Comments on: Marks of authenticity: the downplay http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/ ... exploring religion and culture in an online world Mon, 21 May 2012 17:05:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: paul http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/comment-page-1/#comment-16315 paul Tue, 07 Apr 2009 16:21:58 +0000 http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/#comment-16315 Totally yeah mate. If a blogger sets themself up as an "authority" on any topic, they're not going to invite comments from readers with any sense of confidence. Bloggers are all too aware of this, wanting to make their space an even ground. And to talk of experience is to imply is from a personal point of view, and highlight the limits of the argument/opinion, thus welcoming new perspectives. Totally yeah mate. If a blogger sets themself up as an “authority” on any topic, they’re not going to invite comments from readers with any sense of confidence. Bloggers are all too aware of this, wanting to make their space an even ground.

And to talk of experience is to imply is from a personal point of view, and highlight the limits of the argument/opinion, thus welcoming new perspectives.

]]> By: Rob J http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/comment-page-1/#comment-16284 Rob J Tue, 07 Apr 2009 02:16:19 +0000 http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/#comment-16284 After thinking about this some more, I think perhaps another reason for the downplay, or at least another aspect of it, is that it encourages debate. From my experience, blogs which convey an opinion have more active discussions in their comments than blogs which are more informational. Blogging etiquette appears to have developed to the point where it is perfectly acceptable to "argue" with someone over their opinion, than it is to argue over an informative statement. Perhaps people are put off by the authority of an educated or informative post, and don't feel in a position to respond. "I may not be able to counter your fancy college talk, but if you're going to give your opinion, then I am going to give you mine." Even personal experience is "arguable" in that if the blogger has learnt something from personal experience, and the commenter has learnt something different from a different personal experience, the commenter can feel comfortable saying that. After thinking about this some more, I think perhaps another reason for the downplay, or at least another aspect of it, is that it encourages debate.
From my experience, blogs which convey an opinion have more active discussions in their comments than blogs which are more informational. Blogging etiquette appears to have developed to the point where it is perfectly acceptable to “argue” with someone over their opinion, than it is to argue over an informative statement.
Perhaps people are put off by the authority of an educated or informative post, and don’t feel in a position to respond. “I may not be able to counter your fancy college talk, but if you’re going to give your opinion, then I am going to give you mine.”
Even personal experience is “arguable” in that if the blogger has learnt something from personal experience, and the commenter has learnt something different from a different personal experience, the commenter can feel comfortable saying that.

]]> By: paul http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/comment-page-1/#comment-16203 paul Sun, 05 Apr 2009 00:46:05 +0000 http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/#comment-16203 I think you're absolutely right, Rob. It's not just emerging church bloggers who follow this etiquette. The us of the word "rant" is almost a praise-word for blogging. From the interviews I've conducted with bloggers and from many of their posts, the reasons are fairly plain: that blogging promises some freedom from the constraints of other forums for talking about church. As I said in a previous post, blogging promises a free parliament on authentic religious identity and practice. I guess what I'm wanting to explore in this series of posts is whether what blogging promises is close to what blogging actually provides. I think you’re absolutely right, Rob. It’s not just emerging church bloggers who follow this etiquette. The us of the word “rant” is almost a praise-word for blogging.

From the interviews I’ve conducted with bloggers and from many of their posts, the reasons are fairly plain: that blogging promises some freedom from the constraints of other forums for talking about church. As I said in a previous post, blogging promises a free parliament on authentic religious identity and practice. I guess what I’m wanting to explore in this series of posts is whether what blogging promises is close to what blogging actually provides.

]]> By: Rob J http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/comment-page-1/#comment-16200 Rob J Sun, 05 Apr 2009 00:31:37 +0000 http://teusner.org/2009/04/05/marks-of-authenticity-the-downplay/#comment-16200 I think it's fair to say, though, that this practice is not confined to religious blogging, and is fairly standard idiom on any blog. Most blogs will have a "rants" tag, and are phrased in such a way as to emphasise opinion, rather than knowledge. Perhaps then the question becomes: what draws people to this medium, which encourages this form of expresion, when wishing to discuss religion and church? I think it’s fair to say, though, that this practice is not confined to religious blogging, and is fairly standard idiom on any blog. Most blogs will have a “rants” tag, and are phrased in such a way as to emphasise opinion, rather than knowledge.
Perhaps then the question becomes: what draws people to this medium, which encourages this form of expresion, when wishing to discuss religion and church?

]]>