« The Times Rides To The Rescue Of DU | Main | Weekend Caption Contest™Update »

Is It Too Much To Ask?

That when I get interviewed for a major publication, like say Monday's edition of the Wall Street Journal, that they actually get the name of the domain right?

Video Blogs Break Out With Tsunami Scenes
By *ANTONIO REGALADO* and *JESSICA MINTZ* *Staff Reporters of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL* January 3, 2005; Page B1

Kevin Aylward, who runs Wizbangblog.org, says blogs fulfilled an important role in letting people experience the tragedy. "When you see it, and you see how it's happening to just ordinary people, it brings home the enormity of it. That is the fascination with the videos."
That's twice in two months, previously the USA Today mangled my domain name in the print edition and later fixed it in the online version.

It does bring up an interesting point - the domain names of wizbangblog.org and wizbangblog.net are clearly taken by a cybersquatter. I've asserted a copyright to the name Wizbang and have applied for a trademark for the name Wizbang. Why? To make sure I own what I created, and to make sure I've got my legal ducks in a row when I go after those who are unjustly trading off the Wizbang name.

If you're an IP attorney who wants to help a blogger get control of his "brand" drop me a line...

Update: The print edition of the Journal has the correct URL. Only the online edition had the URL error which has been fixed. My thanks to the WSJ for getting it right in print and making it right online!


Comments (57)

Boy that sucks. :-D... (Below threshold)

Boy that sucks. :-D

I can relate Kevin... MTV o... (Below threshold)
Matt:

I can relate Kevin... MTV once "linked" to Blogs For Bush, only instead of .com they used .org -- i was fortunate enough to be able to snag .org and register it... ultimately MTV didn't send much traffic my way anyway.. bummer about the squatting problem.. why don't you try these guys.

I disagree about your whole... (Below threshold)

I disagree about your whole "brand-name" conceit and the practice of claiming ownership to words all over the net is bullshit.

I'm a firm believer in web-libertairianism. Why should you get to automatically scarf up all the domain names with wizbang in them just because you have a blog? I think you may have a bit of over-inflated self-importance going on there. There is a good likelihood there are older, more frequented sites with the words Wiz or Bang in them, how would you like it if they claimed you were wheezing off their juice and snarfed up your precious little domain.

I read blogs, I like blogs, but I have to say the 'blogosphere' is getting a bit full of itself. There are entities that have been around on the net a lot longer than you (we've been around since '97 ourselves) and I've never seen a coterie of interelated sites that takes itself and its importance in the world as seriously and vaingloriously as blogs are doing lately. There's one thing of which you geniuses seem unaware: blogs are mainly important to other blogs. You're not really any more important in the course of world events than the old Star Trek newsgroups, which also had nice large, commited followings and thought they were the second coming of Jesus.

A little dose of reality might do all you fuckers a world of good. This newest bit of hubris (laying claim to any word in your blog) is just a symptom of your sickness. Now excuse me, I have to go post in my blog, Insta-Poli-Daily Pundit Power-whiz-line-bang-blog.net.org.com

Aww..no worries really...wh... (Below threshold)

Aww..no worries really...when I read the article I **knew** immediately it was YOUR blog the idiots were referring to and just assumed they were indeed jealous of you and mangled it on purpose...

Docweasel...I don't know ho... (Below threshold)

Docweasel...I don't know how well you follow this blog...if at all, but you DO realize, that blogs were the one that broke the story (via powerline, littlegreenfootballs, and wizbang) about the faked 'Bush' Memos that CBS tried passing off as legit?

Yeah, so what? That is anot... (Below threshold)

Yeah, so what? That is another manufactured legend of grand import, mostly to OTHER FUCKING BLOGS. The only reason the media is paying any attention is because you blogs talk incessantly about the media, and the media loves the attention right back!!

What effect did the entire Rather fiasco have on anything other than pumping up the legend of the blogs? Did it influence a single vote? Did it cause real changes in editorial policy? Or did it just hype up some blogs.

Listen son, this isn't my first rodeo on the net. We made our bones as a humor site spoofing the WTC disaster and got hatemail and noteriety by swirling up the mud in our own way. We got mentioned on Howard Stern and crashed our servers on a glorious day in late 2001. We thought we were big shit too. Newflash: all the crap you or I type matters only to other obsessed little net-kiddies and poli-junkies. Your views and pontifical posts are of no more great import than the billions of bytes spent over at the Harry Potter forum or one of the online RPG shrines I link you up to.

