![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Jul. 9th, 2008
shouting from atop my tiny soapbox
Jul. 9th, 2008 05:05 pmBoing-Boing is not a personal website/blog. Boing-Boing is not equivalent to my LiveJournal.
it was a print zine before it was a website, and currently it makes enough money to have a full-time employee. that makes it a business, not a hobby or personal sandbox in my book.
i would say that the site has a collective editorial voice, and it is one that speaks very strongly for transparency and freedom of access to information. at least one of the editors is publicly critical of unannounced 1984-style changes to web pages.
therefore, mass unpublishing is bullshit. the most annoying thing is a group of people who showed previous evidence of intelligence being *confused* by the negative reaction.
google your own citations. i don't feel like lending them my meagre traffic right now.
it was a print zine before it was a website, and currently it makes enough money to have a full-time employee. that makes it a business, not a hobby or personal sandbox in my book.
i would say that the site has a collective editorial voice, and it is one that speaks very strongly for transparency and freedom of access to information. at least one of the editors is publicly critical of unannounced 1984-style changes to web pages.
therefore, mass unpublishing is bullshit. the most annoying thing is a group of people who showed previous evidence of intelligence being *confused* by the negative reaction.
google your own citations. i don't feel like lending them my meagre traffic right now.
shouting from atop my tiny soapbox
Jul. 9th, 2008 05:05 pmBoing-Boing is not a personal website/blog. Boing-Boing is not equivalent to my LiveJournal.
it was a print zine before it was a website, and currently it makes enough money to have a full-time employee. that makes it a business, not a hobby or personal sandbox in my book.
i would say that the site has a collective editorial voice, and it is one that speaks very strongly for transparency and freedom of access to information. at least one of the editors is publicly critical of unannounced 1984-style changes to web pages.
therefore, mass unpublishing is bullshit. the most annoying thing is a group of people who showed previous evidence of intelligence being *confused* by the negative reaction.
google your own citations. i don't feel like lending them my meagre traffic right now.
it was a print zine before it was a website, and currently it makes enough money to have a full-time employee. that makes it a business, not a hobby or personal sandbox in my book.
i would say that the site has a collective editorial voice, and it is one that speaks very strongly for transparency and freedom of access to information. at least one of the editors is publicly critical of unannounced 1984-style changes to web pages.
therefore, mass unpublishing is bullshit. the most annoying thing is a group of people who showed previous evidence of intelligence being *confused* by the negative reaction.
google your own citations. i don't feel like lending them my meagre traffic right now.