Oh, no, you are not to think for yourself!

"Is this article saying that every blog in the world is wrong? No, of course not! Again, there are some professionals and specialists who use blogs to serve a proper purpose."

That's right kids leave blogging to the professionals! Either that or you can write overly wordy commentaries and then call them articles rather than blog posts just like Kevin D. Denee of Ambassador Youth does.

Let me emphasize that no oneincluding adultsshould have a blog or personal website (unless it is for legitimate business purposes).

Holy crap, this guy is for real.

Other people expressing themselves -- bad, bad, bad.

My word. Talk about taking gratuitous restrictiveness to an unreasonable extreme.

-Rob

The never-blog warning is an exaggeration, but the article does contain a little good advice for teenagers: don't post personal information on the internet, don't agree to meet strangers whom you know only from information they posted on the internet, don't get so addicted to the social boards that you neglect face-to-face friendships.

I must be even older than I thought, though, as e-mail and text messaging are referred to as "old-fashioned" methods of communicating.

That's frightening. It's disturbing on so many levels. I can't believe someone would tell those of faith they couldn't possibly have a reason to maintain a blog. Talk about an attempt to restrict thinking and expression . . .

Like a lot of commentary on the blogosphere, this article seems to misunderstand what it is criticizing.

Young people in the world are far different then those in the Church.

File under: no shit. And when we type wrong, is that EVIL, or just the appearance of EVIL?

There should never be a need to use slang or any type of wrong words.

Just asking.

Julia, it's not surprising that the article conflates basic safety with restrictiveness. I've seen radicals of all stripes do this: they start from a commonly accepted if a bit exaggerated idea, and then use it to promote a far more radical idea.

Libertarians start by saying freedom is good and conclude that the market must be unregulated. Post-colonialists start by saying that there's an imperialist streak in the first world and conclude that attacking the third world's human rights record is bad. Radical feminists start by saying that women and men are equal and conclude that all of the world's evils are the result of rape.

Similarly, Christian fundamentalists start by saying that there are pedophiles and conclude by saying women, children, and teenagers must be conclaved from the outside world.

Bora,
Slightly misleading post on *your* part, friend. After all, the article itself is condemning 'idle chatter' as being vain and non-productive because most bloggers tend to write *without* thinking beforehand! Indeed, a lot of the condemnation of the author is based on a claim that blogging prevents thinking, not the other way around.

Alon,
Similarly, I think you take this too far. There is a big difference between 'blogging is a waste of time that should be avoided' and 'isolate yourselves from the world'.

Sure, the guy is an extremist, buts let us criticise what he's actually saying.

The never-blog warning is an exaggeration, but the article does contain a little good advice for teenagers: don't post personal information on the internet, don't agree to meet strangers whom you know only from information they posted on the internet, don't get so addicted to the social boards that you neglect face-to-face friendships.

You know what, I disagree. Be careful what you do, but meeting people you only know through the internet can be quite interesting. Back in 2000 I travelled the US for a couple of months, visitng people I knew online etc. It was interesting (and a cheap way to travel) - I have lost contact with most of those people, but I'm still in touch with some of them. I was 25, but in my late teens I could have done the same, and still have enjoyed it.