So, James Meeley has been recently linked both by Kalinara on Blog@Newsarama's Meanwhile column (something I look forward to every week) and When Fangirls Attack! and he's thrown something of a fit in the comments sections both times. In both cases, he's asked the site to "cease and desist" linking to his page, because "he doesn't need the help" getting an audience. Naturally, because of Blogger's system, every time he comments about getting rid of the link, his name becomes a link to his profile, and thus back to his blog. Perhaps he should send a "cease and desist" letter to Blogger, so that they stop linking to his blog through his profile, and through that pesky "next blog" link.
I'm not sure what the funniest part of all this is. It could be that this guy not only thinks that people linking to him is to help give him an audience, but that he has some say in whether or not such linkage occurs. It could be that he thinks using legal language like "cease and desist" holds some kind of intimidation power on these here Internets. It could be that he's so wrapped up in his metaphor of "Internet=Real place" that he thinks the rules of the Internet conform to the rules of the outer world. It could be that a man who claims to be 32 is throwing a hissy-fit on two of the most prominent comic blogs around.
Or it could be, as Mike Sterling noted, that he's totally "unclear on the concept of 'the internet.'"
In any case, I find it freakin' hilarious.
Also, the undersigned (heretofore referred to as "I"), in pursuance with the general rules of Internet etiquitte, hereby issue to the comic blogohedron (including but not limited to weblogs, websites, and online journals involving topics of comic books, manga, comic-based movies, manga-based movies, and other media forms of the characters and plotlines involved in such sources) an order to cease and desist all refusal to link to The Fortress of Soliloquy on the basis of race, creed, gender, sexual orientation, or content. Failure to link to The Fortress of Soliloquy shall constitute a breach of contract, and may result in the loss or suspension of said offender's Comics Blogging License, the loss of the offender's blog security deposit, eviction from the Comics Blogohedron, and/or fines not to exceed $5,200.00. The blogohedron is hereby given seven (7) days to comply with this order, starting from the date on which this message is received. By reading the previous sentence, the reader has agreed to the conditions of this order, and has forfeited all rights to refer to the aforementioned The Fortress of Soliloquy or its employee(s) as "petulant," "immature," "fat," etc.
The Fortress of Soliloquy assumes no responsibility for injuries sustained in accordance with the normal actions of reading or commenting on this post, or subsequent to said actions, nor does it assume responsibility for any accusations that the above joke is "too long," "tedious," "not funny," etc.
Actually, I thought the above mentioned post by The Undersigned to be freaking hilarious.
I really don't understand a faction of folks online who think people need permission from a linkee/site in order to link to them. As if in the real world, I would need permission from the author of a book to recommend it to my friends. Or from a politician to tell anyone who will listen that said politician is an ass.
The thing that doesn't make sense to me is that even if you're linked to, it doesn't mean that the people will follow the link, or that they'll decide that your blog meets their interests, and become regular commenters/readers.
Of course, I loved finding out I was getting mentions in the Meanwhile column, so maybe I'm just coming at this from a different angle.
shellys: I can't imagine how long research papers would take if you had to contact and get permission from the authors of each and every article before you cited them. Thanks for reassuring me about my sense of humor.
calvinpitt: I thought the same thing. Just as it's a person's choice whether or not to click the link, it's his choice whether or not to obsessively check SiteMeter or whatever to find out where his hits are coming from. The only reason he knows people are coming to him through WFA, if they even are, is if he's actively looking for it, or if he's actively watching WFA.
But yeah, I love getting linked in Meanwhile. It's like being mildly famous.
Why is this so hard to grasp for people? Is this the result of the lowered educations standards in the US?
No, but your terrible grammar and spelling are.
The issue isn't about a link. It's about respect.
Please allow me to quote the greatest non-comic-book movie ever, when I say "you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."
Respect is a mutual thing. If you show none, you will receive none. If you come onto someone else's blog and expect them to bow to your whims, then you are displaying a lack of respect. You shouldn't be surprised when such a lack of respect is repaid.
Look, if every other blogger is a "link whore" who doesn't care who and where they are linked, that's fine. But there's nothing metally wrong with someone who does mind that.
I would disagree. Anyone, anywhere, could link to anyone, anywhere, and unless you went a-searching for it, you'd never know. I could be linked on every neo-Nazi page on the web. Fine, that's their prerogative. I'm not going to get worked up over it, because it doesn't affect me in the slightest. If you think that linking to you against your wishes is somehow akin to rape (as your "whore" label would suggest), then yes, you are seriously overreacting.
As has been noted, the ones who linked me have professed hatred from me.
Such hatred, in fact, that they allow you to keep posting on their blog, without deleting your posts or attacking you or anything. My, the vitriol expressed by Ragnell and Kalinara knows no bounds.
That's fine. I really don't care what they think of me.
Then why do you care whether or not they link to you?