Everyone thinks their pile of crap on the net is more important than somone else's. Which is fine until you start getting fascist- that's right I'm breaking out the Nazi trope- by laying claim to any domain that remotely sounds like yours because of what you have "created" here. You make me want to puke. Wake up and face North twink, you are nothing more than another ranter. You deserve nothing.

You are the one starting the very slippery slope stuff that will eventually stifle the net. Plus its more of the litigious crap that makes people want to kill all lawyers.

You realize that RSS-feed t... (Below threshold)

You realize that RSS-feed type websites/weblogs/news journals are actually becoming huge as an alternative source for news/political discussion. For today's "on-the-go" activist/news junkie, RSS feeds, news journals and weblogs can be accessed from anywhere you find an internet connection. They are huge not because they claim they are, but because its a fast-growing part of the internet. You weren't anything years ago because I bet you were only a tiny percent of the internet. Nowadays, weblogs are becoming a bigger and bigger part of web-surfing and the average daily traffic for users.

You realize that it DID cause the entire incident that forced Dan Rather to step down as "Presenter/Anchor" for CBS.

Besides, I can compare webl... (Below threshold)

Besides, I can compare weblogs versus mainstream media polipundits as the same debate for/against P2P filesharing. P2P filesharing had something similar. It allowed lesser-known bands to be featured in an arena that previously only music groups that the producing companies wanted pushed.

Weblogs/Web Journals allow certain stories to be put forth to the masses that otherwise would be "passed over" by the big media powers/networks. Do you want those huge conglamorates to have a monopoly on news reporting? Do you want the stories that only those news conglamorates will put forth, or do you want to be able to see as many stories as possible, and pick and choose which ones that YOU, the consumer want to read about and pay attention to.

Hence that whole Laci Peterson Trial. I was sick of it the first time I heard about it. Get it off my fucking..... television. I don't watch MSM the same way I don't listen to radio stations any longer.

(Pardon my french, but am I the only one who was disturbed at the media's frenzy over that whole case?)

Ah bullshit. You know when ... (Below threshold)

Ah bullshit. You know when will someone finally step up and say "the emperor has no clothes" on this whole goddam Rathergate thing? Rather's been pulling this crap for years. No one cares. 60 minutes never convinced anyone of anything.

The ONLY reason this particular media slam is notable is because smartypants bloggers were able to pull out fonts and animated gifs and pore over their word processors and come out with the amazing bombshell that Rather & Co. do shoddy reporting and they are biased. Well kiss my grits what a scoop. If not for "Rathergate" the entire story would have vanished without a ripple, not changed a single vote and just been added to the big heap o' nasty Bush stories cranked out in 2004.

Do you really think any actual working, thinking, voting person gives 2 shits about another AWOL Bush story? Hell naw. The only people who care are these blahgz. They are desperate for credibility. LOOK AT ME WRITING! they cry out. LiSTEN TO ME I'M IMPORTANT.

I predict a massive bloglash because blahgerz are getting just a bit too full of themselves. Everyone is getting pretty sick of hearing just how smart and influential you guys seem to think you are. Hello. You're preaching to your little choirs. You change no minds. Its just cyber-wanking.

You know this crap reminds me of karaoke. You used to have to learn an instrument, rehearse, get a gig then lay your no-talent ass out there to annoy people. Now you just have to show up drunk and read words off a screen.

You used to have to have a smattering of coding knowledge or at least be able to work Frontpage express to get site online. Now every swinging dick with an opinion logs on blahgspaht and starts in a'rantin' and they all link each other and its game on.

Most of what you guys post is nothing but links to other fucking blahgz. I predict sooner or later every blahg is going to consist of one giant daisy chain of links with no actual story at the end. Or wait maybe it already happened.

Docweasel, you DO realize t... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Docweasel, you DO realize that you can trademark and copyright original words, right? That's why so many new products and companies MAKE UP their names or spellings of common words (Cingular, Motorola, Ascenda, Camaro, Enron, etc. etc.). If you can find "wizbangblog" in a dictionary somewhere that predates Kevin's use of it for this site, I will be very, very impressed.

As for the rest of what you've spewed... Doc, you got issues. Issues that sound suspiciously like "I got a small pee-pee and I'm gonna make everyone else pay for it" type of issues. Does that tie in to how docweasel.com is a porn site, and a poorly set-up one at that? Here's one little hint of a problem, Doc: unless the visitor has their resolution set to 800X600, your site sends browsers into major conniptions.

