And to go back to moderation … the one time I do feel it’s warranted is when comments refer to people by name and contain inaccurate or misleading and negative info. Ideally, I’d like to see the blog owner add something to the comment to question or correct the info (note I didn’t say delete, necessarily). However, some platforms (e.g. Blogger) don’t allow this.

I don’t know anyone on the net that much in love with themselves. :)

As for my travelling friend, I forgot to mention another purpose her blog serves. Since her family and social acquaintances comment freely on her blog and she replies, this is essentially a (cheap) way for her to stay in touch, in both the communicative and psychological sense. She makes her blog private because she doesn't want the crazies out there viewing her journey and possibly stalking her IRL.

Which is what, in my mind, distinguishes more personal blogs from more public blogs which don't mind and in some cases, like, attracting the crazies.

Well, it’s the crazies that keep most bloggers from posting anything truly personal on their blogs. Some people don’t even use their real names. So really, it doesn’t matter if a blog is set up to be private or not. It’s what you actually post that counts. The very popular Dooce, for instance, doesn’t have her actual residential address on her contact page. She got herself a separate mailing address for all those crazies sending her dead rats and dirty underwear. All this, after she got fired for her blog. If any blogger had good reason to go private, it would be her. But she doesn’t.

For me, setting up my blog so that it was private would actually be a hindrance in keeping touch with my family, as many of them are not very technically oriented. For a long time, my mom couldn’t even figure out why the front page of the blog kept changing … and where did that post about crocheting her hats go? If I made her have to put in a username and password just to view my site, she would never know that I was alive and posting.

As for my travelling friend, I forgot to mention another purpose her blog serves. Since her family and social acquaintances comment freely on her blog and she replies, this is essentially a (cheap) way for her to stay in touch, in both the communicative and psychological sense. She makes her blog private because she doesn’t want the crazies out there viewing her journey and possibly stalking her IRL.

Which is what, in my mind, distinguishes more personal blogs from more public blogs which don’t mind and in some cases, like, attracting the crazies.

As for moderating I actually thought the whole 600+ thread on SBTB was handled well by the site owners. It was Candy’s post which ignited it and Candy shared her opinions frankly throughout. No issues there.

I’m gonna flip between a couple of your comments.

…the narcissistic *would* and *are* drawn to the blogging medium.

That makes sense. As the medium with the fewest barriers to entry–anybody can put up a web page, blog, youtube vid, etc.—the Web attracts all kinds, and likely the largest percentage of narcissists over other forms of media.

If you’re using the term in the colloquial sense, though, we’re all narcissists because we all—regardless of who blogs a topic and who responds to it–post on the Web. Or in RL, I assume none of us is sitting in a dark corner too humble to be visible to friends and family. And, the authors! How hefty are their ovaries to believe they’ve got a story worth publishing, much less that readers should plunk done $$ to read! Even your travelling friend—thinking she’s so important that only an exclusive group of her friends are allowed to “witness” her adventures *g*? But you sanction her use because she’s sharing something with you are that you enjoy. That’s no more or less valuable a purpose than these blogs serve. The difference is in tone, degree but the value of either is no less because of that.

So I think, in the context of the topic, unless you’re talking about the actual diagnosable disorder of narcissicm, the question of ego goes nowhere, particularly considering that whatever narcissism there is certainly isn’t preventing you, me, or anyone else from voicing sometimes unbelievably rude disagreement with the blog owners. To me, that’s what’s important. Disagreement–even or maybe especially rude disagreement–wins against over-modding any day.

My essential take on “high-profile� blogger behavior is this: It is a bit disingenuous of them to cry, oh boo-hoo, woe is me, why won't people just play nicely in my sandbox, when the very sandbox they've set up encourages the rugrats, who for the most part *do* play nicely, to sometimes throw sand in each other's faces.

Agreed. This is the eternal free speech vs. censorship debate writ small. Lively, free-wheeling exchange of ideas with little intervention=sometimes things get nasty. If some don’t like the raucous and often blunt tone, well, there are other choices out there. Myself, I enjoy the diversity and wit of the exchanges. I like things put out there to wrangle and wrestle with, over preachings about the Responsibility of the Moderator. A false sense of moral superiority is more heinous to me than a perceived lack of modding.

April summed it up best: Blogging is just another medium. And it’s no more or less rife with narcissists, of whatever degree, than any other medium. People are simply social creatures with a built-in need to communicate.

