Doc Searls and Dave Rogers Converse

I was happy to read about Dave Rogers’s and Doc Searls’s conversation on Dave’s blog the other day. Both write about subject matter I care about – various intersections of society and the web – and have opinions I respect, if not always agree with.

The back and forth between them is a great and rare example of how two people of very, very differing opinions can converse and connect across the Web.

So color me sad when I read Stowe Boyd’s response. Yes, Dave called him blowhard. But his denouncement of Dave was downright Cheney-like, putting words in his mouth and even calling Dave an “enemy of the future”.

I hope I never get such an elitist, my-view-is-the-only-correct-view way of looking at the Web or the world.

4 thoughts on “Doc Searls and Dave Rogers Converse

  1. It’s Stowe, not Steve.

    I am not an elitist: I just don’t like his argument that the Internet sucks, and anyone advocating it is feeding the world a ‘line of shit’. And I don’t like him calling me a blowhard for unsubstantiated reasons.

  2. I fixed my spelling. Sorry about that.

    It’s fine not to like being called a blowhard. Shit – I wouldn’t take that lightly either.

    But… “I just don’t like his argument that the Internet sucks, and anyone advocating it is feeding the world a ‘line of shit’.”

    He didn’t say that. You’re taking two parts of his post, concatenating them, and then arguing against that.

    Look, I agree with you on a lot of subject matter. I agree with Dave on a lot of subject matter. He called you a blowhard. And you upped the ante instead of trying to deal with what was behind that. In a sense – you proved him right.

    Waving him off as a simplistic troll is a major mistake.

  3. Hi Karl, Dave here.

    I called Stowe a blowhard because he is. Now, I suppose it would have been better, perhaps fairer, if I had explained why I called him a blowhard.

    Two reasons:

    1. Because “blowhard” is less offensive than the other alliteratively appropriate appellation for a wannebe A-lister I considered using.

    2. Because anyone who writes things like: “In the talk, I lumped her and her anti-CPA screed (Yes, Linda, that’s how I interpret it, and please stop telling me I don’t understand you. I understand you better than you do.) along with Toffler’s Information Overload (it’s driving us crazy, he asserted) and the Attention Economy mavens (free information leads to attention scarcity). I don’t buy any of it.” Anyone with the arrogance to assert that “I understand you better than you do,” is a blowhard.

    Or worse.

    At least you didn’t call him “Stewie.” (“Victory is mine!”)

  4. Stowe, it sounds like he has reasons.

    Dave, I kinda think you could have stated your opinion a bit better. Then again – the word “blowhard” got Stowe’s attention.

    There is now an opportunity for you both, if so taken. I hope you both do.

Comments are closed.