Comments on: Snarking at the Blogwagon

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 23:06:46 +0000

Oh, Dave, after I posted my comment, I worried that you might think it was a jab at your post-drafting skills. It was not – it was a jab at the fact that I am clearly not in Kansas anymore. As if you were unclear about that matter after my repeated exhibits of my inability to master the technical aspects of blogging, such as trackbacks. . . .

Thank you for explaining how you meant parasitism in this context! I had never even THOUGHT about stealing/snarking as a time- and effort-saving blogging tool. I learn something valuable every day!

By: Dave Hoffman

Dave Hoffman — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:52:08 +0000

Elizabeth, your difficulties no doubt reflect poorly on my weakly composed post. My idea of parasitism, in the blog context, is a post that looks at someone else’s original work with a sarcastic eye, without acknowledging the work that went into producing the primary content. You know, what we law professors do to judges all the time.

By: Elizabeth

Elizabeth — Tue, 20 Jun 2006 21:15:45 +0000

Does it reflect poorly on me that I had to read this post twice?

Should I be ashamed that I sit here wondering if my posts are “sometimes funny, slashing and personal, but a wee bit parasitic”?

Should I be more ashamed that I had never even *contemplated* that my posts might be “a wee bit parasitic”?

Perhaps I should not admit, then, that I do not know what a parasitic post reads like. . . .