Blogs are our space.
I know how amazing it is to set one up and then decide what is going on the side bar, how it’s going to look and play with the whats and hows. It is a public voice and in this little presentation of ourselves to others it is fun to figure out the details.
Once our blog is online isn’t always easy, because in finding our way we wonder about things like etiquette - do I provide a reciprocal link, do I tell someone I’ve posted?
We learn by doing. Many of us have blog-lurked before taking the plunge, and it is interesting to be on ‘this’ side of it.
I’ve looked at aggregators a lot lately.
I didn’t say that I was on one, because I wasn’t aware it might cause confusion for someone who really wants to be a part of it.
It has led to an interesting discussion at connexions.
Kinesis has been blogging about 10 months and likes the aggregator very much. However she is pondering the ethics of other points of view that seem contrary to the it’s title.
I seem to have gotten myself into an ethical dilemma of sorts.
Per my request, Kinesis is listed in Unright Christian Blogs. Since most of the other blog owners listed on UCB link to all the other blogs in the group (including mine) I decided to return the favor and generate an Unright Christian blogroll of my own. Since posting these links, however, I have had the opportunity to read through them all and find that UCB contains links to a couple of blogs that espouse a more much conservative evangelical Christianity and overall worldview than I would have expected to find on a list which is called “Unright.”
This is a fair and honest dilemma and I admire the civility and honesty of discussion at Kinesis and over at connexions, it is something I think all of us face as we find our way. You might want to check it out.
Real Live Preacher
Thanks to all of you who sent me the post Real Live Preacher took down.
I read the comments underneath very carefully.
And I will openly say that I have been the recepient (last week) of one of the commenters legalism. (in theology, one who holds to the law of works) It is crushing. I too wonder if I had a part in the commenter heading over to RLP.
I’d like to direct you to Dashhouse. You’ll see a couple of hints in that post about how some of us ponder how to deal with the when and how of standing up to legalists that are completely unaware of the harm and hurt they cause. I don’t think some are trolls.
It’s a difficult situation and I stand with Dashhouse as things unfold, hopefully bibically, with grace, humility and quietly behind the scenes.
Search
Subscribe 
You are currently browsing the Bene Diction Blogs On weblog archives.
Related Entries
For blog design, Wordpress or MovableType coding or blog consulting, see cre8d design.
Bene,
I appreciate the civility of your response to my concerns, especially since it appears that I have created a tempest because I expressed myself poorly. For the record, I never had Bene Diction in mind when I made my comments (and in fact have been lurking here and enjoying your stuff for awhile). I should have taken it upon myself to find out exactly what Richard meant by “unright” before I opened my cyber-mouth. I apologize to you and the other members of Unright if I’ve caused any offense.
I’ve posted more extensive comments at Kinesis and also over at connexions.
It’s only a tempest if we make it one.:^)
Thanks for clarifying, and it is more than alright to ask questions and wonder, don’t you think?
I’m glad it wasn’t BDBO, and that’s great you’ve been lurking. Pop by anytime.
I don’t know much about aggregators, I know people can scrap blogrolls, but I would suspect that if Richard’s aggregator was scrapped, he’d have his techs check it out.
No offense taken, I assure you..:^)
Blog on!
It’s all good fun if we don’t take ourselves too seriously. I reckon a litle misunderstanding every once in a while is inevitable and, if we can maintain that grace and humility you were mentioning, in the long run can help us all get to grips with one another.
So you think it’s ok to pointedly and pulcily announce wanting to delink some-one and to not link to the post concerned? I thought you took a view that it wasn’t ok. I’m just wondering at the consistency Bene.
That should read “publicly”. No offence Bene but I really do see a contradiction in position here.
You’ve lost me Catez, are you referring the Richard’s aggregator?
I wasn’t aware that anyone got delinked, I don’t read it often.
Yes you have missed it. I thought you had position about publicly stating you are going to delink some-one. Never mind - it was just an analytical observation on my part. No worries.