The Ugliness of Pride in Blogging

by Leesa Barnes on April 22, 2007

The preceding post changed from when I originally posted it early Saturday morning. I could’ve deleted it, but chose instead to edit it. I very rarely edit or touch my posts after I’ve published it, but chose to edit that one after hearing a sermon on TV this morning.

Warning – Religious context to follow. If religion scares you, don’t read the rest.

The preacher was talking about pride and used the story of the prodigal son to illustrate his point. If you don’t know about this chap, his story is:

  • He couldn’t wait for his father to die, so he asked dad to give him his share of the wealth now.
  • He left home and went to the city where he spent all his wealth.
  • After trying to force a rich guy to be his friend so he could get money, the son ended up living in the pig pen and eating what they ate.
  • Soon, his pride wore thin and in humility, went back home to ask dad’s forgiveness.

The preacher said that pride can be destructive and hurtful. As I sat back thinking about this, I couldn’t help but think about my earlier post. As I re-read it in the clear of day, I was embarrassed by the language I used. I was surprised that I had used people’s honest opinions about me to launch myself into a demi-god status. I was uncomfortable with what I wrote as it didn’t reflect who I am.

Yes, I wrote the post. I chose those words and I sat at my computer and typed everything up. However, judging from the comments towards that post (which I’ve now deleted since they’re no longer in context), some of you were surprised at my language and choice of words as well. And once I could see myself through other people’s eyes, I too was surprised.

So, to those who posted your comments, thanks for being honest. To see words such as “sour grapes” and “PO’ed” to describe me was a shock because anyone who has met me or knows me can tell you that I’m the opposite of an angry Black woman. And for those who read what I wrote and didn’t respond, I apologize for my hair trigger response. That was unfair to you. And for those who didn’t see the original post at all, you were saved my pollution.

Okay, now back to regular programming.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • email
  • FriendFeed
  • LinkedIn
  • Ping.fm
  • Posterous
  • Reddit
  • RSS
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Tumblr
  • Twitter
  • Barnes!

    I have just finished a four hour recording session for a client who wanted audio clips for their PowerPoint…they were the voice. They thought the session would take twenty minutes. I am punchy (in a funny way, not a fisticuffs way).

    I think it was either Jean Paul Sartre or Steve McGarrett who said: “go with your gut”. So if you’re gut told you “edit” the blog then that was the thing to do…proving yet again it is hard (but not impossible) for one to lie to themselves.

    Like Julien, I too am curious. Unlike Julien I don’t speak French (of any kind) and know relatively little about the internet. Tease those of us who didn’t read the original post if you must…likely I would tease you mercilessly about its content had I read it even though I think I’d have the insight to temper your paragraphs with the reality of you that I know…I know you know you’re not anything less than good people.

    Did that make any sense? I’ve not really eaten well today and I’ve just had two PB&J’s for dinner with a Pepsi chaser. Am I supposed to be seeing spots?

    Anyway the point here is that now without this original post I’ve got nothing o tease you about so you’ve taken the fun out of my day. I hope you’re happy.

    xoxo, your pal,
    the sugar buzzing buffalonian
  • That darn Google, what a little bugger. How quickly it caches pages since it was only up for 24-hours.

    Bry, I'm very competitive, however, this is a challenge I'll pass on. At the end of the day, I'd rather be at peace with myself. Ever since I posted that post early Saturday morning, I didn't feel good about it. It was on my mind virtually the whole day.

    I tried to tell myself that I didn't care. "I'm a disrupter", I told myself. But by Sunday morning, I still felt uneasy to the point that I didn't want to check my email or even go online. I was now afraid to read the very words I typed up. Not good.

    If that's how I felt, there's no way I would want to strikethrough my post or re-post it so everyone can see. Like Ted said, this is my building and like Eric said, if I told everyone what I did, then yes, I was transparent and honest. And I had wished I were as quick as Justin so I could've just deleted it as soon as I published it.

    Which begs the question - If a published post was deleted and no one read it, was it really a post?
  • The idea that everything on the web is sacred, and must be preserved for posterity is transparency taken to its extreme.

    If you've alerted people about what you've done, I'd say you've fulfilled any obligation you might have to be transparent to your readers. People insisting that you can only achieve transparency and honesty in one pre-defined way is too doctrinaire for my taste.

