tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post5402673248769466024..comments2024-03-18T09:58:09.828-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Another Blogger Leaves the SEED Blogs (ScienceBlogs.con)Larry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger62125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-4647842119593792072009-06-14T19:12:35.404-04:002009-06-14T19:12:35.404-04:00funny, funny, story.
This is how it may all end u...funny, funny, story.<br /><br />This is how it may all end up, from the early days of the interwebs :)<br /><br />http://www.jwz.org/gruntle/rbarip.html<br /><br />In the words of jwz (peace be unto him)<br /><br />"Perhaps its best to just never say anything that you wouldn't want published. "Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-42602162269824347752009-06-09T15:42:26.125-04:002009-06-09T15:42:26.125-04:00My 10c worth.My <a href="http://jmlynch.wordpress.com/2009/06/09/why-i-left-scienceblogs/" rel="nofollow">10c worth</a>.John Lynchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17845103991929911157noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-90019141748850630332009-06-06T15:38:24.893-04:002009-06-06T15:38:24.893-04:00kemibe:
Good to know. To clarify, what I meant wa...kemibe:<br />Good to know. To clarify, what I meant was something like everyone that left had contracts that expired near the same time*, didn't feel they could/wanted to keep up with the requisite posting volume, or got fed up with the MT system (which was the style component).<br /><br /><i>*If the contracts actually work that way</i>kezdrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06443548436693601339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-534584637260060392009-06-06T12:40:45.228-04:002009-06-06T12:40:45.228-04:00"I'd assumed something was up, but more o..."I'd assumed something was up, but more of a contract or style issue."<br /><br />People have speculated about this, and I want to emphasize again that this had nothing to do with us (or anyone) leaving. Seed was completely hands-off when it came to editorial oversight, as should be obvious from some of the inane, worthless, and thoroughly vulgar outbursts I produced in a three-year period.<br /><br />I can only say once again that our leaving at a time when several others were doing the same for reasons of their own was an utter coincidence. I know Doc B. hinted at some simmering resentment, but she's a good friend of mine and so I know this was a very small part of her own motivations.<br /><br />We had made up our minds well before learning of any of this supposed tumult between "Sciblings." When you have 80 blogs in a single domain, you're going to have "spikes" of people leaving in apparent droves merely as a result of a predictable outcropping of basic probability theory.<br /><br />I can't help but laugh at all of this, which I suppose is a good sign. And Sandwalk is a great blog (I have undue respect for Canadians for prurient reasons) so I don't mind Larry posting this at all.kemibehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14843360441074102811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-27378874943652936762009-06-05T20:12:51.441-04:002009-06-05T20:12:51.441-04:00I'd been wondering about this as well. One or ...I'd been wondering about this as well. One or two blogs leaving isn't so much of an issue, but when so many leave in such a short(ish) span of time, it does pique the curiosity. I'd assumed something was up, but more of a contract or style issue. Dr. Bushwell's post didn't surprise me however, and yeah it's rather easy to make some guesses as to those making such accusations.<br /><br />Whether or not such problems were a major cause of the departure or not, it's nice to get some light on it. Not to mention amusing..<br /><br />ERV/Jim: Which post are you speaking of about the pit bulls?kezdrohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06443548436693601339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-2492569883018405492009-06-05T18:35:25.492-04:002009-06-05T18:35:25.492-04:00"ETA: lol Im 'disgruntled'. Uh oh! Di..."ETA: lol Im 'disgruntled'. Uh oh! Disgruntled Oklahoman, everyone! Duck and cover!! ROFL!"<br /><br />Ah, but a Disgruntled Oklahoman who sleeps with a pitbull!<br /><br />Duck and cover?? Hell no....RUN RUN RUN!111!Gary Hurdhttp://stonesnbones.blogspot.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-83514613118845311512009-06-05T16:26:50.915-04:002009-06-05T16:26:50.915-04:00Larry, Larry, Larry...how could you overlook a fel...Larry, Larry, Larry...how could you overlook a fellow biochemist? Oh, wait. That's right. Shriveled ovaries = The Invisible Woman. <br /><br />As the abbreviation in pop cultural parlance goes, j/k. I hadn't been posting enough on Refuge v.2 (the SB incarnation) recently to be noticeable (as evidenced by ERV's remarks). <br /><br />Honestly, this is not that big of a deal. Really. If folks actually want to follow our beshatted blog, just change the bookmark.