A diary-format website. Simplified web tools make be used to create it. Newsfeeds are sometimes done in simple blog format, with headline, and first paragraph of a number of unrelated news stories. You can click to get details on any of them.
Ignorant people often refer to any website as a blog. The key feature of a blog is its total lack of organisation. It is just a higgledy-piggledy list of tiny essays by different people with no organisation or index. Usually a blog allows the public to make entries, but sometimes only a single author writes a short essay about whatever he is thinking about recently and tacks it on the end.
Blogs pollute the Internet with disorganised thought. Blogs are mostly fluff. A forum is similar, but it organizes the discussions into general and topics and specific threads. So it is thus somewhat insulting to call someone’s website or forum a blog.
They are a lame disorganised sort of website without proper formatting, indexes or organisation. They are websites for the incompetent. They tend to read like diaries, stream-of-consciousness blathering. A step below blogs is Facebook and a step below that in terms of mindlessness is Twitter (where Sarah Palin hangs out ).
Usually there is a moderator who gets rid of spam, obscene language, posts that don’t make any sense, duplicates… Unfortunately human nature being what it is, the moderator usually also get rid of any posts that he strongly disagrees with. This tends to make for milk-sop lame posts that just say I agree or I disagree in slightly decorated language, without saying anything new about the topic. Unfortunately, there is no overt sign this censorship is occurring. There is nothing to see.
There is no stub saying, This post from Roedy Green was censored because it said rude things about our sponsor Monsanto, and we cant have that can we?” or This post from Roedy Green was censored because it used one of the 36 banned obscene words listed in our subscriber agreement. or This post from Roedy Green was censored because our lawyers said the defamatory things it said about Mr. Rick Perry’s sex practices involving cattle could not be proved in court.
You won’t see the poster complaining about the censorship either, since that too is censored.
The moderator never has to defend his decision, announce his criteria, or permit an appeal. He does this all in secret.
The RichardDawkins.net site takes this censorship a step further. People must present topics to the moderator for discussion. The moderator selects just a few. The rest are never seen by the public. Anyone who tries to discuss something not on the menu, gets his posts censored for being off-topic.
In addition you may not link to your website, mention its same or even mention that you ever wrote anything not posted on the Dawkins site. I consider this illogical, especially for a site that purports to fight censorship. They consider it plugging.
|recommend book⇒Trust Me, I’m Lying: Confessions of a Media Manipulator|
|It explains the way blogs play fast and loose with the truth to attract readers. It explains how mainstream media scan blogs for stories and repeat stories without fact checking.|
|Greyed out stores probably do not have the item in stock. Try looking for it with a bookfinder.|
available on the web at:
optional Replicator mirror
Your face IP:[188.8.131.52]
|Feedback||You are visitor number 12,330.|