November 06, 2004

"Not even a gay, blogging Jesus could help"

These articles say it to many more people than I could reach:

How organized religion, not net religion, won it for Bush (Ashlee Vance)

Nerd party needed to replace 'left-wing' Democrats, says area man (Andrew Orlowski)

But in honor of the Votes, Bits and Bytes punditry, I'll point to my own previous article:

Mathematics of ordinary-blog non-influence

[Self-referentially, practically, nobody read it in the first place, or will read it now :-(]

By Seth Finkelstein | posted in cyberblather | on November 06, 2004 11:59 PM (Infothought permalink) | Followups
Seth Finkelstein's Infothought blog (Wikipedia, Google, censorware, and an inside view of net-politics) - Syndicate site (subscribe, RSS)

Subscribe with Bloglines      Subscribe in NewsGator Online  Google Reader or Homepage


Thanks for those links... including yours which pretty much sums it up I guess. (Your 'reverse psychology' worked, I couldn't resist clicking that link. heh.)
I had no idea really that people were thinking these things in the first place.
Though I wouldn't be surprised...
It's like I thought of the the LiveJournal girl who's trying to sell her crochet hats for $300 a piece or something.
I guess my point is I don't care how many 'friends' the girl has on her list, I think the hats are ridiculous, and I certainly wouldn't pay that kind of money for them... And I don't care how popular someone's blog is, when they're insulting my views, insulting me for having them, I'm certainly not in that 10 people they've "convinced", no matter how much they congratulate themselves that with their venom they've made a solid argument that they're right, or thought they were able to bully people into seeing things their way.
Anyway, that's my take on it.
I wonder why people get the delusions of grandeur though? It would be interesting to try to plot the sociology/psychology of it, I guess.

Posted by: Chloe at November 9, 2004 01:51 PM