SFist: Big Changes at Tribe.net

chris vale

Wed, 30 Aug 2006 10:01:15 -0800

What tribe.net management did had nothing to do with decency, U.S. 2257 or any of the other stated reasone. All that talk was blowing smoke. Tribes then leaders Jan and Wade neither liked or understood the tribe.net community and as such they wanted to get rid of the community and replace it with a more marketable group of people. chris vale

Matt

Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:53:47 -0800

What Tribe is doing has nothing to do with "decency". It has to do with a government that is trying to get everyone to conform to their myopic, puritanical views. Personally, I (and many others on Tribe) do not find nudity and sexuality indecent or obscene. But we certainly find George W. and his actions indecent and obscene. Will his pictures be removed? I think not. Why? Again, this has nothing to do with what is and isn't decent. It has to do with the beginnings of a new kind of government and society in this country. Totalitarianism? Fascism? Dictatorship? Monarchy? Take your pick - they all apply.

steven streight aka vaspers the grate

Tue, 20 Dec 2005 22:04:09 -0800

I also see a Wimpification of the Blogosphere happening rapidly. Blogocombat, friendly inquisitive debate, critique of blog techniques, and harsh analysis of pseudo blogs and blogoid objects... ...all this confrontational activity is being called "the dark side of blogging" or "when blogs go bad". If you criticize, for example, an irrelevant fictional character as the chosen spokesperson for a company, and say that it deviates from the core values of blogging, you're called "ugly" or "sharp tongued strife maker". This is done so false, mediocre blog consultants can save face when their clients ask them why certain blogologists are ranting against their dumb marketing idea.