<br /><br />I'll also echo Wilkins' comment: SEED was nothing but professional. No major complaints there. As for the rest, well, it seems that if I blab, there will be irate folks hunting me down and demanding my first-born for a blood sacrifice. Come to think of it, if they can catch my 21 year old son, they're welcome to him. OK, j/k again. Maybe.Doc Bushwellhttp://chimprefuge.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-51017205945509704622009-06-05T16:06:33.641-04:002009-06-05T16:06:33.641-04:00JIm-- After searching my email, I did see that you...JIm-- After searching my email, I did see that you kinda sorta apologized. And, you and Kevin were both being dicks, but I forgave him more easily because he made me lol and I get over things quickly when I lol.<br /><br />So I do apologize for singling you out.<br /><br />*bow*<br /><br />Though I still think that post of yours was shit.ERVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02070086354372691880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-87964046222691986882009-06-05T15:55:19.729-04:002009-06-05T15:55:19.729-04:00Worst. Family reunion. EVER.Worst. Family reunion. EVER.ERVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02070086354372691880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-61663082272022287072009-06-05T15:53:30.091-04:002009-06-05T15:53:30.091-04:00"And when Jim decided not wanting all pit bul..."And when Jim decided not wanting all pit bulls dead was 'denialism'. Sad to see Kevin go, not Jim, oh well." -ERV<br /><br />I never said any such thing. I <b>never</b> stated that I wanted to see all pit bulls dead. Thanks for misrepresenting me. I have no desire to rehash that argument as you apparently will have no ethical problem with twisting my words again at some point in the future to fit your demonization of me.Jim Fiorehttp://www.chimprefuge.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-61505509506595013042009-06-05T14:35:07.352-04:002009-06-05T14:35:07.352-04:00I've been gruntled, but not heveled, for years...I've been gruntled, but not heveled, for years, most of the time.John S. Wilkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04417266986565803683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-78786074924517918112009-06-05T14:33:05.899-04:002009-06-05T14:33:05.899-04:00Why isn't "gruntled" a word? Screw i...Why isn't "gruntled" a word? Screw it, I'm just going to start using it as a synonym for "happy."kemibehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14843360441074102811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-49202603675393085372009-06-05T14:27:29.968-04:002009-06-05T14:27:29.968-04:00ETA: lol Im 'disgruntled'. Uh oh! Disgru...ETA: lol Im 'disgruntled'. Uh oh! Disgruntled Oklahoman, everyone! Duck and cover!! ROFL!ERVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02070086354372691880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-30000790135163512572009-06-05T14:00:19.365-04:002009-06-05T14:00:19.365-04:00"So the real question is the notion of brandi..."So the real question is the notion of branding aggregated content like this a winner in the world of media commerce."<br /><br />The real question is WHETHER the notion...<br /><br />Me lurn to grammer real gude somedayTom Levensonhttp://inversesquare.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-3224145780817036542009-06-05T13:58:24.281-04:002009-06-05T13:58:24.281-04:00Without making any guesses about anyone's moti...Without making any guesses about anyone's motive for changing web addresses, jobs, houses or whatever, I would note that turnover at some frequency is what one would expect. <br /><br />As I recall, some folks joined Science Blogs over the last year, for reasons that make perfect sense in terms of the interests involved, as I know from direct conversation. <br /><br />Others left -- at least in some cases --e.g. those that Discover snatched up -- because they were offered a venue that, I presume, both pays better and provides a more desirable perch for those bloggers.<br /><br />The interesting thing to me from a media observer's point of view is bigger than the question of bad behavior within a private setting amongst a group to which I do not belong (though I value my friends over there). <br /><br />That is: John is someone whose work I regard highly. I don't care where he chooses to post it. I'll check his stuff out when I have the breathing room to do so, and I'll find it by bookmarking "John Wilkins" and not Science Blogs. So the real question is the notion of branding aggregated content like this a winner in the world of media commerce. I have my doubts, but the Seed folks are making a game effort on that end.Tom Levensonhttp://inversesquare.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-63869567693424150292009-06-05T13:51:09.252-04:002009-06-05T13:51:09.252-04:00LOL wut?