Learn to accept yourself, embrace yourself, celebrate yourself as you are, shortcomings and all, doc, and you will be amazed at the peace and happiness that will be yours.

J.

Not to mention companies li... (Below threshold)
Darby:

Not to mention companies like Google, Yahoo, Ebay, and Amazon.

I'm going to start calling you: Doc "The trouser" Weasel.

Thank you, have a nice New Year...

On a side note, it only took 2 days for the first troll to post... I'm impressed.

This is going to be a fine ... (Below threshold)
JimK:

This is going to be a fine line, but I can walk it...

1. I support the idea of punishing cybersquatters. Registering the .org, .net and .us versions of popular domains is lame. Hit 'em and hit 'em hard.

2. I hope the powers that be here restrict themselves to fighting over the domains that contain "wizbangblog.___" ONLY. Trying to lay claim to the term "wizbang" or shutting down potential opposition blogs (say, for instance someone started "Wizbangwatch," although they would likely be pissing against the wind since most things here tend to be well-researched and documented) would be crossing the line.

3. doc has some valid points, albeit somewhat vitriolically spewed. Two things here: Doc, tone down that hatred and you might get someone to listen, and secondly yeah...bloggers need to realize that the largest of us is a small fish in a VERY LARGE POND.

You know that traffic the top ten bloggers wield? Name a musical act at the top of the collective mindset. Odds are that musician or band gets 50 to 1000 times the traffic of any of us. Even the biggest.

Drudge aside, and that ain't really a blog, stars and porn get real traffic. Game sites get real traffic around a release. Collectively, Blogspot is in the top 100, but at #72. Can you even fathom how many blogspot blogs there are? All that traffic and they can't beat Nastydollars.com.

What we have are a dedicated batch of people who want to be informed and go out of their way to remain as such. It's a big batch, but it's a drop in the ocean of the Internet.

For now. :)

Its not a porn site, its a ... (Below threshold)

Its not a porn site, its a humor site, in the tradition of National Lampoon and Mad Mag we discovered humor goes better with tits. I don't know what browser you have but I have no idea what you are talking about with your 800x600 comment. We get about 10k uniques a day and I've never heard any complaints.

And the 'pee-pee' comment is weak. You are the one whipping out your big cyber dick and shaking it around the place threatening to sue people. At long last, who the fuck do you think you are? This is basically a little vanity site. Grow up. At least we pay for our own bandwidth with our banners.

OK, doc, it seems the probl... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

OK, doc, it seems the problem I had with your site has cleared itself up. Nice little trick you have there, though -- refusing to let a visitor "back" out of your site. Does every reload it triggers add another count to the site meter, inflating your traffic?

And doc, if you dislike wizbang so much, why do you stick around and keep bitching? You can simply do what I do when I find a site I don't like -- such as yours, for example -- and NOT GO THERE. In fact, I freely invite you to never come here again. It's probably better for your blood pressure, anyway.

But if you're a masochist, and simply like doing things to aggravate yourself, you need more help than I am either capable or interested in providing.

And while you're still ranting about your "web-libertairianism" beliefs (here's a hint, doc, it's "libertarianism"), one of the hallmarks of true libertarianism is respect for the right of private property -- be it real or intellectual. Kevin invented the term, and while "wizbangblogwatch.com" could be considered fair use, the use of the .org and .net versions are simple dilution of his on creation.

You'll also note that there's a copyright notice on the main page, doc. Kevin owns it ALL. That includes your comments here. Again, you don't like it, feel free to go away and stay away.

J.

he swats at me for a typo, ... (Below threshold)

he swats at me for a typo, makes small penis jokes, rants about the site I'm affiliated with and doesn't answer any of the substansive charges I make.

You know Wizbangblahg has jumped the shark when they start channeling Norm Coleman.

To actually answer you: I'm up all night, every night, working. I get bored, I play vid games, I chat, I surf around. As a diversion I thought I'd tweak a thin-skinned, full of themself blahger. I am sated. The typing hand, having typed, moves on.

And I still have no idea wtf you are talking about 'won't let you out of the site'. We have zero pop-ups, blind links or any other tricks. If you are having problems getting out of the site (other than just being hypnotized by our genius): See the little X in the upper right hand corner of your browser? Click it.

Doc, I manually typed "docw... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Doc, I manually typed "docweasel.com" into my browser, and then tried to "Back" to my previous page. Apparently "docweasel" is a redirect page to your splash page, so simply "backing" out isn't an option.

But I did take your advice about the "X" in the top right, and it helped immensely. I feel much better. Physician, perhaps you ought to heal thyself and try it here.

J.

Ah. You must still be using... (Below threshold)

Ah. You must still be using IE- how un-l337 of you! All net-savvy and intelligent people agree Firefox is the browser you need. It will jump right over those nasty redirects.

We have random splash page redirects for variety.

And really, I enjoy your quaint little site. I first happened upon it when a webmaster friend of mine, a former bud of yours who I guess you figure 'done you wrong', pointed it out to me linking me to a rant you did about him and how he hurt your fee-fees, and he gets quite a kick out of keeping score of your feuds with other sites you feel have done you dirty, just so he knows he's not alone.

Whinging is a major theme on Wizbang, kind of your signature trope (after fascism and domain grabbing). I hope you can add us to your cry-roll, since our redirect caused you distress. You know if you read back in your responses to my posts you come off as really whiny and touchy.

If you can't see how pompous and full of yourselves you seem with this 'protect our brand' crap then you really have lost touch and kind of epitomize what I'm talking about with blahgerz thinking they are all that after a little notice in 2004. The election's over, people have politics fatigue, I think if anything poli-blahgz are going to fade a bit for at least a year.

Blahgz are nothing but the flavor of the week so you really should cool your jets a bit. Something new always comes up on the net and blahgz may end up being a victim of the faster news/internet cycle. They already seem passe, after getting noticed by TIME mag. Glenn Reynolds et al are as establishment as William Safire. On to vid-blahging! Or cellphone blahging.

Doc, sounds like your site ... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Doc, sounds like your site is self-selecting about who you welcome. That's certainly your right, and it works -- I self-selected myself away.

Poor, poor docweasel. He can't stand what he reads at Wizbang, yet he can't stay away. Sounds like he has a "problem." Perhaps he needs an "intervention."

Doc, the first step is admitting that you have a problem, that you can no longer control your browsing habits. Then you have to turn the problem over to a Higher Power and ask them to help you with your addiction.

Doc, I have some connections. I just might be able to help arrange that assistance from a Higher Power. All you have to do is take the first step towards asking for it.

J.

Hey, what's wrong with <a h... (Below threshold)

Hey, what's wrong with Wizbang Watch?

doc has some good points al... (Below threshold)
AFP Staff:

doc has some good points although he's obviously baiting you. JayTea your last couple posts, especially your last one, are not worthy of you. If you want to flame and flamewar, you just got pwn3d bigtime. If you would have argued his valid points, as crudely as he may have put them, you would have come off better. Its also valid that you guys seem to have a lot of 'victimization' issues with other sites. This is like the 5th time I've heard of you having some sort of a problem with other sites. For this reason and the sometimes childishness of your responses and your over-reaction to people who disagree with you (everyone who disagrees is not automatically a troll) I can't really consider you in the top tier of blogs as someone above included you with Powerline and Little Green footballs. I think a more mature attitude would serve you better. That last post of JayTea's actually made docweasel look measured and rational in comparison. You guys can do better I've seen it, sometimes you need to think before you post. And suing people over a domain name is just silly, sorry I have to diagree with you there. Call in the lawyers is the battle cry of the Democrats, remember!

Good luck and I do enjoy your otherwise fine site.

AFPBlog

To Jay Tea and Kevin:... (Below threshold)
BR:

To Jay Tea and Kevin:

I was Googling "docweasel" and saw that he posted here on 29 Oct. 04 in the Al Qaqaa thread called "The Pluses and Minuses of a group blog". But I can't access the Comments section. What happened? Will we no longer be able to access data in the Comments sections of 2004? Also, I can't access Archives for past months prior to 2005. I hope this is just a temporary glitch.

In this particular instance I'd be interested to see what buttons were pushed; i.e., why "docweasel" is making an appearance here with the sole intent of invalidation. And why would this new "AFP Staff" (Agence France Presse?) commenter be his ally?

Doc, if Wizbang is so unimp... (Below threshold)
Boyd:

Doc, if Wizbang is so unimportant, why do you bother to tell Kevin, Paul and JT that they're self-important boobs? (No, not those kind of boobs...if they were, you'd have their pictures spattered all over your own site!)