They have the right to feel how they want. But why go to a place where you know that person you hate will be? Not just a chance, but you KNOW they will be there.
Again, Jim, a blog is not a place. No one is ever "there." And whether or not I hate Stephen Hawking, I'd still link to his blog if I were doing a directory of Physicists' websites.
The person she professes to hate.
No, the person you profess she professes to hate. Ragnell hasn't professed any hatred in this whole situation. You're the only one slinging the h-word around.
Why not just leave immediately? Why poke around where you know you aren't welcome.
Because even though she doesn't like you, she's interested in fair-mindedness and completeness more than petty Internet squabbles.
Tell me, Tom, do you go to places you aren't welcome at?
I'm welcome most places. It comes with not acting like a jackass.
Do you hang around people you hate?
Plus, I try my best not to hate. It makes life a whole lot easier.
They made it obvious they don't want me around them. I respect that. Even though I hate the, just as they hate me, I respect their right to tell me to stay away where I'm not welcome or wanted. But they do not feel obliged to do the same. Even though I've made it clear they aren't welcome.
You do realize that linking to someone's website is not the same as being on that website, correct? When I look at the link to your site on WFA, I'm not looking at your site. I'm looking at Kalinara and Ragnell's site, which links to your site. This isn't a matter of you wanting them to stay away; posting a link to a site does not equate to visiting that site. What you want is for them to remove the link from their site. This has nothing to do with your site at all. You're telling them that they're not welcome on their site.
And why? Because they don't want to "lose my unique voice" at WFA, so they can seem to cover all viewpoints? Too bad. That's not good enough.
You think that's not good enough? Too bad. When you run "When Fangirls Attack," then you can dictate what does and doesn't get linked. Until then, it doesn't matter whether or not you think something is "good enough," it's not your site, ergo, it's not your decision.
But if I tell you I don't want you linking me, respect my request. Just as I'd do the same for you, if you asked me not to link you.
The thing is, James, they did respect your request. You requested that they remove the link from their blog. They respected that request by responding politely, leaving your request in the comments, and directing you to the official linking policy. Now it's up to you to respect their answer to that request. You have this inflated sense of entitlement, as if just because you request something, just because you say "please," you should get it. I hate to think how one could get to be 32 years old without realizing that the world doesn't work that way, and that you don't always get what you request. When your request is denied, you say "thanks anyway," move on, and forget about it. You don't throw a temper tantrum like a toddler.
I don't want to use security measures to keep out the few people I don't want around me. Not only because most of said measures tend to block out almost everyone (which I don't want), but because I shouldn't have to. The people (and they know who they are) who aren't welcome should have the resepct to stay away (especially since they want me to stay away from them).
If they want you to stay away from them so badly, then why are your comments still on the thread? Why haven't they come in and said "hey, go away"? The bottom line is that you don't get to decide what they put on their site. If they want to put "James Meeley is a doo-doo head," that's their right. If they want to link that phrase to your site, that's also their right. It's their blog to do with as they please. You may not like it, but there's nothing you can do about it. You could have moved on and felt like you were being the bigger person, but instead you turned it into a colossal hissyfit.
So, I stay away. Why can't I get the same courtesy?
Because you can't show the same courtesy. Nowhere have they asked you to change the content of your blog, yet you keep demanding that they change the content of theirs.
Of course, I'd like to know how you found out they linked to you withouut "going where you weren't wanted."
Their agenda for WEA means less than nothing to me.
And what do you think your immature ravings mean to the WFA folks? Again, you expect them to respect your site's rules ('if you're Ragnell or Kalinara, stay away'), but then you say that their site's rules mean "less than nothing" to you. Do you see the double-standard?
But linking when I have expressly stated I don't want that from them, isn't right. And "well that's the Internet" doesn't make it so.
No, what isn't right is for a grown man to get all worked up over a freaking hyperlink. What isn't right is for one person to shout "rights" and "freedom" and "my house, my rules" and "respect," then traipse into someone else's 'house' (again borrowing your flawed metaphor), telling them that their rules mean "less than nothing" to him, insulting them and their guests, and telling them what they can and cannot post on their private property. Just because they didn't give you the answer you wanted for your request doesn't mean they didn't do the "right" thing. It just means that they didn't do what you wanted them to do. You are not entitled to control the content of WFA, stop acting like you are. If you want them to respect your rules and stay away, respect their rules and deal with being linked by them.
Your comedy impresses me. I hereby award you the coveted Doctor Polaris "Seal of Excellence in a Non-Magentism Related Field." Display it with pride.
This whole foofaraw has indeed been vastly entertaining. Apparently James thinks that by yelling, and then yelling louder, he is going to get what he wants. What is he, five? Sheesh! I'm waiting for him to start holding his breath.
Damnation. I stay off the nerdosphere for a couple weeks and I miss a total meltdown. That'll teach me.
Post a Comment