Thursday, November 29, 2007

the votes are in

Many of you have expressed what I was thinking: that "private" isn't every really private when you are posting to the internet. In my thousands of posts, I have said things that were wrong or inaccurate based on faulty information or overly optimistic expectations, and I appologize for those. But I don't seek forgiveness for my opinions or analysis as I believe I have been proven correct much more of the time than people who get paid to blabber on TV or in a newspaper column.

I do this for fun. Or really because I love to share my view with you dear readers. But I don't know how to continue my previous style while not being involved in politics. I can't give money, or support a candidate in any outward way (even a lawn sign). And that's a good thing in the long term. The branches should be separate and the one I work for should be beyond reproach.

In the short term, I am going to have to find another outlet. Any suggestions are welcome and keep me on your list for events where I can continue our conversation offline.

That isn't to say that this blog will be a ghost town for a year, but it does mean that if you though I had been guarded this month, it is going to get even more toned down.

I have enjoyed the last five years of blogging. But what I have enjoyed the most is not the writing, but the sharing with and getting to know other people that I would have never encountered but for the blogosphere. I am confident that the next five will be even better.

3 comments:

theorris said...

It will be unfortunate not to have you voice on political matters, but it is certainly understandable. I use a pseudonym not because I am precluded from blogging by my career, but simply because I want (and perhaps need) to keep my professional online existence and my personal online existence separate. No doubt it isn't very hard to figure out my name (given that it is plastered all over my early blog) but I still prefer the distinction. Pseudonyms are, of course, nothing new in publishing. Most authors prior to the 20th century used them regularly. The Brontes, for example, all published under them. Some of the greatest political writing of all time was published either anonymously or pseudonymously. One only need to look at the Federalist Papers to see that.

I wouldn't suggest, however, that you breech ethics and publish that way either.

Open said...

theorris beat me to it --

I was going to suggest doing a new, anonymous blog, like the Voice of Utah does.

Sadly, to keep it truly anonymous, you'd have to leave us out of the loop and we'd have to discover you all over again.

It's great to have an outlet. I hate to see you lose that outlet, even if it is for a good reason.

Jason The said...

I can understand the need to withdraw for career concerns.

I don't actively hide my identity, but I did feel compelled to not make it obvious due to professional concerns (many of my customers would SHIT if they realized my political persuasions, let alone the potty mouth I often have).

Still I will miss your very unique insight (something that always brought me back here), and I think there are many ways you could stay involved without plastering your name across the Tubes. If you would care to, drop us an email at The SideTrack (thesidetrack AT gamil DOT com) and I'll forward my personal mail on, for idea sharing purposes.

Also, looking toward the future, consider blogs like TalkLeft (a very poignant and consistently active blog). Every author there is a currently practicing attorney from a different state, all posting under a pseudonym.

I think there is quite a relevant call for the legal insider's perspective on American politics. I'd hate to see you disappear.