smackfoo.com | I find your lack of faith disturbing.

This has been pin-balling around the internets for a few days now - and succinctly put, suggests that we should all adhere to a blogger’s equivalent of the usual politically correct and chemically castrated system commonly referred to as the code of conduct.

The same morally restrictive and constrained concept as used in many places due to the moronic influences of the minority of folks who can’t help but prove that evolution isn’t without it’s flaws.

It all started way back when Tim O’Reilly proposed a knee-jerk peace-love-harmony reaction to a bunch of retarded misfits mouthing off (in part) when Kathy Sierra decided to point out that being an absolute dick-head isn’t cool.

Joen asks the immediate question we’re all actually thinking:

When Tim O’Reilly drafted a Bloggers Code of Conduct, it sent waves through the so-called blogosphere. While O’Reilly encourages open discussion on this draft, it begs the question: do we even need a code of conduct at all? #

And Greg Storey’s Airbag goes so far as to suggest there are a few more important questions yet to be answered, but that a blog advisory system could indeed be the answer — to which I have subscribed (note the advisory in the home page right column), primarily because, well, I think it’s fucking funny.. It’s not likely to remain forever, but I do consider Greg’s response worthy of a little air-time.

There is no safe-harbour here — if you decided to be an asshat, be prepared to accept the consequences.. comment as you feel seems right to you, but don’t expect to be heard where you’ve made threats, decided to prove how stupid you really are, or beleive you are morally obliged to cram your rhetoric down someone else’s throat.

I don’t censure comments.. but then I don’t suffer fools lightly, either. Balance is key — archaic misguided attempts to “censure” potentially offensive content, is not.

Do we need a blogger’s code of conduct? No — we don’t need a set of rules that constrains how a blogger acts, yet Joe Public is free to be as much or as little of an idiot as they choose. The reason blogging continues to grow and gain an increasing foot-print and exposure in the more traditional press and publication sphere, often comes own to the honest and frank way many bloggers tackle subjects.

Bloggers are perceived as having “the pulse of the internet” and as such are increasingly being heard in many areas traditionally reserved for the more austere and ‘groomed’ sources. And those sources are increasingly suggesting moderation and control of free-speech in the blogging community.. no doubt speared on by nervous publishers who like to ensure nothing risqué, or heaven forbid, remotely honest, makes the front page.

In my experience most folks with serious reality issues post anonymously and attack the person, not the topic. Indeed, haters are easy to spot. And they aren’t just a blogging phenomenon.. those who bounce reality cheques occur in all walks of life, be it in traditional areas, or new, cutting edge technologies.

Ultimately, O’Reilly’s call for a code-of-conduct fails to make any sense in a world where being (sometimes brutally) honest and keeping it real are considered to be top form, rendering any such politically correct mumbo-jumbo an entirely pointless affair.