(Possible) Bibliobloggers and #ManlyMen Discuss Biblioblogging and Bullying

Several bloggers have joined in the discussion about the term “biblioblog” and the question of biblioblog and biblioblogger identity.

Peter Kirk chimed in, noting the irony that the top post of the day was my post about the Doctor Who Experience.

Doug Chaplin doesn’t care. Chris Brady seems to, slightly. John Loftus thinks it’s all a plot to exclude him.

Mark Goodacre notes that biblioblogs.com has become defunct.

Tom Verenna asks whether credentials or sci-fi side interests should affect one’s status.

J.K.Gayle points out that three of the top 5 biblioblogs are by women.

Meanwhile, many bibliobloggers and bloggers whose status as such is presumably open to discussion joined together to stand up to Mark Driscoll’s bullying. They have also been confessing (via the Twitter hashtag #ManlyMen) their less manly attributes. And if my telling you that I get a lump in my throat at the end of Toy Story 3 leads you to think less of me, so be it.

Stay in touch! Like Exploring Our Matrix on Facebook:

Biblical Studies Carnival CXXII
Three Wiser Women
Blogging the #AARSBL15 Blogger Session
The Videofullest Biblical Studies Carnival Ever!
  • http://diglotting.com/ Kevin

    I don’t see why people care so much about the “biblioblogger” label. I have read some of the voices saying how they think it should be defined. I don’t even think I would qualify as a biblioblogger according to some of the criteria proposed, but I couldn’t give a hoot. 

    If someone wants to call themself a biblioblogger but don’t fit the proposed criteria, then guess what, they can still call themself a biblioblogger. As Chaplin noted, this “is what the interwebs are like”.

  • http://www.gentlewisdom.org.uk/ Peter Kirk

    Thanks for the link. Sorry I didn’t link to your posts on the subject, but there were so many from various people that I couldn’t discuss them all.

  • Ken Schenck

    I like what I perceive to be your position, a fitting nominalist position.  An individual post may or may not be a biblioblog post.  We can judge an individual post on its conformity to the standards of objective biblical scholarship.  We can speak of its depth or precision or engagement with the corpus scholarorum.  Beyond that, we can only say that a particular blog functions on this level with a particular frequency or percentage of posts.  Beyond this is the essentialist fallacy of Plato or Aristotle, as if a blog can “be” something or another other than its component parts. 😉

  • Anonymous

    Toy Story 3? Really??
    I am going to assume that you have never watched Hercules.  😉

  • Anonymous

    It’s s sinister plot I tel ya, a sinister one indeed. 😉