<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"><HTML DIR=ltr><HEAD><META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"></HEAD><BODY><DIV><FONT face='Arial' color=#000000 size=2><FONT size=2>
<P>I don't do a blog myself and read them only rarely, but I believe they are
another valid form of communication. According to the political pundits, some of
the blogs are the best researched "journalism" around. </P>
<P> </P>
<P>> Just trying to get some info.</P>
<P>> </P>
<P>> What is the appeal of Blogs?</P>
<P>Some of the appeal is being able to publish your views, information you've
discovered, etc with little or no cost and possibly have really wide
distribution. Our former Baron, Sir Galen, had an opinion column he flogged to a
variety of small newspapers. I cannot speak for him, but I expect he hoped to
change a few opinions, put out his viewpoints eloquently, and perhaps make some
money in the process. Blogs don't typically make money (except by advertising on
their web sites), but they meet all the other criteria and cost essentially
nothing.</P>
<P>> Do people who have Blogs think that no one will read them and put their
own spin on things?</P>
<P>Most bloggers hope others will read their opinions and respond to them on
their blog. Most are interactive exchanges as opposed to diaries.</P>
<P>> What do you do if someone takes your blog out of context?</P>
<P>You copyright the information in a prominent place on the web site. If
someone takes you out of context and you object, you can use the copyright to
force them to retract and stop using your data.</P>
<P>> How do you let someone know if something on a blog hurts you?</P>
<P>Respond on their blog. They may or may not care. If it is not slander or
liable, you cannot make them stop (freedom of speech). </P>
<P>> </P>
<P>> Personally I would much rather talk to people on the phone or in person
or write my private thoughts in a diary than something that can be accessed by
anyone with a internet connection.</P>
<P>Some people want their communications to be fairly private. Others like the
limelight. It is a matter of personal style.</P>
<P>> </P>
<P>> Do you think that Officers, nobles, peers etc should be held to higher
standard on a blog? If so why?</P>
<P>I believe people who are seen to represent a group (the SCA, the Boy Scouts,
etc) can be held to a reasonable standard for their behavior on blogs by the
group. You choose to become a representative of the group. You can always decide
not to be a representative if the cost to your freedom is too great. I think the
group has a right to expect you to be truthful, respectful, and above board in
your discussions about them - in a blog or any other media.</P>
<P>> </P>
<P>> Perhaps these are easy or hard questions. Just trying to figure out the
whole Blog concept and idea.</P>
<P>Search the web for info on blogs and blogging. There is much to absorb and I
certainly am not an expert in this area.</P>
<P>> </P>
<P>> If problems arise from a blog comment what do you think is the best way
to correct that situation?</P>
<P>Depends on the problem. If your prior comments imply someone's feelings are
hurt or someone posts a message while an officer of an SCA group that is at best
unflattering to the group, then those who feel they have transgressed should
communicate with them and express their expectations and feelings. If there is
no change, those persons should decide if it is worth communicating with the
blogger's superiors in the group. </P>
<P>> </P>
<P>> Looking forward to the commentary.</P>
<P>> </P>
<P>> Richard Fairbourne</P>
<P>Caelin on Andrede</P>
<P> </P>
<P> </P></FONT></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>