Maybe I’m just being snarky, although that is certainly not my intention. But I am very tired, it is nearing the end of the semester, I had to spend Turkey Day alone, I am involved in trying to craft a student body response to a situation here that is extremely political, and honestly, I am getting fed up with various things I am seeing around the biblioblogosphere.
I will leave most of that (the last clause) for when I am in a better mood though.
I just finished making a long comment on a post about PubSub’s Community Lists over at LISNews.org. Yes, it was snarkier than it needed to be. It was also far more upbeat than I wished I could have been. You know, I’m just getting too darn old to play games with language. Let’s tell the truth, fix what needs fixing, be adults and move on.
Three weeks ago I made a post about the new PubSub Community Lists. I also added a comment at Steven Cohen’s blog and provided a link to my, at least as intended, constructive criticism. My comments today are also intended constructively, but when the person you are trying to address doesn’t acknowledge your presence then it is hard to be constructive, intentionally or no.
As I said in my original post and in my comment today, I could really care less about my ‘influence.’ I am not trying to influence anyone here. I am trying to have conversations with a few interesting and intelligent people. I am trying to learn from them. And as I say in my disclaimer, I am trying "to question and challenge the beliefs that I think I hold."
I may have bitten off more than I can chew, but I am trying to start an
experiment that I certainly hope will take on a life of its own in the
Journal Club. And just recently, Walt Crawford mentioned this humble
blog in the newest Cites & Insights thanks to a conversation of sorts between Angel, Walt and me. That my friends is more than enough ‘influence’ for me. By the way, that conversation was on gatekeeping, i.e., influence.
I could be accused of not trying hard enough to engage Steven in a conversation. And maybe there is some validity in that. But consider the following: He detests email. He believes the concept of info overload is complete crap. He has various and assorted ego searches set up as feeds. He works at PubSub. I posted a comment at his blog and included a link to my post. In my post I put in a link to Steven’s blog and four to various PubSub pages, to include The Librarian List. Various keywords, to include ‘Steven Cohen,’ are in my post.
My assumptions based on all of the above: Can’t email him. He isn’t overloaded in info, unlike some of us. My post should have shown up on his radar from multiple angles, to include the comment at his blog.
I am not trying to be critical or petty. I am trying to offer a critique. Maybe I need to be better educated as to how various tools work, such as PubSub, but then I have already stated that I am happy, and willing, to be educated. Despite any lack of education on my part though, it is the case that the current iteration of The Librarian List at PubSub has some bad data. That little notion my brain and education are quite capable of determining.
I must admit, I’m a bit taken aback by your comments. While I did see your comments in the many “Ego” feeds that I have set up, I didn’t take the time to respond because I didn’t think it warranted a response. My apologies for not responding. I’ve commented on LISNews about the PubSub community lists, so no need to reply again here.
As for not being able to get in touch with me, I must also admit that it is not easy. I am on e-mail all the time, but can’t respond to everything I get (this is not an ego thing, but the truth). That said, I have admitted in the past that I hate e-mail (still do, but it’s what we all use) and the best way to reach me is by phone and IM.I’ve actually said that on many occasions and it is in my contact page I actually prefer the phone and have a good cell plan so that I can used it a lot. Nothing beats a V2V conversation.
I’m sorry that you feel that you were being ignored. That clearly was not my intent. I truly believed that your blog post did not warrant a response from me. This one clearly did.
You mention on LISNews that you have met me in the past. Where? I’d love to be able to put a face to the name.
Last, I really do appreciate your comments (even though they seem a bit harsh) as they will only help me grow as a professional.
Yikes! I’m really sorry that you have not had such a positive experience both with the PubSub Community lists and the inability to get me to respond to your commentary.
First, I did read your original post, but didn’t see the need to respond (looking at it again, I still didn’t think that one was warranted). I do have many ego feeds set up (not just through PubSub) and see most of what is said about me (I think it’s important) and do respond when I feel the need is present.
Second, while I do hate e-mail (I really do), I do use it, and have mentioned this on many posts on my blog. So, you can get in touch with me via e-mail. That said, I can’t promise that I will respond right away. It might take a few days or a week depending on the nature of the message and what I have going on in life, work, etc. I also mention on my contact page that the best way to get in touch with me is via IM or phone. I prefer phone because I like talking to people V2V, it’s my nature.
As far as information overload, I stand by my remarks, that IO is man-made and totally “fixed” by making conscious choices about what we read. I refer you to my recent column in Public Libraries (Sept/Oct 2005) titled, “Moving Backwards From Information Gluttony”
Feel free to contact me via phone if you would like to discuss these issues further and being “fed up” with the library blogging community. We probably have similar views on that!
BTW, if you received two comments from me, please delete the first one. I don’t think that the first one went through from last night. Thanks.
Pingback: ...the thoughts are broken...