Doc Bushwell:
... also want to be open a...LOL wut?<br /><br />Doc Bushwell:<br /><i>... also want to be open about what I say without fear of being castigated as a misogynist (a term often used inaccurately - try "sexist," folks), a tremendously ironic notion given that I harbor genuine ovaries (although going dormant) and had some pretty hair-raising experiences during my fairly long scientific career which allow me to speak from a solid platform of experience and credibility.</i><br /><br />Me: Remembers interactions with Bushwellies, like last summer when Kevin was accused of being sexist for sharing a harmless funny story (referring to Docs comments on the topic), and left back forum and even blagging for a while. And when Jim decided not wanting all pit bulls dead was 'denialism'. Sad to see Kevin go, not Jim, oh well.<br /><br />DrugMonkey: <i>It is cowardly in the extreme, Wilkins and ERV, to raise issues based solely on your opinion that have a tendency to indict other bloggers whom you know will not defend themselves because of the confidentiality policy.</i><br />What the hell are you talking about?<br /><br />Why wouldnt Larry blag about this? One, he almost joined SciBlogs, and two, dont you think EVERYONE is wondering what the fuck is going on for so many quality blaggers leaving SciBlogs allovasudden? Nono... Larry must have an insider, you see, theyre all out to get you... everyones out to get *you*.<br /><br />*flips off the attention whore, because thats what he wants*ERVhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02070086354372691880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-44881116618883220382009-06-05T13:40:06.562-04:002009-06-05T13:40:06.562-04:00Bob O'Hara says,
... there are enough blogger...<i>Bob O'Hara says,<br /><br />... there are enough bloggers at Sb that it's not going to be obvious who is involved.<br /><br />If you believe that then I'd like to talk to you about a bridge in New York that I have for sale.</i><br /><br />As a regular reader of several SciBlogs and occasional skimmer of several more, it certainly wasn't obvious to me who might be the nexus of the unpleasantness -- there are far too many others whom I never read, and it could be any of them. The best I might do is to speculate based on those who display a more political face on their public blogs -- except that on the whole, I don't really care. I have a longstanding policy of avoiding taking sides in other people's online disputes, without a damn good reason AND detailed knowledge -- and a forum I can't read isn't even on that radar.<br /><br />So IMO, Drugmonkey's complaint about implied indictments is silly (and counterproductive -- I certainly have a worse opinion of him now than I did before). Wilkins and the chimps didn't like it at SB; they went elsewhere; I update my RSS feeds; end of story.Eamon Knighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04262012749524758120noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-84757931119784990702009-06-05T13:12:47.449-04:002009-06-05T13:12:47.449-04:00As someone pointed out, the quoted material came f...As someone pointed out, the quoted material came from Doc Bushwell herself, not me, although I was the one who made the post.<br /><br />It's pointless to make a big deal out of this, but our defection had nothing to do with anything going on in the mysterious "back channel." The three of us simply don't have time to do a true science blog justice, and speaking for myself, having devolved into posting nothing but arrant bullshit and Xtranormal cartoons, I had come to feel like a non-contributor.<br /><br />Hey ERV, I met a very nice Staffordshire on a run recently. ;o)kemibehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14843360441074102811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-88714846419126299872009-06-04T23:39:17.147-04:002009-06-04T23:39:17.147-04:00Well, it wasn't obvious at the time.Well, it wasn't obvious at the time.John S. Wilkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04417266986565803683noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-73956242287061047142009-06-04T22:30:00.817-04:002009-06-04T22:30:00.817-04:00Bob O'Hara says,
