Of course a "code of conduct" is a way for the more powerful bloggers to start "taming the Internet frontier," as it were - to their own advantage.
It will always be the instinct of those in powerful positions to seek to keep frozen the natural evolution of conversation, under the guise of "law and order," of course.
Elisa Camahort
· 2 years ago
Thank you for your post, and for noting the same difference we at BlogHer see between setting transparent guidelines for community participation within our own community vs. trying to come up with a code for the entire blogosphere to theoretically follow or not.
Donna- I don't know if I see some kind of plot or evil intent on the part of "powerful bloggers", but I do agree that the free exchange of ideas absolutely must be protected. Those who are against net neutrality, for example, are a much larger risk than A-list bloggers I think.
Elisa- I do think that it's an important distinction. Sites like Blogher, that publish a great deal of content from a variety of viewpoints, need a code of conduct, but you're not asking that your contributers adhere to the same code on their personal blogs. I'm not sure even Tim O'Reilly sees the difference, though!
All Comments
It will always be the instinct of those in powerful positions to seek to keep frozen the natural evolution of conversation, under the guise of "law and order," of course.
That distinction was not drawn very clearly in the article, so I'm grateful you mention it. you can see more of our thoughts on that distinction at my blog: http://workerbeesblog.blogspot.com/2007/04/theo... , and from Lisa on a BlogHer post (in the comments): http://blogher.org/node/17887#comment-17365
Elisa- I do think that it's an important distinction. Sites like Blogher, that publish a great deal of content from a variety of viewpoints, need a code of conduct, but you're not asking that your contributers adhere to the same code on their personal blogs. I'm not sure even Tim O'Reilly sees the difference, though!