    The strike-through thing is a convention, not a requirement.
  • hm. i gotta say, i'm very curious.
  • When it comes to changing blog posts, there is a not so fine line and you didn't cross it. It's your blog, you may do as you wish with no complaints from me!

    Delete, change, etc. as long as there is no dishonesty is no problem.
    Now if you wrote posts and dated them to appear in the past, changing history as you went, that would be a different matter.

    "Thou shalt not change blog posts" is not a commandment, religious or otherwise. Now I choose not to change mine (or at least haven't yet), but if change/delete a post or entire blog it's my business. And my blog simply isn't important enough for it to really matter anyways.

    The blogosphere may be public, but this is entirely dissimilar from spray painting a building. And besides, in this case it's you're building!
  • I'd like to rephrase the third-to-last sentence of my previous comment (though please leave previous one up - I'll stand by it):

    "But if you don’t let readers see the original post in transparent fashion, *aren't you* just finding another way to hide behind your pride?"
  • Leesa:

    I did the same thing just recently, and felt a bit odd about it. I'd posted something regarding mediocrity and what it takes to rise above it. When my girlfriend read it, she was upset that I'd placed myself in such a highly egotistical context -- one I didn't recognize at the time and am still not 100% sure was there in the first place.

    But, just the same, I took it down. I have a large enough ego as it is, and when people close to me start telling me I'm coming off in a way that may be off-putting to others, that's worth considering.

    In hindsight, I should have left the post up and gauged response and / or done the strikethrough thing, but I decided to be quick and easy about the fix.

    Interesting to know about the astrological energies, though... It does seem to be going around the podosphere more than usual too...
  • Leesa:

    I have to agree with Lou here in not agreeing with your decision to edit the post the way you did and to remove critical comments.

    I think your post here shows you don't feel good about what you wrote over the weekend. But to remove the parts you consider ugly? To strike the critical comments?

    Leesa, you must know that the original post lives in Google's cache. And of the two posts I'm seeing on that cache page, one of them is actually very positive!

    I challenge you to put the original post -- and the deleted comments -- back on your blog. You've made your apology, and I think it's a good one. All of us have written things we shouldn't have because our blood was boiling. We understand. But if you don't let readers see the original post in transparent fashion, you're just finding another way to hide behind your pride. I don't think you need to do that.

    Great discussion point here!
  • I did not read the original post. I commend you for looking at the issues and seeing a different perspective, that takes integrity and courage. Most people do not acknowledge their own shadow issues- pride, greed, etc. I celebrate what you have shared and the lessons learned; there is deep learning in the experience for all of us.

    As a sidenote: We have had some strong astrological energies in the last 30 days that are ripping the cloaks off people's ego's-big one's and little ones. Imus, Baldwin and even sadly Cho. Hold your words, actions and deeds harmless and play fair.
  • Thanks Lou. In hindsight, I shouldn't have posted it in the first place. There's no room for negativity on my blog and that means even from me. So, no, striking through that copy was not acceptable. And given the comments I received about that post, my readers do know that I'm being honest to them. Only regular readers understand that out of 250 posts on my blog, that one was truly out of character for me.

    An example - a colleague of mine recently had her email "broken into." Someone started posting ugly comments on listservs and made it look like they came from her. While those who had little interaction with her thought badly of her, those who knew her and had a relationship with her called/emailed her to find out what's up. She was thankful that she had people who were able to discern between the pretender and the real deal.

    If I lose a few readers because I didn't put strikethroughs in a post, oh well, I lose them. I'd rather be honest to me than to have others fan the flames due to my comments. As my mother would say, "Don't cry over spilled milk because it's already spilled." And so, I admit my mistake, post an apology to my readers and onward I go.
  • Lou Edards
    Leesa I have never posted to your blog before, but feel compelled to do so given this post and your previous post.

    If I had been the publisher or an event organizer I would be deterred from inviting you because of your tone in your communications.

    I am suprised you did not follow usual blogging etiquette of striking through your changed copy. By deleting it are you really being honest with your readers? And there is no reference on the changed post that you have made an amendment to the original post.

    It's not just what we say but also the impact we have on people through our behaviours that then determines if people will want to engage with us.

    Leesa, if you can follow what you promise on the title of your blog "tips on how to use a podcast to open doors, fill your sales funnel and boost your business" in both your blog and podcast - do more of that and you will find that that will also apply to you too and more doors will get opened.

    To your success.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post:

Next post: