Another day, another dogfight blogfight.
Polimom really didn’t intend to post about the most recent blog-o-battle, but between conversations and chats, various e-mails, and the ongoing (and escalating) problems with Online Integrity, I’m capitulating.
Since this latest brouhaha is several days on, I’m assuming folks who might be interested are already up to speed. In a nutshell, Glenn Greenwald has launched some cannons at the right recently. The right unsurprisingly fired back, the overzealous got personal, and some comments were made in Greenwald’s defense from his same IP address. He then defended himself, suggesting that since an IP address often covers an entire household’s access point, and that he is well-known to respond quite directly on his own behalf, an alternative explanation should be considered.
Heads huddled, notes were compared, and conclusions were drawn: Glenn Greenwald (say many) disguised himself under a variety of aliases to defend himself. He has engaged in sockpuppetry — and that’s the only thing that distinguishes this from the run-of-the-mill left v. right flame war.
This morning, Confederate Yankee attempts to test the reasonableness of Mr. Greenwald’s defense:
I’ll let you be the judge, but as you consider these charges, first look inward, and ask yourself these questions:
- Who are your housemates?
- How interested is your housemate in your blogging?
- Does your housemate make it a habit to know who is criticizing your blog, and how to find these sites—and the specific posts on these sites—on the Internet?
- Does your housemate make it a habit to defend you on blogs?
- Wold he use multiple aliases to do so, and to what end?
- Can your housemate imitate your writing style precisely?
He then describes how this might work in his own household, concluding that since his housemate, for a variety of reasons, would not act in this way, it’s simply not viable.
While I strongly disagree with CY’s politics (and have voiced my differences more than once), I appreciate his attempt to think about this logically; calling for reason and logic speaks well of him. However, while Occam’s Razor does indeed generally cut in the direction of least resistance, one requires more datapoints to begin slicing.
For instance: several times at the Chronicle blog, Adorable Child (AC) — my highly gifted, intrepid internet-warrior-child — attempted to come to my defense. Happily, Polimom saw those comments come through; they never saw the “light of day” (and she and I talked about this very thing…).
Not only that, but Dear Husband (DH) is also internet savvy, and I’d be completely unsurprised to see him wade into a fray if he felt moved to do so (like… if I were bothered enough about it to discuss). While I’d be very surprised if DH used numerous aliases, I have no trouble seeing how such a thing could happen.
Therefore, Polimom submits that since Glenn Greenwald’s scenario could easily have played via my own household’s internet access point, his defense of those IP addresses is just as likely to be true as not; Occam’s Razor does not apply.
So — Will CY’s application of logic make the slightest dent in the blogosphere’s determination to judge from within its rigidly polarized trenches?
*snort*
Not a chance. Next week, or the week after, they’ll all be at one another’s throats again; just another day in the blogosphere.