The Verdict

  • “Dworkin would be delighted to surf the blogosphere since it brings the opportunity of finding many potential critics of the highest calibre, like Daniel M. Harrison … Mr. Harrison's blog is an interesting, inspiring and excellently written collection of opinions and experiences.” -Professor Santiago Iñiguez, Dean of IE Business School, BizDeansTalk
  • "Well written ... please continue your good thinking." - John Nesheim, bestselling author of "The Power of Unfair Advantage"
  • "I am very impressed with (this) blog and will be adding it to the Execupundit blogroll ... The business world can certainly use a person of (Daniel M. Harrison's) caliber." - Michael S. Wade, Execupundit
  • "He'd be welcome in my class anytime." -The Unknown Professor, Financial Rounds
  • "I love this blog" - Harish Palanniapan


  • Seeking Alpha Certified


  • Seeking Alpha Certified

« Hindsight | Main | Copyrighting Themselves Out of Business »

December 04, 2005



Is there an echo of this going around the web? Moderators at digg do not remove the stories - its voted "Lame" by people. If there are 10 "Lame" votes then the story is automatically removed. Does the system need work? Yes, but it is being worked on - see .

Daniel M. Harrison

I am not arguing that moderator's DO remove stories at - merely that artificial processes such as the 10 vs. 1000 logic are being employed to compensate for editorial absence.


I read the first part of your post this morning while searching for that Inquirer article (from Digg). The Inquirer has another article about the idiocy of bloggers which has been circulating today. You make an essential point in closing that could easily be elaborated upon: consumer (that is, profit system) democracies are fundamentally dysfunctional.

Good post.

i on the ball patriot

“Although we like to think that we know exactly what we want, and that we are capable of choosing our preferred product, as inexperienced consumers we are in fact notoriously inefficient, which is why as a society we have traditionally always been happy to have “professionals” do the selection process for us.”

Pity that we might make a mistake and then as a result become more discerning, yes of course, let someone else “protect” us from our own ineptness.

“If there is no natural editing process, an artificial one often has to be implemented in order to make the venture commercially viable.”

Democracy, commercially viable? Please ...

You make and twist a valid point, that in a world of endless choices it is sometimes helpful to have a surrogate involved. But you entirely overlook the fact that those surrogates, the professional crack monkeys, prostitute their souls to buy their crack.

That prostitution is the impetus behind the swift boating of the word ‘blogger’ that is going on right now.

Dude, I think your intent might be good here, but you need to turn off American Idol and get out on the streets and talk to a few homeless people.

Corsarius is great, but I'm certainly not in favor for the lame-voting. It *is* needed, but 10 lame votes are too few to merit the deletion of a good and popular article.

The comments to this entry are closed.