Re: can someone please explain what this blog tagging this is all about?

On Jan 15, 2:37 pm, dizw..._at_gmail.com wrote:

> Well, sorry you feel that way, but your comments about blog
> aggregators clearly indicate you don't use them and you don't
> understand them. If you did, you wouldn't say things like "just switch
> to another one" because you would know that what affects one affects
> them all, by their very nature. Sorry, but them's the facts. What I
> was trying to say is, don't try and build too much of a case of such
> very shaky foundations, If you don't understand what happened to OraNA
> and why it's significant, that's fine: nothing wrong in not using a
> service you have no use for. But it's probably not such a good idea to
> make pronouncements about someone's behaviour when you don't (appear
> to) know much about the actual reality that has given rise to that
> behaviour.

But it doesn't affect them all the same. Otherwise, why would oraclick still show the tags and orana not? Neither has been taken offline - would you say oraclick was entirely up and running to begin with? I wouldn't. I think oraclick just demonstrates what happens with a rating system that lacks a critical mass. But I did see a tag that I wouldn't have otherwise, for good or bad.

I think we may all know more than we wanted to about the rise of this behavior.

Maybe we should all blame Tom's beard :-) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extraordinary_Popular_Delusions_and_the_Madness_of_Crowds

jg

--
@home.com is bogus.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20061015/news_1m15garcia.html