News-Record.com

I hear their complaints but you know what-- their complaints are all a bunch of BS. Those of us who are at the top of the local blogging scene got there by blogging and busting our humps to make it work for all who want to be a part of it. In the Blogosphere the only way to get to the top is by including as many others as possible. Blogging may be solitary but success is plural.

As one of Greensboro's top 5 bloggers (according to Technorati and every other publicly available measure) and the founding and current organizer of Blogsboro I approve every area blogger who decides they want to be a part of what we're doing. To the best of my memory, Dr. Mary and Mister Wilson have NEVER taken part in anything we have done yet they have the audacity to call us a clique.

Blogsboro is the most successful and 9th. largest blogging group in the world (see the bottom of the linked page) with something like 120 +/- members-- a bit larger than your above average size clique. The eight cities above us have populations at least 4 times that of Greensboro and Toronto at #10 is also over 4 times the size of Greensboro.

Some have chosen not to take part but speaking as the ONE who has his finger on the "approve member" button I can honestly say no one has ever been turned away. Fact is: If I turned people away we would never have been as successful as we are.

Those who call is a clique are simply too (pick the one that fits) lazy, sorry, busy, shy, introverted, or disinterested to make the choice to participate online or offline. They also need to learn that it takes years to build an audience-- not weeks or months.

The meetings are every month, free to all, and you don't even have to be a member to attend. Anyone who thinks Blogsboro is exclusive or exclusionary needs to take it up with me as they simply don't have their facts straight.

Some people seem to assume "community" means one big happy group, or a group in which they can dictate the conversation, when it might actually mean a collection of several groups, each with shifting memberships and definitions over time. Some communities exist pretty much to oppose other communities.

The web allows groups to exist beyond many traditional constraints, but it doesn't change the tendency of people to select and behave on the basis of shared interests or other factors.

I think the Meetup group is a great thing, but I've never been to a Meetup; I use that time to interact offline with another group (my family).

I read the blogs that interest me, and post things that interest me, and that I think will be useful and interesting to my various audiences.

I maintain open comments at my site, but that in no way obligates me to believe or agree with everything that people say there.

The web offers a newspaper the opportunity to interact with its readers in new ways, and for readers to make themselves heard in new ways. It does not obligate the paper to do whatever these newly empowered people want at all times.

ConvergeSouth is open to all. That's one reason we have worked hard to keep it free. It's about learning to use the web in whatever way interests you. Some of the people who are most accomplished online are involved in politics, and we'll tap their expertise at the sessions without getting into the politics they espouse. That's true for Elizabeth Edwards, and for Red State's Mike Krempasky. If some people choose to paint this volunteer-driven event as something different, that's their choice, but that doesn't make it so.

I've asked Ed more than once why he doesn't ban certain commenters and he replies the same each time: he wants to keep an open forum where anyone can say anything. He hopes for the best (some truth, some accuracy) but understands that folks don't always agree and jeezie peezie, isn't that what communities are?

When Mr. Sun and I had an online pissing contest, we stepped back and then had lunch. Now we realize the vast range that humor encompasses and I think we'd call ourselves friends, or at least heading that way.

One chooses to be inside or outside a community. One joins by compromising, standing up for a position, and listening to others. When we refuse to listen, we hear only ourselves. And we stand alone. ConvergeSouth is the opposite of that - it's the time and place that anyone can say anything to anybody in the community - one hopes with a sense of honesty, truth, and community intention. That's simply being an authentic person.

Buber, one of my favorite philosophers, wrote, When man is so completely full of himself, there is no room for the Divine [paraphrased]. If people would be quiet enough to hear the still, small voice within them, then they could start to hear the sounds of other voices.

Shhhh. Listen.

False, but common, definition of "clique:" A group of like-minded people with whom I disagree and that I imagine is elitist or exclusive.

Looking forward to ConvergeSouth: A group of like-minded people with whom I agree and that I know is neither elitist or exclusive.

Regards,

Like-minded in that we all see possibility in expression and border-crossing via the web, but with a great diversity of political, social, and personal opinion, judging by the registration list.

The scorn and vective used to defend such an "open" "community" is just ... well.. interesting. (And possibly point-proving..)

Obviously I could start a blog. And, obviously I can go to ConvergeSouth. Both are free to do and I'm certain I would not be turned away. (Mocked, possibly... and not embraced, but probably not turned away.)

(And, if I did start a blog, I doubt I could be in the "top of the local blogging scene" -- again, another point-proving statement.)