I just get amused when folks try to tell someone that they're not nearly as important as they think they are. When I run across someone who is gettin' "too big for the britches," I just ignore 'em.

So it seems to me that Doc's actions tell us something different from his words.

Joe R. - Not a damn thing, ... (Below threshold)
JimK:

Joe R. - Not a damn thing, sir. Not a damn thing. :)

Docweasel, you know what you sound like? Some sorry little jagoff who got dumped by a woman and is now telling all her friends what a bitch she is.

YOU HAVE SOME VALID POINTS. Try to make them without being a complete ass. You'd be surprised at how folks will talk to someone who isn't screaming at them...or doing the textual equivalent thereof.

Another Google item shows "... (Below threshold)
BR:

Another Google item shows "docweasel" posted here on 27 Nov 04 in a thread called "Seizing a good opportunity to shut up". That related to the maligned Marine of Fallujah.

What did the 2 threads have in common? (Al Qaqaa and Fallujah Marine?): VIDEO. Use of video to attack Bush administration/Iraq War. Video frauds exposed at wizbang.

I hope the Comments sections become available soon - would like to see what "docweasel" had to say there.

Leaping over the fascinatin... (Below threshold)

Leaping over the fascinating comments from the Doc and to the substantive point....getting journalists to provide the correct URL for blogs. A tough one. I still have problems getting internet sites to provide the correct link to my site, even when I’ve written the damn article in question.
Perhpas it will all get better this year, eh?

Here's an excerpt from an a... (Below threshold)
BR:

Here's an excerpt from an article entitled "Doc Weasel's Search Engine Tips" (Is it our "docweasel" ?) at http://members.fortunecity.com/cfu40bdsm/04links/search.html:

******
"Here are some tips on getting listed:

Of course use all your metatags. Don't repeat words in the metatags=keywords section, some robots quit parsing when they reach a duplicate. There is nothing wrong with listing more than 180 (all that most engines parse), some engines WILL check them all and reference them back to you, and the rest will just ignore them. Makes your page a bit bigger the more HTML code of any kind you have, of course.

Embed all your keywords on your page, even if they are invisible. A lot of pages use too many image buttons and headers, and relevant phrases and keywords are not parsed by spiders looking at your page. Use alt tags that duplicate whatever your text images say. One way of listing relevant words invisibly on your page is put them way at the bottom, after a number of line breaks, in the same color font as your background (Doc Weasel uses black on black, if you go the index page and highlight the words at the very bottom you can read them if your highlight color is a light one). Feel free to steal the Doc's keyword list, it contains all the most frequently searched words. People who stumble on your page looking for something else are liable to check you out if you have a worthwhile page, so nothing wrong with listing Britney Spears or mp3 in your keywords, even if they have nothing to do with your site."

*****

Maybe he's looking for a wizbanging.

At least they got your name... (Below threshold)

At least they got your name right. When I was in an article in the Wall Street Journal, my entire first name was replaced by someone else's.

Sounds to me as if 'docweas... (Below threshold)
Lysander:

Sounds to me as if 'docweasel' is jealous. Been 'here' since 1997, and now he's whinging about being replaced by newcomers.

>:)

Just look at alllll these o... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Just look at alllll these other sites -- some of them, their site names protected by copyright (already) -- riding on Wizbang's coattails.

Copyright protection (and a Trademark for an image, if you can afford to obtain a Trademark [is expensive process]) exist to protect intellectual property. I support the process. For anyone whose work results in some content that the public accesses, a copyright is essential, and just look at this thread to see an inkling of why.

About the Wall Street Journal article, I get the feeling, to put it very mildly, that print and broadcast media is really, really resentful of blogs, and specifically the ten/twenty/thirty or so higher traffic blogs. Certain media seems to perceive the fact that individuals have managed to do something all on their own, without relying on the presumption of a preexisting media 'reputation' or presence, and the resentments are showing.

Perhaps the misspelling of Wizbang -- and the URL, wizbangblog.com -- is intentional. As in, whoops, sent readers to a misleading result, whaddyaknow...

Media employs factcheckers. They check facts and recheck facts and editors are responsible for their performance. Someone seems to have feigned a reality, but I can't, for the life of me, accept it as "accidental" or some "oversight."

TWSJ owes you an apology, a written one at that.

And, for the general air of... (Below threshold)
-S-:

And, for the general air of the tangential issue about decrying proprietary information as proprietary, if domains were free as the leaves falling in the fall, there'd be no charges being made nor requirements in place to even register a domain. And everything would be nothing and nothing would be free, err...some deathtrap elipticall nonsense like that.