I agree, blogging can indeed be like work. But for authors still struggling for some shred of name recognition–and in this overpacked genre, that ain’t no piddling task–it’s necessary. Far as I’m concerned, the best way to approach it is to have some fun with it and, most important, try to connect on some personal level with readers.

“An individual with narcissistic personality disorder exhibits extreme self-importance, inability to empathize with others and heightened sensitivity to criticism. Self-involvement and lack of empathy characterize this personality disorder.

People with narcissistic personality disorder are frequently perfectionists and need to be the center of attention, receiving affection and admiration, and controlling the situation. To get the attention he craves, he may try to create crises that return the focus to him. Like patients with antisocial personality disorder, this person places entitlement issues at the fore. He feels that the world owes him, regardless of whether he makes a contribution.”

Certainly not ALL bloggers would qualify as narcissistic but reading that definition from above, it strikes me that yes, the narcissistic *would* and *are* drawn to the blogging medium.

We worry so much that we’ve “hurt” someone or stepped on someone’s “feelings” when in fact people just can’t deal with an opposing opinion anymore.

You don’t have to hate the person. Just the opinion.

Why can’t it simply be viewed that many of them just want to share? Or to communicate with others?

I was on the net pre-Blogger days. Many of the bloggers I read didn’t even write much. They simply posted links to other sites. It was really just “web logging” as the original definition implies — where they would log the links on the web that they thought interesting. For readers, it was handy because some people had more knowledge of the web, so you were often introduced to new things.

Still others, like Jeffrey Zeldman, would blog about certain strides in web standards, about new ways to design a site, et cetera. It was mostly as a service to other web designers … because at the time, only web professionals really frequented the net, and he was considered at the forefront of the industry. When he DID starting writing about himself (I think the first time was mostly to vent), he had such reader response to it (mostly via e-mail), as well as a demand for more, that he started doing it regularly. It made him human and approachable to many of his readers.

When comments and karma ratings became a standard feature on many content management systems, bloggers realized that they could post more of what people wanted and less of what they didn’t want … because suddenly, they had feedback! They could cater better to those they served. Readers want more links to articles about Cascading StyleSheets? OK, we’ll post more of them then.

What exactly is narcissistic about that?

I’ll grant that the notion of blogging is a little different these days. Most people who start up a blog now don’t really do so to edify anyone or to share random web links. I guess many of them have discovered what blogs have been able to accomplish for its pioneers. But there are so many different reasons people blog now that you really can’t generalize it all to narcissistic behavior.

Call any one of us bloggers narcissistic on an individual basis if you like, but not the entire group of us in a generalization. It isn’t fair to many bloggers out there.

And the fact is … many of the old bloggers I used to read have actually shut off their comments after a while. As their popularity grew, they were getting far too many comments, and since their original purpose was either to vent anonymously or to publicly share a new way of designing a site, or what have you, and not to have a lively discussion, the reader response actually got in the way. And many of those who had tons and tons of traffic? They shut down after a while because they couldn’t pay for all the bandwidth. They had never intended their blogs to be anything more than what it was.

Blogging is a medium. That’s all it is. The bloggers behind them are as varied as the people you meet on the street, and their blogs typically reflect that.

Given that I like discussion, I’m mostly for the bloggers participating and against moderating. I’ve seen forums and blogs where one commenter can stifle discussion and drive away others. It’s a pity, but in most cases I’ve found that preventing the occasional bad behavior isn’t worth imposing rules on everyone else.

There are exceptions–there are plenty of crazies on the internet who can force a site into a harder stance on moderating.

Some of the moderating style should depend on how the site presents itself. If the site’s all about one person being opinionated, I wouldn’t be surprised by an equally strong moderating style–if I choose to comment there, I can’t really take offense at being moderated. However, if the site claims to encourage open debate, I pay a lot more attention to their moderating style.

There’s certainly an element of narcissism. Obviously so in personal blogs, and even blogs that have an external focus can take on a narcissistic tone. But one could argue that simply participating in conversation is in part narcissistic.

