My good friend Dan Collins thinks I went to eleven today over Stacy and Donald. In point of fact, I reigned it in. I deflected my true anger and resentment into the meme about Cassandra and such, partly as it also gave me a chance to acknowledge some old and dear friends. And I didn't much care for seeing Cassandra's name being bandied about by two people who have all but lost any respect I ever had for them. Really, Dan, you don't have an issue with two fellows out here playing ping pong with a solid conservative woman's name on their blog? Well, that's another matter, but I certainly do. I don't' find them, or it funny at all. Why you said nothing of that troubles me a little, because I know you to be a decent sort. Won't these two adolescent morons ever buy a clue, or lighten up? They won't if they aren't told about it, that's for sure. So I told them about it in precisely the manner I chose to do it. Too bad. As for your take on it, that isn't really a big concern, or anything that impacts my friendship with you, I hope.
But this entire affair is greatly misunderstood, as it was by Donald at the start. My original group email on this had very little to do with him, or the video at all and everything to do with Stacy McCain and his game of rules. And that's my fault for not being as clear as I could, so allow me to set the record straight. It isn't Dan Collin's fault he is misunderstanding all this. It's mine.
Today, he hauls off on Donald Douglas and Stacy McCain in rather vehement fashion, over the whole Erin Andrews peephole video business and its blogospheric sequelae, and apart from this notice, I'm not going to get involved. As I wrote to Donald at the time, I wouldn't have written about it, personally. I can understand how people could consider publicizing such an invasion of privacy as being an accessory to the crime of obtaining it, particularly when one does so for personal gain.
How can I state this clearly? I don't give a good goshdamn about the Erin Andrews video. No, I wouldn't have posted it. Others did. I don't think it reflects well on them. But, beyond that, I couldn't care less.
What concerns me, as a reputable blogger, is the link rigging game being perpetrated here, instigated by Stacy as it was. Do you people really not understand how Wikio, Technorati and most other link rating services actually work? And what they mean? I can only assume you do, or you wouldn't be playing it. But, let's go through it.
They rate blogs on the number of inbound links. I mean, that is the deceptive, dishonest and manipulative game he has you all playing, right? So, what does that mean?
Traditionally, a blogger acquires links - and subsequent link ratings - by writing decent content that is picked up by other blogs. The better a blogger, the more links go to their count. Get my drift? Because it does matter, whether you think it does, or not. Believe me, it does.
So, what happens, given your little game? Well, decent bloggers - just like many of you, I might add - toil away, their little fingers typing up post after post. And if they are lucky AND good - they attract links. And their credibility goes up among various rating services due to the solid content they produce.
But someone like Stacy invariably comes along desperate for recognition as a blogger, but lacking any restraint, apparently, or patience though he has great talent, to be frank - so he thinks he's devised a great new scam to fool the system. And to some extent, he has. He's far from the first. This has been going on in one fashion, or another, for years.
Unfortunately, many well deserved links that many a good blogger acquires can get wiped away by what amounts to self-serving spam posts by a group of bloggers getting themselves off by pumping up one another's rankings. So, what is it you want, Dan? You people want me, someone who has never played such games but has a decent ranking based upon his work, to respect you, somehow? To laugh at a deceptive and dishonest move to game the system to benefit you, while hurting others?
Sorry, I don't roll that way. You're trashing up the playing field with BS that's garbage, as far as I'm concerned. And while you're link ratings might go up - though Stacy's will and have the most due his status as ringleader - sorry, you're making yourselves worthless in my view - a sideshow, a veritable circus of the blogosphere. And it hurts blogging as a whole.
Playing such games can lift almost anyone up to where they get noticed, good blogger, or not. And in too many cases, people unfamiliar with blogs will click in on a search, or wikio link, only to find out the blogger isn't all that. So, they figure, if this is the best they got according to these rankings, why bother with the damned things? They're trash.
And all because you're rigging a system, exploiting it for your own gain and diminishing the value of good work by others in the process. And none of you either have the knowledge to know, or conscience to own up to the BS that you're pulling. And ignorance is no excuse in my book.
And the scammers most certainly deserve to be called out on it in no uncertain terms, which is precisely what I'm doing here - just so we're clear. And as for the Erin Andrews video? Jaysus. Who really gives that big a damn in the end? I certainly don't and never did.