Just register all domains possible for Wizbang (and Wizbangblog) and then sue everyone who tries to masquerede as 'you' is my suggestion and be aggressive about it. The argument that the internet is some pool of uncaptured ooze, as in cats unherdable, is just a waste of time argument.

I realize that places like The Well and critics on Wikipedia and other areas devoted and still do, at times, a great deal of energy to this issue of the internet being some unlimited space of no-individual-presence or ownership, but, perhaps the energy that makes it possible is in theory but it certainly isn't in molecular structure.

As in, everything has structure. Even when the structure is permissive, still a structure.

I still don't understand ab... (Below threshold)

I still don't understand about docweasels webpage. When I tried going there, it kept refreshing every half second without loading the freakin' page.

Well I finally got it worki... (Below threshold)

Well I finally got it working, I had to type in "www.docweasel.com" in the address bar to get it to work.


I got featured on his OWN blog! Hah, cute.
"UPDATE:

then some idiot responded with this gem:

Docweasel...I don't know how well you follow this blog...if at all, but you DO realize, that blogs were the one that broke the story (via powerline, littlegreenfootballs, and wizbang) about the faked 'Bush' Memos that CBS tried passing off as legit? Posted by: Henry at January 3, 2005 02:51 AM "

I find his entire post cute, because instead of writing anything new, he just copy and pastes ALL of his comments onto that website as if he were cool.
http://docweasel.com/enter.shtml

Henry: the force is still ... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Henry: the force is still with you. As in, be of good cheer, the mention means the polar opposite of what it was written to mean...no worries.

~;-D

Hee hee, the last word on (... (Below threshold)
BR:

Hee hee, the last word on (from) "docweasel":

"The thing is, they say it takes one to know one, and I've pulled a lot of 'net hoaxes myself. In fact, our site kind of made its bones hoaxing some really tasteless stuff after the WTC attack. Its not hard to do because people seem very credulous about stuff that you'd think they would require a tiny bit of evidence."

Posted by: docweasel at November 17, 2004 09:47 AM at http://www.mudvillegazette.com/archives/001730.html

You guys are focusing on so... (Below threshold)
Mantis2:

You guys are focusing on some guy's site rather than what he says, and it does have some merit: come on Whizbang writers, really, someone riding Whizbang's "coattails?" give me a break. Are you guys getting so rich off this site that someone emulating it could actually be worth the fifteen bucks it would take to register the domains plus the hassle of setting up the sites? It does seem far-fetched and as if you think a bit much of yourself. And JayTea does come accross as as much or more of a smartass then this guy does, and he never addresses the issues the guy brings up. What do you have a comments section if you just make ad hominem attacks on some guy who disagrees with you? It's disturbingly like the actions of big media when someone criticizes them. Maybe he's right, maybe blogs have "jumped the shark".


Actually the docweasel site is very cool, there's a lot of originally coded stuff.

http://docweasel.com/index_k.sthml

for one

There's an entire forum with a tagboard if you really want to rant at him, whoever was talking about his not having comments.

I think the idea that Wizba... (Below threshold)
Deidre Dean:

I think the idea that Wizbang is in danger of losing its "brand" is kind of silly and yeah a bit presumptuous. I mean you guys aren't all that big. And you let yourself JTea get way too flustered when someone calls you something like that. Anyway one thing that guys site does have an awesome monty python section. So much for copyright restrictions huh? Maybe you could turn him in :D

http://docweasel.com/features/monty.html

Well, DD, if it's silly and... (Below threshold)
julie:

Well, DD, if it's silly and no big deal, why are you and the other weasals so hot and bothered over it?

As a business they have built up a certain amount of Good Will and they are entitled to protect it.

uh, why are you calling me ... (Below threshold)
Deidre Dean:

uh, why are you calling me a weasel? I have nothing to do with the site. And where do you see anyone except JayT getting hot and bothered? My comment is pretty lighthearted. I do think its a little swell-headed to think wizbangblog name is actually worth making a fuss over. Seriously, how much do you guys make from ads on this site? I'd be quite willing to bet you make next to NOTHING. I've worked in intenet ad commerce kind of tangentally and no bloggers are making even enough to really pay for the bandwidth it takes to run the site. So why would anyone want to leech off your name when even the ACTUAL SITE doesn't make enough money to matter.

