Search Engine Watch and Danny Sullivan have been synonymous in the minds of search professionals for several years. After November 30th, Sullivan will no longer post to the SEW blog. WebProNews asked a group of well-known search industry pros for their thoughts on the day after Sullivan files his last blog entry under the SEW brand.

More...

Good grief... "his writing occupies the pinacle", "perhaps it will take two people", "We are eager to see what Incisive does when December begins", "an iconic person", "a lot of people can't wait to see that continue".

Are you sure Danny doesn't walk on water? As evidenced by the voluminous numbers of responses, I think the majority opinion is, so....

For some, I am sure this is synonamous with a Mars landing. But for those of us grunts just out there in the work-a-day, the most interesting aspect of all this is watching the groupies go to and fro, wringing their hands in giddy anticipation similar to finding out who Jennifer Anniston is dating now. Yawn!

I don't know about the walking on water bit, but Danny and family were in Maui recently, and he didn't mention flying there in his personal blog... :)

"NET NEUITRALITY" APPEARS TO BE A SCAM.

Why is it that every scheme aimed at curtailing
freedom of speech calls itself "neutral?"

As I read it, the point behind "Net Neutrality" is
to shut conservatives up.

Liberals apparently style themselves too oppressed
(or lazy) to be able to make their own case in an open forum, so they feel they have to pass some sort of rule, everywhere, that says they're the only
ones allowed to speak.

And they do this while nattering on about "freedom!"

"Net Neutrality," perhaps better known as
"Netizen Neutering," is just another arttempt to
censor the Internet. And that's not what the
Internet's about, no matter who you are.

Cyberblessings,

Fr. JIm <><

I suppose the Blogosphere is the next step forward from the newsgroups. It is a more sophisticated
forum, more able to function as an actual "medium" and attract an audience.

As on the newsgroups, however, there is flaming. Immature people, given a forum, will always try to
enforce their presence by trying to be shocking.They normally gather some or other group of similarly
frustrated people around them, and think themselves successful, while the rest of us go about our business.

And, you know what? That's okay!

People we don't like need love, too!

If one guy wants to charge to let people post on his blog, and there are people who want to pay him,
why not? It's his blog, and their money! Personally, I think it's a waste of money, but I have a solution for that:
I don't read his blog. I'm not part of his universe.

If someone else thinks the fellow is violating the "Information Is Free" ethic of the Net and wants to
take the pay-to-post blogster to task, why not? All he's doing is upholding one of the basic principles
of netizenship! If he becomes infantile and offensive, I have a solution for that: I don't read him!

Blog-flaming will sort itself out the same way newsgroup-flaming did. Sooner or later everybody gets sick of it
and helps the flamers grow up. Either they take the advice and guidance, or they find themselves bounced, and
shunted off to their own little corner of newsgroupland.

Same thing with the Blogs. The blog-version of "bouncing" a blog-flamer is to simply not visit there.

When I begin to work to shut people up, however, I'm going beyond my desire to not listen to them.
I'm then in the business of trying to impose my will on the whole rest of the world.

At that point, I become a much greater menace than the thing I'm trying to stop.

Does that mean I should not suggest that the whole world would be better off thinking as I do? Does that
mean I should be timid in presenting my pointr of view, and inviting others to share it? Certainly not!

But even if I have no respect at all for my opponent's opinion, I need to respect his right to
state it. If I seek to shut him up, I am giving him permission to try to shut me up. Then we have
moved out of the marketplace of ideas, entirely, into someplace different: a place civilization has
spent a lot of time trying to move out of.

Got a case? Make it! On a level playing field, if it's any good, you'll win!

If we start trying to bulldoze the playing field in one direction or another, however, all we've done is give
the other guy permission to find his own bulldozer.

A few mornings later, we will wake up and look in the mirror, and see the thing we were trying to prevent.

Cyberblessings--

Fr. Jim <><

frjim: I DO agree with you! Well put, well reasoned, and a fine example of rationale thinking -- which isn't what many of the bloggers and especially the blog flamers come up with.
But, as you intimate, it's a (relatively) free world (in our part of it, anyway) and, as the saying more or less puts it: I may disagree with you, but I'll go down fighting for your right to hold the views you do.
In my opinion, mankind's greatest strength lies in dialogue -- just as this week's swing to the Democrats will, it's to be hoped, bring some more sense to America's position in the world.
Meantime, I'll certainly follow your example and won't bother to read the utterings put forth by the self proclaimed "We Know Best" blogs and posters thereto.

Duncan

__________________
Acts as an Exclusive Buyer Broker for purchasers of residential, industrial, commercial, and investment properties in all parts of the Niagara Peninsula.
http://www.duncanpollock.com
http://www.iciniagara.com

Hi, Duncan--

Thanks for the good words!

As a "we know best" sort myself (I am, after all,
an Orthodox priest), I want to speak to the
modification of your closing statement. I won't,
however, because you have a perfect right to tune
me out, too--just as I have a perfect right to
preach to you, and to hope I'm worthy of your attention.

The Net is a wide-open place. It doesn't lock you
in a box, like television or newspapers. This gives
it no power to corrupt that we don't allow it, and
virtually unlimited power to inform.

It ain't broke. Let's not try to fix it.

Cyberblessings--

Fr. Jim <><

I guess I am an idiot here, but can you please explain what part of the Net Neutrality bill relates to oppression, censorship, and loss of free speech?

Thanks.

*

__________________
Whipnet's RSS Feeds

Don't feel bad, I'm trying to figure out what the hell any of this has to do with Danny Sullivan.

Dutter:
Sorry for the comment. I did not notice this was an already busted thread.

*

__________________
Whipnet's RSS Feeds

No problem, I'm thinking about unbusting it <clickety-click> shortly.