Look, I take a contrarian point of view most of the time. That's fine. I expect not to be the best of buds with people.

JR says that everyone everywhere can visit his blog. So it's an open community. Well, I don't define that as an open community. If that was the case, we could define any website as an open community -- as long as it's not password protected.

But, if you look around at these blogs, they are essentially an insular community. The comments on each other's blogs are so populated with back-slapping inside comments and "fun" snipes it's just a turn off to me. (I guess I am a "lazy, sorry and introverted" person.)

Go a bit deeper in these blogs and it's all just like passing notes in middle school. All that's missing is the veiled sexual innuindo (which would actually make it a bit more interesting.)

Just look at the Converge South stuff (again, yes, it's free and open to everyone). But, c'mon. It's just the same, insular community running it.

And, these dinners (aside from maybe the BBQ) just reek of elitism: Liberty Oak, 223 S. Elm, Ganache, Europa.. etc. I suppose there is no Southern Lights there, but that's about all that is missing.

I really applaud what JR does. I do. And, to a lesser extent what the N&R is trying to do (minus Lex) But, don't tell me that just because anyone can visit these blogs that this is free of any and all barriers. Like-minded people in the blog world really only want to be around other like-minded people.

Don't disagree with people and certainly don't argue -- or else.

The tools are really the only difference.

I guess my mother taught me that people do treat other people differently based on if they agree with each other. (Just today JR blew off my journalism truisms because he didn't agree with them -- he actually called it "goofy stuff". So, don't lie to me people...)

I just wish I lived in the socialist utopia that this blog group does.

jim, why do you feel you would be mocked if you started a blog? or showed up at convergesouth as one of 250 *individuals*?

that answer might clear up a lot. (and i'm not mocking you)

I finally pierced JR's heart. Wow. How many times has he stomped on mine?

Jim had his say. Here's mine.

Billy, "Dr. Mary" (I would prefer Dr. Johnson, in deference to my deceased Father), has never been to any of your "blogsboro" events because "Dr. Mary" has "busted her hump" for EIGHT YEARS fighting corruption on a "local" level . . . both in the "non-profit" medical and legal sectors. JR doesn't want to hear about it or report on it. "Dr. Mary" travels for a living . . . having been black-balled locally because she chose to fight the corruption instead of just rolling over and letting her dreams of a hometown practice die. When you have a meeting, I'm generally three hours away.

The most profoundly disappointing/discouraging part of joining this "community" has been the snark and the name-calling. I HATE IT. I am NOT lazy, shy or "disinterested". I am very, very busy (working to pay the mortgage because I'm about five-hundred light years behind where I should be financially at this point in my career). I am also (believe it or not) fairly shy and introverted.

I don't feel a part of this "community" in large part because (1) I was kicked out of the real one unjustly, and (2) JR keeps passing me and my story back off to the boys in Asheboro. Well there's a problem with number 2. The boys running the journalistic show in Asheboro (A) have their own clique and my bad guys are a part of it, (B) don't print stories or letters that threaten the status quo, (C) have a crappy website (maybe they should send someone to Converge South), and (D) don't blog. I went to a Chamber of Commerce "business showcase" today at the YMCA in Asheboro. The News & Record had a booth (again, offering an "alternative" that isn't really). The Courier Tribune didn't even show up. They didn't have to. They control the "MSM" show and they know it.

I may have only had a blog for a few months (after commenting for about a year), but I've more than paid my dues to the "community" . . . whether the community knows it or appreciates it (and clearly it never has - or I wouldn't be the boat I'm in). Ed knows more about that now. He does not have permission to share.

One of the problems that I face as a physician blogging under my own name, is that I cannot say everything and anything I want to say . . . either on the blog . . . or in person. I can't tell every story.

As I told Ed Cone in private e-mail correspondence this week, I came to the blogosphere (1) because I was invited (and told it was another way to get MSM attention on the problems I've faced as a physician burned in public service), and (2) out of sheer desperation.

I've done nothing here but speak with passion, honesty and truth. Sue is annoyed and would ban the commentary (and that strikes me as both elitist and exclusive).

I have listened intently to the "helpful" suggestions (sometimes afterwards wanting to leap off a bridge). And for my trouble, I've pretty much been (1) ignored or (2) pounded.

As I told Ed, it's very hard to hear the same "helpful" suggestions (over and over again) . . . suggestions & avenues that I have already tried (I'm NOT as stupid as some of you assume) . . . and STILL get no substantive HELP in terms of MSM exposure.