Yeah the originl post comes off as big headed and as if these guys have an overdeveloped sense of impotance, and I do agree with doc's point that bloggers are getting way too full of themselves.

For the record the little band of blind defenders commenting seem to be the ones getting 'hot and bothered'. Plus they seem to have some problems actually navigating the net. I just clicked doc's homepage thingy on the comments and it went right to the site- the first time I'd ever heard of it.

You let yourself Deidre Dea... (Below threshold)

You let yourself Deidre Dean get way too flustered when someone calls you something like that.

My what a display of emotio... (Below threshold)

My what a display of emotional commenting! I thought for a minute I was reading Blogcritics.org. Remember how that site used to get going in their comment section? That was before Eric put a cease and desist order out. Kevin may want to get the same deal here. I checked out the Doc's site and ohmygod! ZuD won't be sampling that site anytime soon. Thanx for the drama folks.

First, I find it laughable ... (Below threshold)
Kathy Cooper:

First, I find it laughable JT seems to think its necessary to grab all the domains with wizbang in them because they are some kind of goldmine or something. The only people making serious bank on the 'net independantly are porn sites and gambling sites.

Second, JT's preoccupation with docweasel's "pee-pee" is kind of creepy :p Do you actually refer to your cock as a "pee-pee" JT? There is some serious freudal stuff going on when in the midst of a disagreement, one party immediately starts with the dick comparisons *rme*

Try debating him on points. If anyone is the troll here its the guy running the site. I thought comments sections were for discussion and debate, not adoring the site owner.

Now I guess you'll make some witty comment about the size of my tits.

DD:If no one would e... (Below threshold)
julie:

DD:
If no one would ever want to leach off their name, why are you making a big deal about it? You sure got upset fast over a merely perceived association. Yet, you say JT does not have the right to be offended by the weasal coming here and insulting him from the get go.

Kathy:
There is nothing witty about your tits, so I won't comment on them. I will, however, make fun of your pee-pee.

I get the distinct impressi... (Below threshold)
Deidre Dean:

I get the distinct impression JT is posting as julie defending himself. Making baseless comments like "you are the one getting upset" doesn't change the fact that some very valid points were raised, and rather than addressing them JT and either his defenders or him pretending to be his defenders went off making personal cracks about anyone who agrees that worrying about registering every domain with the letter w to z to protect your "brand" is just ridiculous, not to mention conceited. And its pretty childish to answer critics with schoolyard taunts like "my pee pee is bigger than yours". As docweasel mentioned, the Powerline guys were ragging Norm Coleman just this week about what a tool he was for doing the same thing. Seems like blogmeisters are becoming more like the very media types they criticize. Only difference is, Norm Coleman actually gets paid to write commentary. JayTea just does it for his self-gratification. I took the time to actually read other entries and I see nothing insightful or worthy anywhere on the site that isn't merely a link to another blog's work. Don't worry I won't be back to join your little pickle party. Try to get along without me.

So DD, let’s examine the va... (Below threshold)
julie:

So DD, let’s examine the valid points you say you raised:

Silly . . .presumptuous . . . aren't all that big . . . too flustered . . . hot and bothered . . . swell-headed . . . you make next to NOTHING . . . over-developed sense of impotance . . . ridiculous . . . conceited . . . my pee pee is bigger than yours [indeed it is]. . . nothing insightful or worthy anywhere on the site . . . Making baseless comments like "you are the one getting upset”

You upset? Nah! No way! Boy, what would people do without your insightful, witty, criticisms. lol

I would say "julie" has to ... (Below threshold)
Sherry Upstill:

I would say "julie" has to be JayTea posting on an alias or else who else could be so obsessed with defending him and responding to every post. Its well-known that bloggers themselves make most of the comments to make their site seem "happening" and active. I would guess JayTee moniters ALL the comments and responds as himself or an alter to every one, because its obvious he is extremely rattled by criticism. Ontopic: yeah, go ahead and reg every possible permutation including anagrams of wizbangblog. Then and only then can you be sure of reaping the rich reward of netdollars that fine brand name is sure to pound your way.

Your entire attitude just plays up what a dillitante you are about the internet. Believe me, we got quite a kick over at ...dotcom when your little "awards" show got derailed because you are ignorant of basic coding concepts. Your response: whine like a baby. You are a joke and your behaviour just reinforces that daily.

Feel free to email me if you have any snarky remarks, I won't be back to this lame-0 site. And your stupid subscribe form is busted (yet more incompetence).

