How ... odd (emphasis added):
Joining the Blogging Alliance of Non-Partisan Canadians
Do I Qualify?
The qualifications for membership are as follows:
1. Are you Canadian?
2. Do you have a blog?
3. Do you consider yourself to have a relatively open mind?
4. Are you NOT a member of a partisan blogging association, meaning one dedicated to a particular Canadian political party, such as the Green Bloggers, the Blogging NDP, the LibLogs or the Blogging Tories, or...
And yet, curiously, one finds main page posts from Blogging Tories members Getting It Right, and Unambiguously Ambidextrous, and The Crux of the Matter, and Backseat Blogger, and ... well, you get the idea.
The definition of "non-partisan" sure has changed since I was a kid.
14 comments:
Grandfather clauses. You'll notice a few Libloggers, Blogging Dippers and Green Bloggers in the list as well.
I'm sorry ... how can you be "grandfathered" into a blog that advertises itself as non-partisan in a way that makes any sense?
Agreed, you are either partisan, or you are non-partisan, the criteria are quite clear, and there are no semi-partisan provisions.
The BT roll is a weird one in itself, I wonder if that "native Californian" grandfather (AKA Captain Ed of Captains Quarters) who is "living in the Twin Cities area of Minnesota" even knows he's a Blogging Tory?
-- maybe someone should ask him why he's not proudly displaying the BT blogroll in a visible location as they require.
Some people are just shameless whores and will do anything to get their blogs promoted wherever, whenever, however.
Paging Denyse O'Leary... No? Werner Patels...
But more seriously, the aggregator model is somewhat unfortunate as it casts people as "partisans" by association when in fact they may well be somewhat ambivalent. I've often thought that it would be funny to sign up as part of the BTs, but I'd hate to be connected in any way with 99% of them.
The original impetus of the BANPC was to provide an alternate blogroll for those who didn't want to feel obliged to sign up with a partisan blogroll in order to get the link love. It doesn't ask people to be apolitical, although I personally favour those bloggers who, while political, don't toe the party line all the time. The BANPC simply gave a home for a group of people who wanted to be a little different. Perhaps "non-partisan" is a misnomer, since a number of multi-partisan blogs joined up (belonging to multiple partisan blogrolls, like the Blogging Party of Canada), but the name fits in a pinch.
And the grandfather clause is stated in the BANPC join page which you yourself quoted. I quote: "Sites which meet the criteria when they joined the BANPC, and which went on to join other partisan blogging associations will NOT be asked to leave the BANPC. They can stay as part of a grandfather clause. Members of the Progressive Bloggers, the Liberty Logs and the Red Ensign Brigade are also welcome to join."
Getting it Right, Crux of the Matter, Backseat Blogger and all the other partisan blogroll members on the blog were not members of said blogrolls when they asked to join. I allowed them to join, and I don't see the need to ask them to leave.
Frankly, I'm pleased at the diversity of opinion I've managed to accrue on this aggregator, and I think that blogs like Unambiguously Ambidextrous and Montreal Simon are key to that.
Sorry, James, but what you've written makes no sense. Accepting members who were non-partisan at the time but subsequently went on to join partisan blogrolls is just as absurd as starting a club explicitly for singles to help them meet other singles, but letting members who eventually settled down and got married continue to hang around.
Either the aggregator is non-partisan, or it isn't. "Grandfathering" is a decidedly feeble rationalization for violating the clear and unambiguous requirements for membership, regardless of how polite and accommodating you're trying to be for the sake of history.
Fair enough. I fielded similar complaints from Stephen Taylor and Jason Cherniak. But as I told them, this is a one-man operation and, ultimately, I don't want to ask these individuals to leave.
The grandfather clause _was_ there near the beginning. I put it in when the Green Bloggers Association materialized, and a number of Green Bloggers asked if they had to abandon their BANPC membership in order to join the new blogroll.
P.S. "Getting it Right" at this URL:
http://abbink.blogspot.com/
...is not a member of the Blogging Tories.
You're right, James -- I was confusing that blog with another BT blog of the same name.
In my defense, I try to be non-partisan. As in, I may have conservative beliefs, but I try to give credit where it is honestly due. I don't automatically agree with what the party says, and often times I do disagree. As well, the requirement for the blogging Tories is that one must have conservative values. That's about it. It doesn't say, "You must adhere to the doctrine of the party at all times or be banned." Not once has Stephen Taylor ever voiced his concerns. As for BANPC, I am glad James made me a member since it exposes to an array of varied opinion. As such I have many variety of links on my blogs from Liberals, NDP, Greens, and non-partisans.
So I think I qualify.
CC, on the other hand, could literally not exist without the existence of our BT aggregate.
Please pay attention, Raphael. At no point did I accuse you of being non-partisan. I was simply pointing out the incongruity of your being a member of that allegedly non-partisan aggregator, when its own published membership rules specifically disqualify people who are members of other partisan aggregators, such as the Blogging Tories.
Which leads me to ask two simple questions:
1) What part of the above do you just not understand?
2) Are you starting to realize why I find it so easy to make fun of the Blogging Tories, given their collective talent for not understanding the basics of the English language?
I understand why you make fun of us. It's your bread and butter, baby.
Yes, Raph, that must be it. It's like when someone asked Willie Sutton why he robbed banks, and he answered, "Because that's where the money is."
And if I want to make fun of right-wing silliness, well ... I'm sure you can figure out the rest, right?
P.S. Please tell me you're not whining. I'm getting really tired of all the whining. It's like it's all you've got.
Post a Comment