Not On My Blog

Tim O'Reilly has released the first draft of his "code of conduct" for blogs.

Excuse me for moment, while I rinse the throw up from my mouth.

I find it funny that so many bloggers think we suddenly need a "code of conduct" to protect the blogosphere. Do these people have no principles or ethics in real life? Do they carry a copy of a "code of conduct for real life" in their back pockets? Do people actually think that the line which separates reality and the web also blocks their moral and ethical principles? Maybe the concept is too difficult for some of them to comprehend, so they feel more comfortable having some sort of "rule" to follow.

Let me state right now, that I will not be implementing this code on my site. It is pointless, at least for those of us who are guided by our principals and actually have ethical fibers running throughout our bodies.

Here are the main statements from the "code" followed by my comments (which I would have stated in person and were also not sent privately beforehand).

1. We take responsibility for our own words and for the comments we allow on our blog.

This is pointless let alone useless. We already have laws on the books regarding slander and libel. While we enjoy the right to free speech, we can already be held accountable for these words, whether we say them, or type them, if they are damaging to another.

As far as questionable language is concerned, every blog is different. Some allow harsh language, some don't. I, personally, follow a general rule not use such language, but have never deleted a comment from someone, based on their usage of some questionable language.

If I started drawing the line on what could or couldn't be said, where would I stop? Everything ever written could be construed as "offensive" to someone at some time for some reason. Heck, I once told a technical support person to stop being "pissy" with me, and he hung up on me for using offensive language and attacking him. You get my point.

2. We won't say anything online that we wouldn't say in person.

Some of us already follow this rule, but, I don't think everyone should be forced to follow it.

The very nature of the blogosphere is to allow people to speak their mind, whether they would say it in person or not.

3. We connect privately before we respond publicly.

In July of this year, I will have been blogging for 10 years. I have never, in any of those 10 years, responded privately to someone who has left a comment on my blog. If they felt compelled to leave a comment on my site, in public, then I should have the decency to reply to their comment, in public as well. Oh sure, heated arguments may occur, and some people may misinterpret some points of the conversation, but hush-hushing controversial or explosive topics will only help foster censorship at some level.

4. When we believe someone is unfairly attacking another, we take action.

This one is a no-brainer. Do we really need a "code" to tell us to do the right thing? Give me a break. When was the last time you stopped to check the rule book before taking action to stop something bad from happening?

5. We do not allow anonymous comments.

Some people are emboldened by a certain level of anonymity, and if that level of anonymity allows them to feel comfortable enough to express their feelings on my blog, or others, then so be it. I would rather they remain anonymous than silent.

Just as your blog design and platform are personal choices, I think the right to offer anonymity in your comments should be as well.

6. We ignore the trolls.

Ignoring trolls does usually make them go away. However, some of the trolls I have seen have calmed down after a while and then proven to be prolific commentors. While many trolls have no goal but to annoy you, there are some who actually have ill intentions. Those are the trolls who should be ignored. Watch out though, because some of those trolls today will become bloggers tomorrow.

In summary, I think this whole "code of conduct" idea is a total waste, and now you know my reasons why.