Tonight, I was perplexed about a comment claiming to be from DaveWiner - though it could just as easily be from an impostor - on the final installment of my extended XmlRpc ramblings:

Pretty arrogant if you ask me. What has LM Orchard contributed to the world? Add more value, less bluster and bullshit.
I suppose I should have stopped while I was ahead, refraining from rambling on about my case study to begin with, let alone responding to this comment. But, nonetheless I was bothered tonight, and responded:
Your comment confuses me.

I've written that your work has helped me and given me food for thought - despite other disagreements I may have with you. And I've written that a tool of yours I've come to consider imperfect has, nonetheless, worked perfectly for me. These things remind me that I don't know it all and have much to learn and hash out. If this is bluster and bullshit, I certainly didn't intend it as such.

As for my contributions and value - I'd like to think I'm doing something right in this field, given that I still have a well-paying job and a non-zero readership of my weblog.

I was trying to give a compliment and a positive testimonial, while addressing some of the standard criticisms I'd seen before. And I wanted to back it up with my own experiences while tempering it with my admitted inexperience.

But, after having had a decent dinner and a measure of time watching soap operas with my girlfriend on the couch, I've decided that this is what tweaks me about the comment: What's a weblog for, if it doesn't make room for arrogant bluster and bullshit? My assumption in writing here is that I know enough or can figure enough out to write things valuable to someone - or at least, if I'm wrong, I can still provide myself as a foil of ignorance to someone else's enlightenment.

Attacking the process, or the village idiot himself, is not constructive.

Hope that helps. Have a nice day. Please drive through.


Archived Comments

  • I say write what you want, its YOUR weblog :)
  • I'm quite certain you can speak for and defend yourself, Les, as you've amptly demonstrated. That said, I feel compelled to add to the large and growing crowd of individuals to loudly and publicly proclaim that Dave Winer is so clearly an obnoxious, pompous windbag without a grain of humility or self-control to his credit. Thus, despite his technical/product accomplishments (themselves increasingly resembling a one-hit wonder), I would encourage you to adjust your valuation of his opinion to zero. There. I feel much better.
  • Your weblog.. your content.. you should write what you will.. Of course by doing so and allowing un-moderated comments you're also inviting feedback that will not always be positive.. or wanted.. or warranted.. Such is life.. In the meantime, give your girlfriend a hug and be glad she's not Dave :)
  • I'd just ignore his opinion. While he has undoubtedly contributed a few good things his web site largely seems to consist of saying how good things he has invented are, and how anything else is not only wrong but stupid. I find the code and ideas here to be much more interesting.
  • Well, if it counts for anything, your contributions are valuable to me - both code (AmphetaOutlines just rocks) and ideas. Keep going, and keep hacking.
  • (Disclaimer: I'm not Dave.) What makes the people commenting here think the post from "Dave Winer" was from anyone named Dave Winer, much less the person we all think of when we hear the words "Dave Winer"? It sounded to me like someone impersonating Dave (specifically in the use of "LM Orchard" instead of "you", and in using several phrases that sounded similar to Dave's catch phrases). And besides, any opinion is useful, if only as a thing to compare yourself against.
  • I don't know anything about anyone purporting to be Dave Winer,(but I am now tempted to find out!) such is the beauty of the weblog. AmphetaOutlines certainly does it for me, keep up the good work, thanks for the code and the thoughts, sorry I didn't say 'thanks' before!
  • Good point about the possible impersonation of Dave - I'd thought the same thing, but hadn't written that very clearly. I just edited the post to make that point stronger.
  • This leads to a whole discussion of signing comments..somewhere recently I saw talk of an optional PGP signature block for authentication. Ironically enough, Userland has a bug in their commenting system.