Some of my reasons for starting a blog:

• It’s a kind of writing I don’t do elsewhere.
• I like discussing things.
• Some of the blogs I comment on have real “communities”. In that setting, it seems only fair to put some of my thoughts out there so anyone who cares can get a sense of where I’m coming from.
• It gives me a nice place to argue from. I can say “Go here for details” instead of hijacking someone else’s blog with my idea.
• I grouse about both blogs and print putting a sharp divide between “genre” and “literary” fiction. I read both; I’d like to discuss both. So I should try it and see if there’s something inherently difficult about it.
• I feel free to set my own pace. I don’t try to post frequently to provide constant diversions for my “readership”. Er, such as it is. (No offense, y’all y’oneortwo. You’re small quantity but high quality.)
Ironically, I’m a little afraid of high traffic. I enjoy getting comments and discussing topics, but I’m amazed that the Ja(y)n*s manage to have lives, read books, and maintain a site this active!

I think that starting a blog is inherently narcissistic behavior. I know that when I began DA a year and a half ago, it was because I wanted to be heard and I wanted to talk about issues in the romance industry that interested me.

Thank you, Jane, for saying that. There’s nothing wrong with being narcissitic or a narcissist. Just admit it. I’m probably one too cuz I can’t seem to shut up on message boards for the past 3 months or so. I’m just too lazy to start my own blog. ;)

I think that one reason that a blog owner might not participate to a large degree in the comment thread is a) of skewing the conversation and b) the time involved. I.e., it takes a long time to create an opinion piece, a review or whatnot and by the time that the discussion is open for comments, the blog article author has kind of “shot her wad”.

But I’d take them off the wrestle.

As a poster, I like to read opinions and comments on topics that hold some interest for me. If I have an opinion, I like to add mine. I enjoy the interaction, the different takes on the same topics.

I have no desire to blog myself–pretty sure it would feel like work, and I get paid when I work. Plus I don’t have enough to say about any particular thing on a regular basis. But I’m glad others blog, so I can benefit from it.

Narcissistic behavior? Shit, yeah, to one degree or another. There’s not much we do that can’t be thus categorized, Nora’s choice of shoes included. (Please, just don’t throw one at me!)

Blog owners actively court internet traffic. They post entries *in order to* garner attention and generate commentary.

That’s not exactly why I blog. Yeah, it’s good for promo and all, but I mainly do it as a writing exercise. Getting into the habit of some sort of daily writing helps give me more discipline in my work-writing. Something that PBW suggested and it has helped.

More, blogging can be fun. I don’t know that I necessarily ‘court’ traffic. I don’t post anything controversial because I don’t have the time to keep up with it and still write, plus I’m too lazy to deal with it. I don’t really promote my blog much either.

There are different reasons to blog~not everybody cares all that much about garnering attention. Yeah, I like commentary but even if I didn’t get it, I’d keep on doing it. I’ve gotten to like it.

Um, then why don't bloggers confine themselves to scribbling away in their diaries or whatever for their eyes only, then, if all they want is an outlet for their ideas/opinions. They want people to *respond* to their ideas/opinions.

Kat responded pretty much along the same vein as I would have. I’ve been journaling since I was nine or ten and “blogging” since before the word “blog” was coined, and actually, I started off with the comments feature turned off, turning it on only because many of my readers asked me to.

I don’t blog for traffic, though the traffic’s nice sometimes. I blog because it’s a handy place to post my creative play, and if my friends and family want to know what’s new with me, I never have to repeat myself; I simply send them a link to my latest post.

And it’s true that you can’t always predict what will get people to respond. The most comments I ever got (over 60) was on a throwaway post about my hair, while some of what I thought were my best work got no comments at all. Ah, blogging. No rhyme nor reason.

And what do posters want?

Speaking for this poster only, I want to engage other people in online *conversations* on topics of mutual interest, whether these people share my viewpoint or not. Tone can be warm, civil, sarcastic, humorous, condescending, whatever. I don’t really care. The whole point of being online is to interact with others, no? Which is a two-way street. So that includes, IMO, a blog owner participating in her own comment thread on a topic she has deemed worthy enough to post an entry about.

My essential take on “high-profile” blogger behavior is this: It is a bit disingenuous of them to cry, oh boo-hoo, woe is me, why won’t people just play nicely in my sandbox, when the very sandbox they’ve set up encourages the rugrats, who for the most part *do* play nicely, to sometimes throw sand in each other’s faces.

My current favorite blog to read is one that a real life friend is maintaining while she is essentially traveling, solo, around the world. We get to keep up with her adventures and photos and more importantly, know that she is alive and doing well. It is by invite-only and serves a *purpose.*