... there are enough blogger...Bob O'Hara says,<br /><br /><i>... there are enough bloggers at Sb that it's not going to be obvious who is involved.</i><br><br>If you believe that then I'd like to talk to you about a bridge in New York that I have for sale.Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-92012314042779170362009-06-04T22:28:11.122-04:002009-06-04T22:28:11.122-04:00DrugMonkey says,
Oh and nice frame there Prof Mor...DrugMonkey says,<br /><br /><i>Oh and nice frame there Prof Moran, not like you are missing several alternatives for Munger there. Such as "correcting the record" rather than "taking sides"</i><br><br>Explain to me how you can "correct the record" without breaking the code of silence.<br /><br />And, just for the record, John Wilkins had absolutely nothing to do with creating this posting.Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-13711493919797474992009-06-04T16:27:02.819-04:002009-06-04T16:27:02.819-04:00Adding whut Bob?
Nobody forced Moran and Wilkins ...Adding whut Bob?<br /><br />Nobody forced Moran and Wilkins to cook up this thread....<br /><br /><br /><br />Oh and nice frame there Prof Moran, not like you are missing several alternatives for Munger there. Such as "correcting the record" rather than "taking sides"DrugMonkeynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-67879166357206699902009-06-04T16:13:41.361-04:002009-06-04T16:13:41.361-04:00Not everyone is so forthcoming on these issues, no...<i>Not everyone is so forthcoming on these issues, nor should they have to be.</i> <br />And there's no reason for them to be - John has given no indication about who was involved. He hasn't indicted anybody, and there are enough bloggers at Sb that it's not going to be obvious who is involved.<br /><br />Look, the best thing to do is to let John be. He's unhappy with what happened, but if you refrain from adding fuel to the fire, it'll blow over.Bob O'Harahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09924796617668384141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-1380195731093164962009-06-04T15:58:23.706-04:002009-06-04T15:58:23.706-04:00Dave Munger says,
It's also quite clear from ...Dave Munger says,<br /><br /><i>It's also quite clear from this thread that others don't respect those agreements, and instead have chosen to use their versions of the private discussions in the forums to advance their personal agendas.</i><br><br>Apparently a lot of "personal agendas" were advanced. As a result, several friends of mine, who I greatly respect, have left Scienceblogs. <br /><br />That's a very public statement, don't you think? <br /><br />You have three choices.<br /><br />1. You can say nothing at all.<br /><br />2. You can take sides by attacking the credibility and integrity of those who resigned. <br /><br />3. You can express regret that things got out of control.<br /><br />You have clearly rejected #1 and you seem to be taking sides by leaning toward #2. Is this correct?Larry Moranhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-80004691204013128782009-06-04T15:29:32.009-04:002009-06-04T15:29:32.009-04:00exactly my point Bob O'
"tendency to ind...exactly my point Bob O'<br /><br />"tendency to indict"<br /><br />You assume that just because I am commenting here that I must be in Wilkins "some of the bloggers" set. <br /><br />I'm generally pretty out front on my blog and in relevant other threads with my positions and even tone, albeit perhaps not every incident emerges. Many of the major ones have. <br /><br />Not everyone is so forthcoming on these issues, nor should they have to be. It is "naive" as Moran put it, to pretend that some of the bloggers that are restrained in public will not be assumed based on Wilkins' accusations to be "accusing everyone of being misogynistic and racist in the back forums". <br /><br />This is quite clearly unethical behavior, particularly given his admission that "details are confidential".Drugmonkeyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05414353815962084981noreply@blogger.com