Shhh. Listen. The problem is CRIMINAL. I can't (successfully) go "civil" again without getting someone to take some kind of action in terms of prosecuting or sanctioning. What about that does anyone not get? The Randolph County DA won't even meet with me and has NEVER returned correspondence. It took me three years to get an interview with the IRS (last week - I blogged on it) . . . and this only after pestering the crap out of Howard Coble). It's a black hole.

For anybody whining about the stalls and delays and radio silence in the GSO police department investigation, I know what it's like to get NOTHING out of the US Attorney's office . . . or the SBI.

So here it is. The "HELP" I need is a good investigative reporter . . . from a good local newspaper . . . someone to apply some heat to the seats of those in power and government (at the local and state levels) that are NOT doing their jobs. I need someone to shine some light in the black hole. That is the JOB of the press . . . and now of the blogosphere. At least that's what you keep telling us (JR and Ed).

Meet about it, talk about it, but talk is cheap. I need action.

In a sense, I am seeking the "divine". I am seeking a system of medicine, law, and journalism that really works for the good of those who practice those arts . . . and those who benefit from those arts when they are done right. I am seeking political leaders who will really represent the "ordinary" man or woman . . . and a press that will hold them acocuntable if they don't. Clearly I'm still looking in the wrong places.

Just a thought: The "top five" (or ten or whatever) bloggers in the area calling people "whack-jobs" or "cranks" (or declaring that what they have to say is "BS") is NOT exactly the best way to offer an invtitation to your blog parties (or disprove that cliques don't exist). In my case, it's like kicking an already (deeply) wounded animal and not expecting them to bite back.

I am not attending Converge South. I have a prevous engagement. Another time perhaps. In addition, I am simply not a John Edwards groupie (for VERY GOOD reasons that, as of today, I have explained in detail to Ed). I consider Ms. Edwards' presence politically polarizing and self-serving (as self-serving as was the Senator's tenure in the Senate). I may in the minority, but that's okay. I'm voting with my feet and going to the State Fair with my Mom instead.

Sean, I started a blog. And for several months I stayed exclusively there. I'm still mocked and made fun of when I come out to play (usually because I cannot stand the hypocrisy that stands between what some people are saying and what they are doing). Until fairly recently JR did not see fit to link it in his "community" blogroll.

Would I be mocked if I attended ConvergeSouth?

It depends. If I stood up in the group and introduced myself, it's highly likely I would be.

If I just blended in with the rest of the 250, then, no, obviously, no one would single me out.

If I was wearing a nametag (do people do that at CS?) I'd likely just be ignored in that situation -- or a handful of people would come up to me and ask why I don't jump on the blogsboro Kumbayah bandwagon..

With any blog I started, I'd likely never be included in "blogrolls" so the treatment would essentially be ignored. That is, unless, I became known and then I'd probably get traffic that lambasted me....

Jim, why would you be mocked if you introduced yourself at ConvergeSouth? (Quick answer: you wouldn't.) People are coming to this conference from DC and Atlanta and points in between to talk about and learn about using the web for blogs, audio, video, organizing, etc. That's it.

In terms of hit-count or agreement at a blog, again, I don't see anyone saying that access to potential readers is a promise of actual readers, or that having a voice online means people will agree or even respect what you say. Pareto curves (unequal attention in a marketplace) apply to blogs.

The web rewrites the rules of distribution, not the rules of human nature. The point of a web community is not that JR has to agree with whatever views are expressed, it's that he has access to them, and you have access to him.

Dr Johnson now has a much wider group of people who have heard a version of her story -- what they do with it, or don't do with it, is up to them.

The web allows people to participate in a broader forum, but it is NOT a socialist wonderland in which everyone is guaranteed attention, and I don't hear any of the bloggers hear saying it is.

Dr. J. writes from her own extrapolations, "Sue is annoyed and would ban the commentary (and that strikes me as both elitist and exclusive)."

Sue didn't say or write that. Nor is she currently banning anyone from her own blog. (She did once, for very bad language.)

But wait, oh yeah, Dr. Mary...doesn't need facts.

When some people join a conversation, it stops.

Jim, if you came to CS and introduced yourself, people would say, "Hello." Last year, we met people we disagree with vehemently and there were hugs all around. (You don't LOOK like what I THOUGHT you might look like!)

You might just be a little too full of yourself and your impact on others - c'mon over and meet all the the folks and I'm pretty sure you'll find out you like some of them. And they might like you. Is it easier to hide at home or behind a fake online persona and ass.u.me what others will do than it is to step outside your comfort zone and shake hands?

