Rule #1 in good blogging (as if I would know...) don't get too specific if you want to make a point.
Seriously. Such is the case with the below entry on the Catalyst website. I really didn't want to say the conference was a waste of time, or vacuous, or anything, but apparently it came across that way. Sorry about that.
I really wanted to talk about a theme I encounter a lot: We want to image ourselves all important-like, and that kinda scares me -- especially because I'm prone to it, myself. I found an example.
I tried to let on that I didn't think the conference, as a whole, was portrayed well by its own web-speak, but that flew by some people. Bad writing? Probably.
But I knew this before: If you give an example, an illustration from reality to make a point, the illustration may become the point.
Especially if you include a big picture of it.
For a more full-bodied understanding of the conference itself, see Anne Jackson's comments in the thread. For a more full-bodied understanding of the many ways I personally struggle with trying to make myself significant, and -- possibly -- recognize it elsewhere, see the original post.
As for the "Brant, stick to your guns!" objection to my apology: I am a-stickin' to my guns.
Just wanted to clarify what I'm gunning for.