Comments on: My problem with BlogHer http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/ Tact is for pussies Sat, 20 Mar 2010 19:54:39 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Avitable http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31517 Avitable Wed, 23 Jul 2008 03:05:29 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31517 <b>Tracy</b>, knew I could count on you. <b>Sarcastica</b>, just don't go getting pregnant. Tracy, knew I could count on you.

Sarcastica, just don't go getting pregnant.

]]> By: Sarcastica http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31513 Sarcastica Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:09:05 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31513 Sounds like a very good, fair, sensible idea. I'm for it! Sounds like a very good, fair, sensible idea. I'm for it!

]]> By: Tracy Lynn http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31505 Tracy Lynn Tue, 22 Jul 2008 22:17:35 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31505 I would totally be a part of such a thing. Always assuming I can manage to get online again. I would totally be a part of such a thing. Always assuming I can manage to get online again.

]]> By: Avitable http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31402 Avitable Sun, 20 Jul 2008 20:24:11 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31402 <b>Clayjack</b>, I'd never put those smilies on a professional site. I own a 7-figure national corporation and am very distinctly different in a professional capacity. <b>Danalyn</b>, you would be correct! <b>Marty</b>, you'd definitely be invited. Clayjack, I'd never put those smilies on a professional site. I own a 7-figure national corporation and am very distinctly different in a professional capacity.

Danalyn, you would be correct!

Marty, you'd definitely be invited.

]]> By: martymankins http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31397 martymankins Sun, 20 Jul 2008 19:02:05 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31397 As a former DINK, I could see the value of a site like that. In a way, I'm a DINK still, since my daughter lives with her mom and both my wife and I work. That means I can comment on your new site (when it's up) As a former DINK, I could see the value of a site like that.

In a way, I'm a DINK still, since my daughter lives with her mom and both my wife and I work.

That means I can comment on your new site (when it's up)

]]> By: Danalyn http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31396 Danalyn Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:59:23 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31396 But just for the hell of it...because they're here... :boobs4: :tongue1: :boobs2: :sex003: :cocksuck2: :sex007: :sex011: :jerkoff2: But just for the hell of it…because they're here…

:boobs4: :tongue1: :boobs2: :sex003: :cocksuck2: :sex007: :sex011: :jerkoff2:

]]> By: Danalyn http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31395 Danalyn Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:58:14 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31395 <b>@ Clayjack:</b> I don't Adam would actually put these smileys on the DINK site. ;) @ Clayjack: I don't Adam would actually put these smileys on the DINK site. )

]]> By: Clayjack http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31392 Clayjack Sun, 20 Jul 2008 18:52:58 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31392 Yeah, the "kids" one was probably below the belt. My bad. However, I still didn't have kids when I was your age (30ish, right?), and even 5 or so years later, so I know about living in a neighborhood with kids and not having any, and how that can kind of put you on the outs with many. Thankfully we lived next to a lesbian couple that was shitloads of fun. They didn't have kids, and in our area all the moms made a point of not making them feel welcome, either. So we'd hang out, drink, and tell stories about our intolerant neighbors. But I'm sticking to the masturbating smilies comment. Having sold web advertising to larger companies, I know they get queasy when they think their product identity will be tied to something like smiley faces spanking their monkeys. Yeah, the "kids" one was probably below the belt. My bad. However, I still didn't have kids when I was your age (30ish, right?), and even 5 or so years later, so I know about living in a neighborhood with kids and not having any, and how that can kind of put you on the outs with many. Thankfully we lived next to a lesbian couple that was shitloads of fun. They didn't have kids, and in our area all the moms made a point of not making them feel welcome, either. So we'd hang out, drink, and tell stories about our intolerant neighbors.

But I'm sticking to the masturbating smilies comment. Having sold web advertising to larger companies, I know they get queasy when they think their product identity will be tied to something like smiley faces spanking their monkeys.

]]> By: Avitable http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31389 Avitable Sun, 20 Jul 2008 15:59:06 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31389 <b>Clayjack</b>, it had nothing to do with your support of BlogHer. I was merely going by your comment, where you said, "the I don't get along in my neighborhood because I don't have kids section". That gives a pretty clear impression of how you personally categorize people with no kids. That, and "the masturbating smilies section (good luck getting advertisers for that one btw)" - I think you can see how I might feel that I've interpreted your words accurately. My audience is made up of about 60-70% parents and 90% women, so I would say that my demographic is just as much BlogHer's as it is any other. Finally, I didn't call you shitty. I called the attitude I perceived from your initial foray onto my blog shitty. That is a big difference - I have good friends who take shitty positions all of the time. Clayjack, it had nothing to do with your support of BlogHer. I was merely going by your comment, where you said, "the I don't get along in my neighborhood because I don't have kids section". That gives a pretty clear impression of how you personally categorize people with no kids. That, and "the masturbating smilies section (good luck getting advertisers for that one btw)" – I think you can see how I might feel that I've interpreted your words accurately.

My audience is made up of about 60-70% parents and 90% women, so I would say that my demographic is just as much BlogHer's as it is any other.

Finally, I didn't call you shitty. I called the attitude I perceived from your initial foray onto my blog shitty. That is a big difference – I have good friends who take shitty positions all of the time.

]]> By: Clayjack http://www.avitable.com/2008/07/18/my-problem-with-blogher/#comment-31388 Clayjack Sun, 20 Jul 2008 14:12:02 +0000 http://www.avitable.com/?p=1670#comment-31388 @Avitable - Is it conceivable that your audience is made up of people that align more closely with your demographic,and that that demo may not be as large as the BlogHer demo? Part of what I was trying to say was the DINK demo is likely far more varied than a DINK-focused site could handle, unless you're getting a few million unique visits a month out of the gate. And I'm confused as to how a guy applauding a women-centric event could be deemed a people-hater. Are you unable to absorb a message if it doesn't come encased in the wrapper of your choice? "77 people agree" doesn't seem like reason enough for me to crap on the event. I don't see that you have any advertising on this site. I don't on my blog, either. However, I have other sites that do earn some nice pocket change - it was from that perspective that I was laying out what I would see as monetization hurdles to your idea. My apologies if that didn't come in the form of a joke or snarkiness. But I will add that managing an online community of thousands (something I do) is way different than just letting fly with whatever acid is in your mouth at the moment - calling other people "shitty" on their first foray into your site will probably give you the chance to grow the new site at a slow, manageable pace. Good luck with your venture, and my apologies for stirring the pot. @Avitable –

Is it conceivable that your audience is made up of people that align more closely with your demographic,and that that demo may not be as large as the BlogHer demo? Part of what I was trying to say was the DINK demo is likely far more varied than a DINK-focused site could handle, unless you're getting a few million unique visits a month out of the gate.

And I'm confused as to how a guy applauding a women-centric event could be deemed a people-hater. Are you unable to absorb a message if it doesn't come encased in the wrapper of your choice? "77 people agree" doesn't seem like reason enough for me to crap on the event.

I don't see that you have any advertising on this site. I don't on my blog, either. However, I have other sites that do earn some nice pocket change – it was from that perspective that I was laying out what I would see as monetization hurdles to your idea. My apologies if that didn't come in the form of a joke or snarkiness. But I will add that managing an online community of thousands (something I do) is way different than just letting fly with whatever acid is in your mouth at the moment – calling other people "shitty" on their first foray into your site will probably give you the chance to grow the new site at a slow, manageable pace.

Good luck with your venture, and my apologies for stirring the pot.

]]>