As for the restaurants downtown, we required a few things:
1. The ability to seat 10-15 people.
2. Reasonable price ranges.
3. Taking reservations.
4. Having a menu that diverse people could enjoy.
5. Agreeing to special/lower prices for the conference people (and a limited menu)
6. Quiet enough to hear each other talk.
7. Able to walk from downtown hotels to restaurants.

The bars don't fit #3 and #6 and we had to sadly reject them for dinner because we eat there all year long and enjoy them.

If you know of other restaurants that fit, let us know (because Sean did show us a new one and we swooped it up for a dinner.)

It's so easy to sit back and hide and point fingers. It's more difficult to become engaged.

jim, i can assure you that you'd be mocked a whole lot more in a comment thread.

hand shakes in the real does that for people; we quickly recognize that we have more things in common (skin, hair, eyes, etc.) than not.

Three comments in a row. Someone is testy. Talk about a conversation stopper. Put all three together and they're as long/"verbose" as mine.

Sue, at the risk of getting into a "pissing contest" with you, here's a fact: your "advice" re: my situation in Asheboro has essentially been to "get over it/go away" or "get psychological help". I'm not going to do either, so let's move on from that.

I have done NOTHING but tell the truth here - and try to "engage" WAY OUTSIDE of most doctor's comfort zones. I'm not here to be "full of myself", I came to these blogs FOR HELP. That in itself would be a story angle.

But Sue you're not the one I'm trying to MOVE on this one. JR is the "local" newspaper editor who joined the blogosphere and sent out an open invitation for "citizen journalists" and blathers on and on and on about "community". My problem is that I believed him.

News flash: I'm not asking for "agreement". I'm asking for this newspaper to regrow a spine and send a reporter down to an area it says it covers and just tell the story that's right under its nose. It's a story that I think that most of locals (who don't blog and who depend on the MSM for their news) are ready to hear.

Are any of these things acceptable to you?

(1) "Non-profit" officials threatened then fired a physician for doing her job . . . for saving a child's life and then blowing the whistle. They destroyed her practice and kept it as their own.

(2) When she fought back, those officials, bankrolled by the taxpayer, filed a SLAPP suit to intimidate the physician into silence (they wound up tucking tail and running from it after the doctor spent many thousands of dollars defending it).

(3) The government (state & federal) that the physician served (Clinton/Hunt/Easley administrations - and Edwards tenure) . . . whose contracts/agreements/codes/laws were violated right and left . . . did not lift a finger to help the doctor.

(4) Hospital officials turned insult into injury when they lied under Oath to keep their financial records and their own bloated salaries from scrutiny. They totally hosed the doctor at settlement. The whole point of the lawsuit was that the physician would be able to afford to come home and rebuild what had been so maliciously been destroyed. What these "pubic servants" did "IS" in black and white AND against the law.

(5) Local law enforcement and state officials (supposedly so concerned about "ethics) could care less that the law was broken . . . and have ignored the doctor's pleas for proper investigation/prosecution.

I'm just curious (and trying to keep the conversation from stopping), what do you think about all of that (JR/Sue/Ed)? Do you think that any of these things are acceptable? And if you don't, what is your responsibility, as a group of local "citizen journalists" (which includes the big boys at the N&R)? Why does one have to audition or somehow qualify for attention?

So far you're not talking about the merits of my case (you can't really - because the journalists in this club have NOT come down to look at the evidence). You're just dissing me . . . because I've dared to share that my view from "the bottom" of the GSO blogosphere. You're "in" or you're out. It's like a bad episode of Project Runway.

I still moderate the comments on my blog - for language and snarkdom. Just like JR edits - or completely ignores - his letters and stories.

Just curious (Sue) which commenters would you ban, Sue? Becasue I think Bubba and Sam have offered many gems over at Ed's . . . and ad a balance that makes the blog readable to those of us who do not worship at the altar of the Democratic Party. Even Connie Mack Berry has been kinder to me (in private correpondence) than you have.

I understand that Converge South is your baby, and that by offering up a dissenting voice about what it means to me (kinda the point of an open forum and free speech), I am peeing your on cornflakes. But maybe YOU need to step back and look at the way YOU approach people . . . especially the newbies. It's something to discuss at Converge.

Now, I put up a long post on the Goodyear situation last night, and I've spent far too much time here doin blog-battle. I'm grateful Jim showed up to help me represent "the cranks", but I'm on vacation and I'm leaving for the day. Talk amongst yourselves.

