Skip to comments.Why do I have to tolerate bloggers
Posted on 01/11/2010 9:58:22 AM PST by VaRepublican
sick of bloggers
Ok Im I’m not to bright. How can I see all stuff minus bloggers?
I don’t pimp my blog here, but I don’t mind as these bloggers are MURDERING the MSM.
Put up with it.
The good ones will survive and are really hurting the MSM.
I’m going to blog about this post and put a teaser into Breaking News.
1. Aer u loged inn?
Actually, everything written by a blogger (or anyone) is copyrighted. They just own their own copyright and can do whatever they wish with it.
You would get more hits on this post if you only put a link to your blog.
ya know what?.... thats fine but I dont want them showing up on MY SCREEN!!!!! you can read them and give them “hits” all you want but pulease enuf!!!!!
The one word blog pimps are tiresome. Especially since so many of them don’t participate in any other fashion.
I think a “reverse excerpt” rule should apply. There’s plenty of sites that FR only allows the first 300 words or less of the story to be posted. I think bloggers should be required to post a minimum of 100 or so words of their “stuff” so we can judge if it’s worth going to their site.
I think that would cut down on the pimps.
Fine... You win all bloggers all the time.
Oh and hello I did not say get rid of tyhem I just asked about me not seeing them!!!!!
Copy EVERYTHING they excerpt.
Post it as a reply. Now no one needs to click their blog.
It pisses them off - big time.
sorry back to work, I will look at later
Actually, their stuff IS copyrighted. According to US law, as soon as original written material is transcribed into any sort of "permanent" form, it becomes copyrighted to the author, even if it is not "officially" registered with the FedGov's copyright office, and even if the author doesn't put up one of those copyright symbols.
This! Thread! Could! Go! All.... The..... Way!!!!!!
I am with you. I like news. I like opinion. But IMO the blog thing is getting out of hand.
I click on articles thinking they are intelligent opinion, only to find out it is simply some guy ranting about one thing or another.
Guy goes into a bar, there's a robot bartender.
The robot says, "What will you have?" The guy says, "Martini." The robot brings back the best martini ever and says to the man, "What's your IQ?" The guy says, "168". The robot then proceeds to talk about physics, space exploration and medical technology.
The guy leaves, but he is curious, so he goes back into the bar. The robot bartender says," What will you have?" The guy says, "Martini". Again, the robot makes a great martini, gives it to the man and says, "What's your IQ?" The guy says, "100." The robot then starts to talk about NASCAR, Budweiser and John Deere tractors.
The guy leaves, but finds it very interesting, so he thinks he will try it one more time. He goes back into the bar. The robot says, "What will you have?" The guy says, "Martini", and the robot brings him another great martini. The robot then says, "What's your IQ?" The guy says, "Uh, about 50." The robot leans in real close and says, "So, you people still happy you voted for Obama?"
You’re not really a waterway with a handicap, are you.
To be honest I don’t golf.
While suturing a cut on the hand of a 75 year old rancher whos hand was caught in the gate while working cattle, the doctor struck up a conversation with the old man. Eventually, the topic got around to Obama and his bid to be our president.
The old rancher said, Well, ya know, Obama is a Post Turtle .
Not being familiar with the term, the doctor asked him what a post turtle was.
The old rancher said, When your driving down a country road, and you come across a fence post with a turtle balanced on top, thats a post turtle .
The old rancher saw the puzzled look on the doctors face, so he continued to explain, You know he didnt get up there by himself, he doesnt belong up there, and he doesnt know what to do while hes up there, and you just wonder what kind of dumbass put him up there to begin with.
This is true.
heard any good jokes lately?
First, I hate the blogs that are posted as “news/activism”, mostly it’s the financial stuff from various blogs like ZeroHedge.
Second, I hate the bloggers who take a real news story, excerpt it on their blog, and then post their blog’s excerpt here, inviting people to go to their blog, where they just have the excerpt from the news site. That’s fine if you want your blog to be a news site excerpt, but why not just post the actual news link here? (we know the answer, trying to drive up google ad revenue).
Third, I hate the bloggers who post excerpts from their blogs that tell you nothing about what the story is, hoping to trick you into going to their blog to read the full entry.
Fourth, I have a true disdain for bloggers who put the source as a real news source, but the link is really to their blog, so you think they are sending you to a news site and you end up on their blog.
Last, I have contempt for the bloggers who specifically ask you to respond IN THEIR BLOG, and worse who will never respond to anything you post in their threads here, as if it is too hard for them to read responses to what they have written.
However, for most of these, I think you just need to de-select “bloggers and personal” from the list of things you want to look at. Having never done this myself, I don’t know exactly how it is done.
I prefer gandalf instead.
I totally agree with you. All sorts of bloggers who are on FR simply to pimp their blogs and increase ad revenue. And they typically only include excerpts from their blogs.
I’ve called a couple of them out on it, and they rebuke ME, calling ME names!
Yes, VaRepublican — self-serving bloggers are taking from FR more than they are giving to FR.
Grey or white version?
your default bookmark for FR and you shouldn’t see the blog posts.
If people would stop clicking or responding to them they would disappear off the forum page pretty quickly most of the time.
But then I’d lose out on the childish pleasure I have of posting the blog they want us to click upon in the thread...
What usually happens is the article comes out on Drudge and the MSM. Then the blog pimps change the title and regurgitate [in more ways than one].
I’m sick of them. There should be some controls.
Not onyl the blog pimps call you names but some Freepers do as well.
Apparently they don’t mind being a party to the pimping.
We’re not allowed to advertise on FR in our taglines or otherwise. Why is it okay to blog pimp? It is advertising.
I’m going to start doing that.
We need to be more aggressive in combating them.
Absolutely ~ everything I write is copyrighted and I know it. Being a part time non-Islamic Jihadi it’s a good idea to avoid violating my copyright ~ except FR has a special exception ~ which I granted to them when I signed on to post stuff here.
Otherwise, I'm probably going to find the same content on another thread.
Along that same line, I wish people here would learn how to exerpt.
For example, the headline says, “Harry Reid Has Long List of Racist Comments.”
Then the poster here includes only the first two introductory paragraphs of the NY Post article. But he does not post the actual meat of the article. You don’t get to read the other racist comments unless you go to the original source. UGH!!!!!
Black and Blue.
See post 12.
Alright!!!! High fivin’ ya on that!
We have rules about sources that MUST be excerpted. Hope this helps.
I'd love to filter the blog pimps too.
You really really really have to see this blog:
Some don't even change the title or regurgitate. They just link the original MSM page.
Here is an excellent example. And it’s done repeatedly.
Im going to start doing that.
We need to be more aggressive in combating them.
That's a good idea. I don't do it all the time, because sometimes I don't want to take the effort, but I do it now and then... :-)
Besides, whatever is on a website will disappear later on, but here on Free Republic (as long as we keep it going) having it "documented" on the thread, keeps it up and visible, even after the blog dies and goes away, which is useful for us documenting stuff...
But not that you have to leave out the important parts.
When I excerpt something, I try to choose the most important 300 words. It’s more work, but that way the information is here, and you don’t have to go to the other source that might change their links or might be blocked for some sites.
I understand the exerpt rules.
But why not exerpt the MEAT of the article, in place of the first paragraph that usually has little or no details?
In other words, if you are going to post an article, make sure that your exerpt matches the headline.
That’s all I am saying.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.