Rules - Just Another Way To Be Hassled By the Man

by Jon Johnston on Jun 20, 2007 7:14 AM CDT in CN News

Rules for the College Football Blogosphere? There aren’t enough rules in the world already?

Peter Bean (BON) and Orson Swindle (EDSBS), two monsters of the college football blogosphere have put up a set of ‘proposals’ (rules) that they’d apparently like us to follow (join the movement, as BON says). I don’t get it - I really don’t.

The list of proposals (rules) sounds like a good idea - bringing up the level of discourse - but isn’t that also how you start paving the road to hell with good intentions? This year it starts with 17 rules and next year there’s 25, the year after that 35, then 50. There’s only one set of rules I’m aware that started at ten and has stayed at ten over the years and those involved a Supreme Being. Human beings can’t help themselves in this regard because they have a need to control the world around them.

I suppose it’s inevitable as the blogosphere evolution/revolution marches on, but I can’t help but feel saddened watching as non-conformists start to conform.

So to y’all joining this movement I say no thanks. I have no interest in following any form of rules regarding participation in the college football blogosphere. I reserve the right to make fun of any number of coaches that I feel like making fun of on any given day of the week. I reserve the right to bash the PAC-10. I reserve the right to be a reactionary boob if the situation presents itself and if I’m wrong, I’ll only apologize if I feel like it (or Mrs. Corn Nation makes me). I will not be bound by a bunch of rules because I won’t remember them anyway.

Referencing a particularly bad ‘70’s movie and Peter Fonda? I can’t get much lower than this can I?

Maybe I need to relax, eh? 45 years old and I still have a problem with authority. Maybe it’s the big chip on my shoulder. Maybe it’s because I want to be free to do what I want to do even if it’s the stupidest thing possible.

As long as the internets remain free (as in speech, not as in beer) I feel an obligation to honor that freedom. There are already too many rules to follow in the world and the blogosphere is one of the few places left that we aren’t forced to comply.

--JJ--

Tweet Comment 6 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

Those are just our pledges

Everyone's got their own standards, but you hit the nail on the head when you mentioned going along with the spirit of elevated discourse.

I'm sure you've got your own ideas for how you intend to cover football in '07.

And I think we all need some football so we can quit talking about needing some football. At least I do...

by HornsFan @ Corn Nation on Jun 20, 2007 8:06 AM CDT reply actions

Not conforming to the non-conformity

That may be the first time I've ever been referred to as a nonconformist. It feels . . . weird.

by Joel Hollingsworth on Jun 20, 2007 10:15 AM CDT reply actions

I think you're right on the money...

I'm completely in favor of your stance.
I mean, if Orson has selected Bobby Bowden as his punching bag...the minute he mentions the Fulmer cup, he's technically broken his own rule.
Like you mention, it's all well intended, but kind of silly to me...I mean, what's it coming to--"you're not promoting SMQ enough and are therefore in violation of Rule #7...you're henceforth banished from the blog community!"
And I expect that conference wars rule to last about two days...Like someone said it best in the EDSBS comments--"Regarding Rule #1: This is because we’re all just going to accept the inherent superiority of the SEC, year in and year out, as natural law, right?"

I realize that these guys maybe want to introduce something that will allow bloggers the mainstream credit they deserve for their tireless efforts. They probably think that an effort like this may allow them to be taken more seriously by those who might currently scoff. But who cares about that, I say. Obviously, good bloggers are already being taken seriously by their readers. It's the mainstream outlets that have become irrelevant, so it's as if OS & PB are saying "well we're looking to change what all you faithful readers have come to enjoy." The great thing about blogs is that you can tailor-fit your reading interests to those writers you enjoy...those who do it well get the hits and the others don't. Unenforceable "rules" don't sound like the blog community to me...more like the NCAA maybe.

This is all from one reader's perspective, but I admire you for taking a stand against this mumbo-jumbo.

by DTsker on Jun 21, 2007 11:59 AM CDT reply actions