You make an excellent point. The blogarchy would have us believe linking is just about improving one’s step up the corporate ladder. I’ve met too many people like that in the real world. You know who they are. The frat boyz and girlz… the jerk at the water cooler who will fink out anyone to impress the boss…

I cannot edit comments — only delete them. So if I’ve deleted yours please don’t be offended but it’s just that I want to remove anything that refers to the problem and I don’t want this degenerating any further than it already has. It’s one of those things that no matter how hard I try to fix it matters only seem to get worse.

It was probably as much my fault as anyone’s for allowing myself to be baited into the situation in the first place, but I still hold to my opinions and nothing will change that.

Nonetheless, I wish to emphasize that this post is NOT about any one person. I just used a certain post as my source for inspiration to raise a much larger issue that is bigger and more important than only one individual.

The issue is about linking and is it appropriate to justify NOT linking to another blog under certain circumstances. For example, certain crowds in the blogosphere will use me as a source for their information but they will not link to me because they’re pissed that I’ve criticized them. That is just plain and simple WRONG.

You must give credit (links) to your sources if you are writing on a topic that they may have inspired or is related to information you have gleaned from them regardless if you like them or not. That is just proper blog etiquette.

Trying to justify criteria for not linking like the author has suggested is just another excuse to create elitist blogarchies that shut out the rest of the blogosphere for their own personal gain, and I’m not falling for it.

Neither should you only just link to those who are within your little clique, who always agree with you, or you happen to like, or can help your pagerank, or to climb up the social ladder. You should not discriminate based on pettiness or bruised egos. The blogosphere is supposed to be a “conversation” and like it or not we are all interrelated one way or another.

We should link to a post if it has inspired us to write or is directly related to what we are writing even if the blog in general does not necessarily represent our “values”, disagrees with us or meets our approval. The rules for sources (linking) should be no different than if you were writing a book or a paper for your college course.

To not do that is in fact wrong and defeats the conversational aspect of the blogosphere. If that breaks down then we might as well just go back to Web 1.0 and make our sermons on old-school websites. Forget about having comments, trackbacks, backlinks etc… who needs them.

One further thing. A new rule for commenting. It is ok if a commenter wishes to take me task and disagree with me, or make accusations against me that require me to respond. I love a good discussion, BUT you MUST provide a proper profile or a legit URL that leads to your blog/website. I want to see a real person behind the name otherwise my suspicions will get the better of me. I will not respond to anyone who insists on hiding behind anonymity under those circumstances, and the comment will be deleted.

Much thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread and if you wish to continue this discussion please do so, but do not refer back to the original problem that we just had.

Thank you and cheers!

Well said Kirsten. Bloggers like you are refreshing and what keeps the blogosphere from being turned into a late night TV infomercial.

But wait! There’s more… You too can make 6 Figure Income… Just buy my course and…

Dear Vics, um… (blushing), I’m married btw, but I think I’ll be seeing you in my dreams tonight… thanks so much for the virtual fanatasy…