Dave Winer marks today what happened when weblogs.com went down and was reborn as Buzzword.com. As the Wired article states, one hell of a flame war went off. Some people had legitimate issues over how it was handled, but others attempted to take advantage and make it personal. No doubt, some of this was in retribution for past real grievances. But it was far too public to have accomplished much except bad blood. A lot of it was spilled. What I’m about to talk about is not related to this, but than again, maybe it is.

Vinnie Paul Abbot lost a brother December 8, 2004. His band mate, his brother, was murdered on stage, while they were performing, by a derranged fan who was upset at the breakup of their former band – Pantera.

Phil Anselmo was lead singer of Pantera. He became like a brother to Vinnie and Darrel. You don’t spend twelve years together thru the ups and downs in life without becoming close. Pantera, speaking as a fan, always resembled to me the sound of a closed fist. They, like Metallica used to, had a “unifying” sound going on. It’s hard to describe, but you can feel it when you listen. Heavier than heavy. That can only comes from band mates who are close. In fact, you could say that Pantera carried the torch for metal when Metallica dropped it in their quest for? well I have no idea. But what I do know is that fans loved Pantera for it. Unlike so many other metal bands, they seemed to somehow get heavier album by album.

Phil traveled to Texas, to mourn the loss of his band mate, his brother, but didn?t attend the funeral – he wasn’t permitted: “to respect the Abbot family’s wishes, and they do not want me there. I believe I belong there, but I understand completely?. I wish his family the least grief they could ever have, and I know it’s impossible. Just bless his family, bless his friends. I love him like a brother loves a brother. . . . I’m so sorry to his family and everyone else who was senselessly killed in Columbus, Ohio.” Why didn’t the family want him there? Bad blood.

As Pantera grew famous, Phil started to lay out grievances with his band mates in more and more public ways. Not simply attacking the opinions of his band mates – but attacking them personally. In magazines. On stage. Phil eventually started his own side project. Recrimations were made both ways. Pantera pretty much imploded. Phil continued to rip on Darrel, and just recently told Metal Hammer magazine that Darrell “deserves to be beaten severely.”

You can imagine how bad Phil feels. My heart goes out to him.

Now I look over to one of my fellow bloggers, someone who?s opinion I value enough to read regularly, ralling a cry to “blogbat” another blogger while calling him pond scum. This very same blogger called on the community to take a pledge for civilized discourse so that the country can come together after the election. He has legitimate things to critique of the other blogger. Giving a in-depth critique of someone else’s views, positions, and so forth is a great thing and blogs are terrific for this. Hyperlinks are terrific tools. But he made it personal without giving the chance for discussion. How is this “civilized discourse”? It looks like anything but. “Fact checking his ass” is good. Calling someone “pondscum” and telling others to “blogbat” him without attempting to reconcile…err…. not so good. I’ve been accused of flaming others on occasion, but I try my best not to blog-to-blog anymore – the consequences can be very bad. Links increase the impact of anything we say exponentially.

If I attack someone personally, instead of attempting to deal with what they are saying or doing first, I decrease the chance to reconcile, or to persuade and bridge. If I publicly attack someone personally, I know now that I pretty much eliminate those opportunities. Unless I want to bring someone or something down (and Lord knows there are some people and things that should be), than I try not to do it. I try to attack their ideas, attack what they are doing. I’m blunt. I can’t help that. But I avoid attacking them personally. That is, unless it is personal. If so, I try one on one communication first. If the other person takes it public – well I gotta defend myself.

I think these are principals that heavily linked to pundit bloggers should think about. You have a responsibility. You help define the truth as far as Google searchers see it. Need I remind you to search for “miserable failure” or “bush mandate” on Google?

Otherwise, all you are doing, in the words of Jon Stewart, is “hurting America”. Don’t be a partisan hack. Have real discussion and argue your view based on it’s merits.

If you think this is preachy, or that I am boring, I don’t give a shit. This is a hard road to take, but I hope I live up to these responsibilities.

(yeah, yeah I know… isn’t this how Democrats lost the election? We were too ‘nice’?… errr… you’re probably right!)

..Crumpled bits of paper
Filled with imperfect thought
Stilted conversations
I’m afraid that’s all we’ve got

You say you just don’t see it
He says it’s perfect sense
You just can’t get agreement
In this present tense
We all talk a different language
Talking in defence

Say it loud, say it clear
You can listen as well as you hear
It’s too late when we die
To admit we don’t see eye to eye

So we open up a quarrel
Between the present and the past
We only sacrifice the future
It’s the bitterness that lasts

“The Living Years”, Mike & The Mechanics (1990)