This assignment had the potential to be a tough one for me, as I have a history of regretting my entry into certain blog conversation. But it was instead made easy, as I couldn’t help but respond to a post over on heretofore-unfamiliar-to-me blog The Buzz Bin. The post in question, Open Does Not Equal Access, finds author Geoff Livingston drawing a distinction between being open to social networking and being accessible via those networks. In short, it’s unrealistic to expect that people will be accessible to you, just because they are open to you on the network. Read the post for a better explanation.

Here’s the thing: If I understand what he’s saying, I completely agree with him. If you are someone who has a policy of adding people who request friendship freely to your social networks, that’s shouldn’t necessarily be interpreted as an open invitation for constant contact, free advice, or ongoing conversation. That would be an unrealistic expectation.

My trouble with the post comes early on:

Unfortunately, one by-product of social worlds seems to be a certain set of the population believes that because an individual or an entity participates in open conversation that their entire business should be openly accessible.

The “their entire business should be openly accessible” part links to my Thoughts on Managing My Social Network post. Taken at face value, I think that’s a mischaracterization of what I was saying. So my first comment on Geoff’s blog sought further clarification. Ryan Deschamps also joined in, as his blog was used in a similar fashion in the same quote presented above. I won’t rehash the whole exchange here. You can go to Geoff’s post to read it in context.

The second part of this exercise is to answer a few questions reflecting on the experience:

• What happened as a result of you disagreeing with the blogger? How did they respond? How did you respond?

My first comment was more a request for clarification than a strict disagreement. His response reinforced my initial contention that I was somehow being misunderstood, so I pushed back a bit over two separate comments. In the end, the blog’s author conceded that perhaps my message wasn’t a perfect illustration of his point, but that he valued our (Ryan’s and my) contributions to the discussion. A pretty tactful way of putting the conversation to rest, actually.

• What do you usually do if you find a post with which you disagree? Do you comment publicly? Email the blogger? Or do you just move on?

Usually, I think briefly about commenting, before thinking the better of it and moving on. I’m trying to avoid the negativity vortex.

• If you comment, typically how do you engage the blogger? Do you ask questions to better understand his/her position? Do you make statements to explain your position? Do you track comments so that you can return to continue the conversation?

I’m getting better at asking for clarification before putting my arguments out there. I try to take a step back before disagreeing with someone. And I’m only just now formally tracking those conversations, although I’ve been pretty good about remembering posts I want to revisit anyway.

• If you’re a blogger, how do you feel if people post comments where they disagree with you? How do you handle these?

It means I’m saying something worth disagreeing about, which is a good thing. I respond.

Tags: comment08