Sunday, February 20, 2005

Chaliceblog Snark Policy

Left Coast Unitarian: Lenten snark vigil has me thinking about my own snarkiness and who and what I will be snarky about.

So I've written a policy. (One that I've been following all along really, but here it is in writing.)

In short.

1. I never insult the CSO on my blog. He and I have a rule of presenting ourselves as a united front to both families and all but the closest of our friends. (Item: All marriages should have this rule. Seriously.) Making some big fuss about a minor beef I have with him would be a violation of this.

2. If you have a blog, you’re fair game. Sorry. You are. If you don’t want your opinions criticized, don’t put them on the internet. If someone typically comes up with better things or if they have a thoughtful wrong opinion, I will be more gentle, but frankly Home Improvement was a hit television show, so clearly people have trouble recognizing when something sucks and need the suckiness pointed out.

3. It’s not my church’s fault that they have CC for a congregant. So I try not to punish them for it. There are a lot of UU churches around DC and I try not to make which one I attend too terribly obvious. At the same time, if they are doing something I'm not used to (such as kicking around having a pledging ritual ) I might mention it so see if other people’s churches are doing the same thing,. If I do decide to take some Sundays and write “church reviews,” I won’t write one about my home church.

4. I’m stricter on myself when it comes to my ministers. Being criticized all over the internet is not in their job descriptions. I might talk about the same topic they talked about, but I won’t directly respond to them.

5. Former members of my previous churches may well show up in thinly-disguised form in the Round Robin. Partially, this is because there’s a certain commedia dell’arte to UU churches. There is a woman at each of my previous churches, and my current one, who could see herself in Peggy, a feisty old lady who runs the church’s social action committee. Other people appear because I miss them and writing them into the round robin lets me be back in church with them in a very loose and self-indulgent sense.

6. When I’m writing something positive about one of my friends, I will use their real name and my favorite of their good qualities or something cool about them. When I write something negative or personal, I won’t reveal who I am talking about Again, most of my friends befriended me in my “real life,” not as a blogger. I try to make them identifiable only in a loose sense. The exception here is, of course, Katy-the-Wise whose identity is pretty clear to anyone who wants to take a little time to look. Katy-the-Wise knows I write about her sometimes and that I very much admire her as a thinker and as a human being. So far, she tolerates being written about, though I don’t know that she reads my blog. If she ever asked me to stop writing about her, I would.

I think these rules constitute a pretty reasonable approach to blogging and to letting my blog reflect my life and opinions.

CC
who doesn't give up stuff for lent

3 comments:

jfield said...

Thank you for writing this out. My point was mostly to try to draw some limits to my tendency to be critical and to make a distinction between my UU blog and any blogging I might do about politics in general.

Probably the next vigil that is necessary is against metablogging. :) ENFJ jfieldnerd

Art said...

What about control freaks who become debate forum hosts. Shouldn't they be snarkable?

Chalicechick said...

Art, I'd say snarking on them would only encourage them.

CC