What We’re About
You’ve already noticed from the design of the home page that DrJandMrK.com is no ordinary Internet website log – weblog, blog. First off, it’s as much an archive or on-line personal library as a weblog. Second, it involves more than one person.
The reason? Short bios are under Who.
As a full-time writer, Mr. K. will provide the bulk of the archived print articles. These are organized into three subject headings: Politics (self-explanatory), Powder (articles about skiing), and Profit (articles about business and economics). This is our attempt to organize a jumble of apparently unrelated material into a coherent archive. Our Archive is also organized by time of posting or print publication (month and year), by author and by original publication.
But we’re also a blog – DrJandMrK.com is also, in part, an ongoing weblog. We will try to post something new and, we hope, reasonably readable and interesting, daily. (It may not be 20 times daily, like the prolific folks at Powerlineblog.com.)
We’ll focus on creating posts that advance, revise or are otherwise relevant to issues that we’ve covered or plan to cover in print articles. In doing so, we’ll often refer to those published items. At other times, we’ll post on issues that just spring to mind or for which we have no ready print outlet. Occasionally, we’ll post on something of purely local interest, and we’ll try to remember to flag this accordingly so farther-off readers can avoid being bored.
We’ll try to avoid the “Five new things that pissed me off when I woke up this morning” approach. Speaking of, we’ll also strive to keep our language in reasonable taste, even when discussing the vilest events or the most corrupt or evil people. Although we’re as salty as the next couple of dudes in our private conversations, we think the obscenity-laced stuff you see on discussion forums, blogs and even in print to be the opposite of meaningful communication.
That said, we’re not blogging fanatics. We don’t live in basements. We don’t spend lonely nights with the glow of the cathode ray tube reflecting off our sweaty underwear, baying at the moon, scarfing potato chips and getting fatter and wheezier by the week. We have busy lives, interesting careers, families and loved ones, friends, hobbies and other interests. We’ll blog when we have something to say, we’ll say it and then we’ll return to the real world.
NEW – Two of the obvious features on the homepage are NEW and Stupidism of the Week. Because this site is as much about our printed articles as it is about our daily postings, the NEW button simply draws attention to the most recently published print articles.
In most cases there’ll be a lag between print publication and posting on our site, corresponding somewhat to the publication’s cycle. Daily-newspaper articles will be posted sometime later the same day, while articles from monthly magazines will wait up to several weeks. That’s to give the publications a chance to sell copies. Hey, if they can’t sell, they can’t afford to commission paid articles, either.
Stupidism of the Week – This stems from both Dr. J.’s and Mr. K.’s instinctive disdain for incompetence, sloppiness and buffoonery. Years ago we began noting instances of people saying “ambliance” for “ambulance” or talking about “telling amusing antidotes.” These weren’t just classic malapropisms, they were sweeping instance of idiocy encompassing everything from bad English (“The company released their results…”) to bizarrely mixed metaphors (“Gravy on the cake,” “Off the cuff of my head”).
The list of exemplars and specimens grew…and grew…and grew into a veritable menagerie of moronic speech! Many of these things didn’t just happen in informal conversation, but in speeches by big million-dollar-a-day fat cats, in official government statements, in publications whose central task is – supposably (another common stupidism) – good English. There weren’t just such numerous instances, but so many classes, of stupid mistakes, that we couldn’t find a single English word to encompass them all. Hence we made up our own: stupidism.
Stupidism of the Week will highlight – and include scornful commentary on – the new instances that we pick up from time to time. Meanwhile, over our first year of blogging we’ll post a series of items covering our entire previous list of Stupidisms, which will then go into the Archive.
Comments, or rather, the lack of them – You’ve also no doubt noticed that the home page and the daily postings don’t appear to make any provision for posting comments. That’s right, they don’t. Why not? Couple of reasons.
First, we simply don’t consider DrJandMrK.com to be a discussion forum. This is primarily a collection of our previously published material, archived for the free and, hopefully, beneficial use of the reading public. Secondarily, it’s a weblog enabling the two authors to follow up on issues that we’ve written about in print or, in some cases, to make quick comments on issues for which we don’t have a ready print outlet.
Unlike some fanatical bloggers, we don’t intend to make a de facto career of blogging, and we intend even less to spend endless hours reading every comment, commenting on comments and managing our site. Finally, the defamation (or libel) laws in Canada are far more stringent than in the U.S. We’ve noticed from other discussion forums that the language quickly deteriorates from “I’d like to add a few thoughts…” in the initial rounds to “You f—— co——–, you s— you a——!!!!!!!”
We don’t fancy getting sued due to the carelessness or unrestrained hostility of a third party. More important, we simply don’t want our site to look like that. We’re already disturbed at the steady coarsening of public discourse. So the last thing we plan to do is provide a soapbox for losers like that. Finally, we are simply too jealous of our own scarce time to ensure a clean and respectful discussion forum by spending hours screening and censoring comments before they’re posted.
All of that said, we welcome feedback in the form of e-mails (Contact Us). We’re happy to read letters that are lively and pugnacious, and even a little insulting. But we beg readers to try to include an actual thought, fact or argument. E-mails that consist of nothing but abuse, profanity or defamation will simply be deleted. So will e-mails that contain attachments of or links to conspirazoid or anti-Semitic or otherwise racist or pornographic sites. Those containing physical threats will be referred to our solicitors and, if needed, the local constabulary.