessarily make him right). Source: Tim O’Reilly

When O’Reilly first blogged about his plans to put such a code together, the masses were in an uproar. Indeed, one is hard-pressed to find any comments on his site where agreement with his idea is apparent. Indeed the fear-mongers are getting all paranoid of this possible infringement on the right to free speech. I don’t see it this way. What I do see is an attempt by a choice few at the top of the food chain to cajole others into playing nice. O’Reilly’s proposal includes, but it not limited to rules such as: (Bold Statements MINE)

1. We take responsibility for our own words and for the comments we allow on our blog.We are committed to the “Civility Enforced” standard: we will not post unacceptable content, and we’ll delete comments that contain it. (enforced by whom?)
2. We won’t say anything online that we wouldn’t say in person. (Why not? Some people express themselves better online)
3. We do not allow anonymous comments. (I will always allow anonymity..,. People may have an opinion that is contrary to that of their family, friends and employers. I want to hear the comments regardless!)

… and the list goes on
The first draft of the code of conduct reads like a kindegarten classroom rules list. Then came the update to the draft. BADGES! This is a must read. Promise when you read it you will not turn red in the face and die laughing. It includes such things as:

But because we want a period of review, we don’t want to finalize that code yet. I’ve put a draft below (and you’ll see it’s based closely on the BlogHer Community Guidelines that I linked to last week.) But we’re also working with wikia to put the draft through a wiki-based review process on blogging.wikia.com. (There’s an easy to remember shortcut link at http://blogging.wikia.com/wiki/BCC) Please feel free to join in and edit the wiki as well as encouraging others to do so. We’ll post the final version on bloggingcode.org, along with the html to display the badge and link to the code.

Reactions:

Calling for a bloggers’ code of conduct, on the other hand is pretty much a wasted effort. Several of the elite have pretty much shouted the idea down for various reasons. Indeed, scary though it may be, I actually agree with Scoble for a change:

I’m not able to currently sign this, either. First I allow anonymous comments. I do watch for hate speech, though, and delete that when it’s found (pretty rare, actually). Source: Scobleizer

The response to O’Reilly’s badge idea has been pretty much universal, and Bogartesque, not to mention the first thing I thought when I read it. “Badges? We don’t need no stinkin’ badges!”

Rob Hyndman, although I am not certain he is completely on board with the code of conduct idea, took me to task over my opinions of the code. He likens commenters on blogsites to visitors to one’s house. He asks whether it is acceptable to come into one’s house and say whatever they want to say. My response is an unadulterated, “YES!” My question is do I have the right to then throw them out when they insult, harrass or otherwise abuse me or mine? Again, my response is ABSOLUTELY, “YES!”

Rob Hyndman
April 9th, 2007 at 10:01

John, it has nothing to do with freedom of speech or the law, unless you agree that I can come into your home and say what I want. Anyone who has something vile and violent, or illegal, or legal and just plain despicable to say can say it on their own blog. I’m not denying them the freedom to speak by telling them they can’t say it on mine. Source: Rob Hyndman

Loren Feldman at 1938 Media has a pretty well defined opinion of the badges and code of conduct issue as a whole. In his video response to the Sierra affair he is very firm about his opinions of not only the code of conduct but Tim O’Reilly in general. I value Loren’s opinions very much. I am not in agreement with how he states them, but I learn from him nonetheless. Should I censor him because, while smart and interesting he isn’t always nice? Not on your life. Bring it on!

video

My Opinion:

People have been setting up unofficial codes of conduct on their sites since the beginning of the BBS craze in the late 80’s. Most sites have a legal disclaimer of sorts. In most of these some mention is made about deleting illegal or insulting material. Most serious bloggers even have disclaimers somewhere on their site, said disclaimers releasing their friends, family and employers from any responsibility for the blogger’s own opinions.

The need, then for a set of rules, dictated by the blogging elite escapes me. It shouldn’t be necessary for a group to tell me, you or anyone else what should or shouldn’t be allowed on your site. It is common sense that illegal activity should not be permitted. On the other hand, good taste cannot be mandated by anyone. It is impossible to legislate politeness.

It is my responsibility to ensure that no one is hurt by the activity on my site. Unfotunately, I cannot and will not censor commenters based upon the fearmongers out there.

Those who choose to put themselves in the line of fire should remember the old adage from kindergarten, “Sticks and stones etc….” You chose to put yourself out there. Get thicker skin or don’t tackle touchy issues.

O’Reilly’s plea for arguments or battles of words to be done privately is absurd. If you attack me in public, I am coming after you in public. Libel, defamation and slander are offenses committed in public, and I will defend myself in PUBLIC.

In my opinion, “play nice” is not two words. Play Nice should be the blogger’s/commenters’ basic tenet!! Remember, this is my home, to use Rob’s analogy, if you step out of line I will ask you to behave. Should you choose to not adhere to my wishes, I will show you the door. Don’t break the law in my house. I know how to contact law enforcement, and I will not protect you.

Unlike Kathy and Bert did, if you think you are being threatened let the police do their job. Don’t go out on your own and play geek investigative squad and quite possibly end up accusing the wrong people of wrongdoing. In my opinion, meankids and unclebobism should not have met the demise they did based upon what appears to be incomplete investigation. See what happens when the blogging elite are pissed off? They take down the guy who pissed them off.

If you don’t like what you read on my site, go away. If you like what you read on my site, tell your friends so they can come and join in the discussions. If you have a problem with what I write, or my opinions, bring it on but “play nice.” if you go after me publicly, expect that I will rebut you publicly. But, whatever you do, don’t wake up Tim O’Reilly, Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton on my account. Their intervention is not required. While respected and probably one of the most intelligent geeks in the blogosphere, Tim O’Reilly is not our moral moderator. That is OUR individual responsiblity.