Passive Agressive Blogging

So, one guy writes a post about how young people who were raised within the church are leaving behind Christianity and offers a few reasons why.  Good post.  Dude’s got a book coming out on the topic, and it looks to be pretty good.

But then, there’s this other blogger who doesn’t seem to much like the content of the first post.  Talks about how all those young people who leave church might still be Christians, and about how those who are worried about it are trying to maintain the status quo and want to feed kids pizza and show them a good time.  Goes so far as to call it all BS, and tells the kids to get a tattoo and realize that even though they don’t have the stomach to hang around the same screwed up churches Jesus died for they’re gonna be alright.  (I’m just gonna guess he hasn’t read the book.)

Here’s my problem:   I’m in a position where I have to infer from the evidence that blogger #2 was responding to #1.  Even though the second post uses the same language as the first, talks about the exact same subject, and is written only two days after the first post goes up, blogger #1 never gets a mention or a link.  Not one.

Oh, wait.  What’s that?  You say I didn’t link to them?

Here’s #1. And here’s #2.

And here’s the book, which I am rather excited to read.

Here’s the deal, wannabe writers and bloggers:  if you critique someone or their ideas, don’t couch it in indirect language that never mentions them by name.  Or do it without at least the courtesy of a link.  It’s called etiquette, and it applies to bloggers too.

Addendum: I never thought I’d be that crotchety old guy on the blogging corner telling the newbies to quit breaking all the rules, but here I am.  It won’t happen again.  Promise.

email
  • http://bensimpson.squarespace.com Ben Simpson

    We’re going to hold you to that promise.

  • http://mereorthodoxy.com Matthew Lee Anderson

    You had better, Ben. I need it. : )