Converge on your targets. Protest too much. But understand (as Jim pointed out) if you do stoop to that (again), you're just proving our point . . . the one that bothers JR so much.

The conversation stopper, I think, is that you make the same point over and over and over again. When challenged -- for instance, I never called you a name and I'm pretty sure Beau didn't -- you continue to insist your version is truth. When I've told you why we're not going to write your story, you continue to insist that it is our responsibility.

All of that is within your rights. But it doesn't engage people in constructive conversation. And constructive conversation -- which includes constructive dissent -- is part of what community is about.

Jim, you had a few good points along the way, but you are way off base on some of your assumptions. I'll address one in particular--the notion that your blog would be ignored. I'm the curator of Greensboro101.com. We have two criteria for including blogs on Greensboro101. 1) That you live in or write about the Greensboro area and 2) that your content not be strictly commercial. Would those exclude you?

It seems to me as if you are making excuses. If you started a blog it would be equally accessible among the other 100 + blogs on Greensboro101. The rest would be up to you--to write something that people would be interested in reading. Are you up to it or would you rather continue to make excuses based on speculation?

Well, Mary, you gotta admit that these guys have plenty to be smug about.

this whole smug meme is cracking me up... i've lived in greensboro for just over a year now. while it's true that i blogged for years before moving here, it's also true that i've never found a more open community than down here; both in the real (much moreso than in nyc, jersey or western mass.) and online.

moral of the story: you get back what you put into it.

in my case, i made it a point to meet as many of the local bloggers in the area as soon as i got to town -- not to woo them to my ways or link whore -- but to make a connection, so that my sense of community is tighter. do i agree with everyone's perspectives? hell no, but that won't stop me from enjoying a conversation over coffee.

now, i imagine if instead of simply meeting people, i tried to force coverage of the injustice of being dooced last year onto local bloggers and media outlets -- turning it into my one-trick pony conversational piece -- i doubt the "community" would appear to be so open to me in return.

think about that for a minute, DMJ. maybe, just maybe, your approach to participating in community is your own worse enemy.

I was not coming back, but got pulled in by an e-mail which generated a post on my own blog. I stopped in here before I left. Against my better judgement, I'm jumping in one more time.

John, you have not told me "why". You have said one thing and done another (and I have pointed it out) over and over and over again. You've made excuses. But you have NOT given me a good reason why. If meeting face to face is so important at Converge South for "constuctive conversation", then perhaps it should be so with people who have responded to your call and have brought you stories that are very important to them. I do see it as a responsibility (to the community you say you cover) at which you have failed miserably. I'm the Muslim cartoon of the GSO blogging "community" (talked about but never seen or heard). And I'm cranky about it.

I say things three or four or more times because (shhh) you don't listen. Again (for the third time), it is a very convenient (and odious) trick of the pen to throw someone else's word out there (a word you KNOW will insult and inflame) to make your point, and then say you never said it, or meant it. You're upset now because some of us did see the slight of hand and called you on it.

I don't think the conversations get shut down when I or Jim or others show up. I think they just get started. They're often shut down when the truth in some of the comments hits a little too close to home (by snarkdom, name-calling, or ignoring the commenter).

Sean, I addressed addressed why I can't make all the blog parties (and it has something to do with what I'm talking about and why I came here). The fact that it cracks you up, makes me sad.

Yes, Brian, these guys have plenty to be smug about. They also have room for much improvment.

I'm signing off for the weekend. Resume converging and protesting.

i'll save you a tissue, DMJ.

This is the kind of thing that I meant when I addressed the conversation stopper idea: you telling me how I've done you wrong and me responding. It'd be one thing if this were only the first or second time this has occurred, but it's not. And so a decent discussion about community devolves into the same old thing.

To set the record straight again, I never said we would do all stories that an individual brought to us so please stop writing that I've broken some kind of commitment.

I've told you we're not interested in pursuing your story and why. You don't understand it and won't accept it. It's like a person who loves watching golf persuade a person who isn't interested in it of how much fun it is. Talk all you want about competition and tension and amazing shots, but it's still not worth it to the other person. So there we are. I can't explain it to you beyond what I have.

Anyone want to go back to discussing cliques within the blogosphere?

The biggest clique may be all those folks who've written and called AFTER we closed registration to see if it'd be OK if they came to ConvergeSouth. Because my email is the only one on the Web site, I get most of the questions (and farm them out). I've been telling folks:
1. C'mon over.
2. Be prepared to share a lunch. We ordered for more than our expectations which were lower than reality. (make a friend, share a sandwich)
3. Press passes - tis funny for an unconference but we made some.
4. Wonder if we can talk A&T into making a bigger auditorium?