Sherry Upstill
s[email protected]
Baltimore MD

Just wanted to clear up a f... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Just wanted to clear up a few things for the record:

1) Once, and only once, have I posted a comment to Wizbang under any name other than "Jay Tea." That was a couple months ago when the discussion turned to a medical condition that I happen to have. While I didn't particularly feel like discussing that matter then or now, but certain misinformations were being batted around that needed correcting. I haven't posted anything on this topic since this morning, when I left for a way-too-long day at work.

2) Up until a couple weeks ago, writing for this site had actually cost me money -- I kicked in a few bucks for Kevin's RNC travel fund. That was more than repaid a couple weeks ago, when I received a surprise "Christmas bonus" for my work here. I've no idea what the "books" for Wizbang look like, and don't care. It's Kevin's site, and that's his business.

3) I probably did get a little too cranky earlier at Doc. I get miffed at people who toss around profanities at the drop of a hat, and I most likely let that sway my comments. I have a great deal of respect for the power of the carefully-crafted and timed swear, and it annoys me when I see them diluted and frittered away casually. It's a bad tendency of mine, and one I should work on. I won't apologize to docweasel for responding in kind, but I will apologize to all the other readers for subjecting them to something that should have been conducted out of public sight.

All that being said, I still have to wonder why docweasel, Diedre Dean, and Sherry put so much energy into generalized criticisms and complaints and gratuitous cheap shots. I could understand and accept constructive criticism (done it plenty of times before, don't plan on changing any time soon), but repeatedly making sweeping condemnations and snide remarks? I don't see any reason behind that beyond simple spite.

OK, that oughta be my final word on this thread. I have a piece or two tangentially relating to the tsunami that I need to get out of my head and on the screen.

J.


Jay Tea, julie and a few ot... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Jay Tea, julie and a few others on Wizbang:

Rest assured that *some of us* can discern individual voices here. Never would it occur to me to associate julie's work with Jay Tea's work and vice versa, or MgGehee's work with Kevin's work, or, Paul's work with leatherpenguin's work, or....

I like to think that *I*, however, can easily assume one of many personnas without notice. At least, it's something to think about, since I've never tried it on Wizbang, and wouldn't ever, either. I'm too concerned that I get credit for my work to pilfer it away with I.D.'s other than "-S-".

Not to overlook firstbroken... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Not to overlook firstbrokenangel and others, however, still included in that fact there (^^).

I'm a coder myself and I ha... (Below threshold)
Dave:

I'm a coder myself and I have to say they do some nice work there. This page is very nicely done:
frontpage?
plus the forum has really advanced CSS stuff:forum

Suzy: I think I've read eno... (Below threshold)

Suzy: I think I've read enough of your posts, as well as enough of the regulars' posts/comments that I think I could discern ;-)

The thing is, could you discern MY style?

Wow, in one week, I have be... (Below threshold)
julie:

Wow, in one week, I have been accused of both being a terrorist and Jay Tea!

You can't get any better than that! They like me, they really like me!l

Of course Julie, we all do ... (Below threshold)

Of course Julie, we all do ;-)

Yeah right you should def g... (Below threshold)

Yeah right you should def get some lawyers on the case. You think quite a lot of yourselves, don't you? I think the dw site rox0rz ballz btw, the forum gets as many comments in an hour as this thing does in a week I'd guess :p Rock on with your bad pee pee jaytea

This is especially funny co... (Below threshold)

This is especially funny considering jayteaz above comments:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/009110.php

Veruca Salt, that's because... (Below threshold)

Veruca Salt, that's because dw's site is nothing but a personalized porno website.

Or didn't you notice?

Henry: I'm reticent to ans... (Below threshold)
-S-:

Henry: I'm reticent to answer that out of fear of being fished in...~;-}

If you are immersed in porn... (Below threshold)
Raphaela:

If you are immersed in porn you must be looking for it hard, there's about 20k pages on that site and about 100 of them are the babes section, with no sex only nude models big deal. Where do you get this personalized porn site stuff? Maybe you've personalized it. I'm a forum member and I manage never to be exposed to the terrors of a naked breast or female backside that seem to scare you so simply by not clicking on a picture post thread. Grow up you babies. I thought this was supposed to be a serious political site. It seems like a haven for immature boys from looking at your posts. And if julie is really a female I'd be surprised, her language and attitude is male. If she is a female I'd say she's an unhappy one.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy