Sunday, June 24, 2007

Jonathan Lies about post, fails to link to truth for readers

A while ago I referenced a blog entry by JM over at GoodByeKen, and JM thanked me for linking to his blog. So he can't plead ignorance to blog ethics when, in a recent false report about something on my blog, he refused to link to the blog entry, making it hard for his readers to see that his remarks were false.

It could be that he's so enamored by BNN rankings that he doesn't want to give anybody else links. Of course, with a lifetime ranking of 2.67 our of 10, I'm not sure what he's so happy about.

I am no longer providing links to his blog, but I will provide the information so you can cut and past it:

In that false entry, Jonathan says:

Blogger Charles of Two Conservatives, noted for his man-crush on Faisal Gill, has finally admitted the obvious. Namely, that the wheels are falling off of Faisal Gill's wagon. And who gets the main credit? The BVBL blog, and deservedly so. But incredibly, Charles saw fit to mention little-old GoodbyeKen for some of the "blame," which is to say, some of the credit. He calls GoodbyeKen BVBLs "partner in crime." Thanks Charles!

But the post to which he refers, "Childish Antics having some effect", had nothing to do with Gill's campaign -- it was about the PWC republican Gala being cancelled:

Mostly, bloggers behaving like children can be ignored. But once in a while their juvenile antics are infectious. When people's uncivil, hate-filled, fact-free diatribes start seriously impacting society, good people need to rise up and put a stop to it.

Greg at BVBL posts that the PWC gala was cancelled.

I quote Greg from his blog as well. And nowhere in the entire blog entry is the name Faisal Gill mentioned. And since I don't believe that "the wheels are falling off" anybody's wagon, it is absurd, and false, for JM to suggest that I "admit" it, and a lie to say I did so in a blog entry.

And while I can't know why he didn't link, not doing so prevented his readers from clicking the link and finding he post was lying about my post. So long as Jonathan believes that lying about other bloggers, and using childish name-calling (man-crush? what are we, in 3rd grade here, Jon?), he probably will continue to get blog hits, because people like this kind of stuff, which is why the National Enquirer sells lots of newspapers.

But posting false statements to get people to read your blog isn't civil, ethical, or honorable. And since I won't sign up to post at anybody's blog, I'll have to answer his false claims here.


Anonymous said...

Jesus Christ, can you be any more of a whiney bitch? Get over yourself. At one time you posted thoughtful material, now it's just a bunch of drivel.

Charles said...


I'd much rather post thoughtful material, but in the internet world, you can't let people lie about you, or else people will start believing it.

I'd much rather answer people's lies in their blogs, but in BVBL's case he has blocked access, and in GBK's case, he requires registration to comment.

So for now I will answer their lies here. Not because I want to whine about people lying, but simply to correct the lies they are telling. People are free to lie all they want, but if they lie about something I care aboue, I will post a response to the lies, in order that the truth will be seen.

Frankly, I wouldn't care anyway, except there are aggregators where this stuff shows up for the world to read (which is how a site like GBK gets anybody to read -- by lying in the first paragraph, they draw people in who just HAVE to see the rest of the story, which requires a click into the site.

Once I understood how that worked, I knew I needed to answer lies forcefully, so people reading the aggregators would see the rebuttal.

In fact, that's a downside to answering falsehoods in comments -- the comments don't show up on aggregators.

But if I had my druthers, I'd answer in comments, and put small items in my blog pointing to my comments to hit the aggregators.

Charles said...

BTW, there are other tricks that people like GBK use. For example, reposting the same blog entries in a way that regenerates an RSS feed to the aggregators.

If you look at BlogNewsNet, you'll see GBK's posts usually appear 3 or 4 times -- that's a deliberate action by the blogger to overwhelm the aggregator and increase blog hits.

For example, GBK's post about reaching "#7" on the influence list appears 7 times on the "most recent posts" section. And since there are a limited number of slots on the front page, doing so knocks off other blogger's entries.

But that's just an observation. All I really care about here is lying about what my post said.

Anonymous said...

It is no suprise that you found JM not telling the truth about you. I have to hand it to JM, Phd. When he gets on a topic, he's like a mental patient. His concentration is maniacal. In my opinion,the good Dr. just forgets to tell all of the truth, when it's not convenient.

Take his pal, twin as it were, over at that blog that banned you. He has a recent eye catching headline something to the effect that some "Gang-Banger" has recently been released by the court. FALSE. WRONG. The criminal is still being heald in jail awaiting ICE action. But WHAT-THE-HELL...The headline is an eye catcher that feeds his coterie of sycophantic scandal jackels. Why check out the true facts when you can scoop everyone else, call people names and get extra attention for your blog? HIS readers will forgive these "minor" faults.

And tell Anonymous #1, the only drivel appears on his pals' blogs.