Anyway, how the heck can there be a clique when 300 people want to do the same thing?

DMJ: "I'm the Muslim cartoon of the GSO blogging "community" (talked about but never seen or heard). And I'm cranky about it."

so you're talked about, but never seen and heard... and that's JR's or independent bloggers fault?

if you want to be seen, make yourself available to be seen in the real.
if you want to be heard, stop shouting in our ears.

simple.

Our trip to the fair was postponed due to the cold front.

JR, YOU put me front and center in this blog post. You could've put any other of your pet "cranks" front and center . . . and probably could've avoided a good portion of this conversation all together. But you picked me . . . and this weekend to do it. It's a weekend where you will be trying to impress everyone at the blog party (including Elizabeth Edwards - the wife of a candidate for whom the state newspapers would like to smooth a path to the Presidency).

You're also starting to feel some real heat about your newspaper's coverage of the Police Department debacle . . . and one of the best words in the world to describe that coverage is "cliquish". Sooner or later the US Attorney's Office (or SBI) is gonna get real tired of people "leaking" all over their investigations and start sending out subpoenas.

You stirred this pot I suspect your motives were not as high-minded as you want everyone to believe. Perhaps you wanted to have someone's riddled body to poke and chuckle about over sandwiches others bring to Converge South?

I realized something yesterday, after "listening" and considering all of the protesting here.

I've put it all out there . . . on a website . . . then in commentary . . . then in a blog. I've been as honest and as forthright as I could. I've made myself available and asked to be "seen" (i.e. interviewed by a reporter). It's been an effort not only to find "justice" for me, but to make the world a better place for those who come after . . . particularly young doctors who find themselves mired in the same kinds of horrific situations with nowhere to go (and they're out there - even if the AMA and NCMS would like to pretend that they are not). It's also for the patients who get caught in the middle. The patients are what it's all about. Ed knows a little bit more about that now.

It's interesting that you bring up golf in that the Randolph County DA was too busy playing it (before his auto accident) to grant me a simple one-on-one. Just like you.

As I have put it all out there, I have answered every question that I legally could. I have put up the long version and the short version. I have bent over backwards to hang in there while the usual suspects (the word is "cliques") beat me silly and called me names (keep your tissue sean).

I realized yesterday that I asked you some questions . . . I listed the things that have happened to me and asked you if they were acceptable (in our society). You did not answer. If the answer to that question is YES, then you've got nothing to loose any sleep about. But if the answer to that question is NO, then you are not doing your job as a "local" journalist . . . particularly a blogging one.

Simple.

It's the gang up tactics, primarily the use of on-line intimidation that I find the most objectionable.

It's like being in school with a group of bullies. I did not tolerate that kind of puerile behavior then, and will not tolerate it now.

When I first started to post on local blogs, I expected an open discussion of ideas without snark, ridicule, over-the-top arrogance or intimidation tactics. I soon found that was not going to be the case. I responded in kind, and will continue to respond in kind.

I am particlarly amused at the "who, us?" attitude we always get when bringing this topic up for discussion.

When we hear them talk about "buiding community", it is a reference to this group's idea of a community, not mine......or many other's idea of what a "community" should actually be.

By the way, Sue: Since Ed won't respond to your request to "ban" me from his site, feel free to "ban" me from your site if it will satisfy your need to stroke your hubris.

Dr. Johnson -- Again, I'm the one who introduced the word "cranks" here to the best of my knowledge, though I did so in an e-mail to Jay Rosen. I didn't identify anyone in particular.

But perhaps I used the wrong word here. Perhaps JR's most frequent commenters are actually the clique, and JR is the outsider. As he says, he doesn't have an "Amen chorus" here.

As for ConvergeSouth -- there are ultimately several levels of community. We're all humans, all of us here (I think) are Americans, most of us here have some tie to North Carolina. Most of us probably like barbecue and Sundrop. Then it diverges -- political interests, social interests, hobbies, musical tastes, religion, etc. If you define yourself only in terms of your most narrow interests, then it's tough to be part of the larger community.

At some point, we become the Goth kids in South Park -- complaining about being outsiders, though the reality is that we're even more cliquish than the supposed "in" crowd. I'm not judging here -- I've done it myself! Many times. Sometimes, we want to feel oppressed. Then we make it so.