Blog envy or blog petty? Corrected Version.

datePosted on 17:18, February 15th, 2012 by Pablo

A fellow named Andrew Geddis posted on another NZ blog a post about electoral reform in which he takes a swipe at KP for not having “dirt under its fingernails.” I do not know this fellow, and he certainly does not know me. Nor does he seem to know that KP is a collective, not an individual effort.

I take it that he believes that KP (whether singular or plural) does not practice what it preaches, as if KP was some sort of effete armchair intellectual circle jerk that is not grounded in real life praxis or any experience with real politics. In a word, he appears to think that KP is all bluster and no substance.

I cannot speak for the other KP members but I know them and can say with some confidence that we, collectively and individually have, are and/or will continue to engage in real politics as well as in political discussion and debate. My experience was mainly in US government service of one sort or another as well as academia (teaching aspects of politics), and after I came to NZ, in voluntarilly helping in the defense of Ahmed Zaoui  and the Urewera 18 against scurrilous charges of terrorism, among other things academic and not.

I am therefore somewhat perplexed by Mr. Geddis’s negative mention of KP. Does he have a beef with one of us? Is there some history I am unaware of? Otherwise I am at a loss to explain what in any event appears to be an unprovoked jibe that has no basis in fact.

Can anyone illuminate me as to what might be going on?

Update:  As several readers including Andrew himself have pointed out, the remark that I found untoward was in fact a joke. As I said in the comments, that pretty much confirms that I am humorless, or at least thin-skinned where KP’s integrity and “grounding” is concerned. I apologise to Andrew for misconstruing his words. What is interesting, once again, is that in contrast to more thoughtful posts, this post on a trivial matter enjoyed a strong upward spike in page views. I guess even reasoned people like to read about unreasonable silliness.

15 Responses to “Blog envy or blog petty? Corrected Version.”

  1. James Butler on February 15th, 2012 at 17:23

    If you’re referring to this:

    We all know that Pundit readers are the best, most informed, wisest and subscribe to the highest possible standards of personal hygiene in the entire blogosphere.

    (Yeah, Kiwipolitico … I’m looking at you and asking when you last cleaned under your fingernails?)

    …then I read it as a light-hearted joke. Plus it seems to imply that Kiwipolitico does have dirt under its fingernails.

  2. Pablo on February 15th, 2012 at 17:42

    Thanks James, I hope that you are correct. I read it differently.

  3. nommopilot on February 15th, 2012 at 17:49

    pretty definitely sure it was a joke…

  4. Pablo on February 15th, 2012 at 17:55

    OK, just call me humorless.

  5. Will de Cleene on February 15th, 2012 at 19:44

    I read it as a light-hearted challenge, like being slapped by a mitten. A blog war between a law wonk and an IR wonk, while entertaining, isn’t that constructive to tweaking MMP.

  6. Hugh on February 15th, 2012 at 19:49

    Trolls. Don’t feed them. ‘Nuff said.

  7. Graeme Edgeler on February 15th, 2012 at 21:25

    I suspect this blog was chosen for the clearly humorous swipe because, it is the blog of academics (Andrew is a professor of law at Otago) and is therefore often pitched at a high level.

  8. Andrew Geddis on February 16th, 2012 at 07:33

    Pablo,

    While explaining is losing, can I just say … it was an absurdist joke, intended as a light-hearted tweak at a “rival” site of intelligent analysis (cf many other blogs) and not meant to be reflective of any shortcomings with you personally or any of your colleagues (if, indeed, such things exist).

  9. Pablo on February 16th, 2012 at 08:07

    Andrew: Sorry about that. I read it the wrong way. I have corrected the post in an update to reflect your true intent.

  10. Tiger Mountain on February 16th, 2012 at 11:05

    Andrew gets it wrong too as do most of us sometimes. During the launch of the “teapot tapes” saga he vociferously maintained a certain wording attributed to the HOS and quoted in a post by The Standard blog and also by Mathew Hooten; was incorrect. He was wrong, the fluid nature –ie they change the online edition at will, was what caught him out. Luckily multiple versions usually survive somewhere out there in such situations.

  11. Hugh on February 16th, 2012 at 18:03

    “What is interesting, once again, is that in contrast to more thoughtful posts, this post on a trivial matter enjoyed a strong upward spike in page views. I guess even reasoned people like to read about unreasonable silliness.”

    Or maybe your readers aren’t as reasonable as you think!

  12. alex on February 17th, 2012 at 11:13

    I would take it as a compliment if I were you, obviously he considers your blog academically worthy of a sly jibe. I notice he didn’t make the joke about, say, Kiwiblog.

  13. Luc Hansen on February 17th, 2012 at 21:13

    No, no, Alex, DPF does take well to jokes about his own running joke – Kiwiblog.

    He was most displeased when I made what I thought was a brilliantly perceptive suggestion that he change his motto “-Fomenting Happy Mischief…” to “fomenting willful ignorance…”

    So maybe the lesson is that blog owners lose their sense of humor at times just as commenters overrate their own intellectual heft!

  14. Luc Hansen on February 17th, 2012 at 21:31

    “…does not take well…”

    Sorry.

  15. Jackal on February 18th, 2012 at 13:16

    Explaining is not losing Pablo. Well said.

Leave a Reply

Name: (required)
Email: (required) (will not be published)
Website:
Comment: