Great idea, Bill. Count me in. What's the agenda?

Keep pushing, guys. You know I'm all for it (in my non-blogger way).

Mark

Perfect. Just be sure not to try to plug your company. You'll get in trouble with the Winernator.

(I know the best sites like Bill's and Donald's already have most of this concept.)

If this BloggerCon ever happens consider this idea to be voted on:

Blogger Code of Conduct (Beta Version)

The idea has three parts. First a pledge is taken by the blogger not to outrageously insult, taunt, abuse, or threaten other bloggers. Second, the blogger also pledges not to respond to any post that contains an outrageous insult, taunt, abuse, or threat. Third, the blogmaster pledges to post the seal of the Blogger Code of Conduct on the front page of the website and delete any post that violates the code to the best of their ability. Freedom of speech is the paramount goal. Can there be a real debate in the face of severe insults and threats?

On a site that has many posts it is the responsibility of the bloggers to turn the other cheek and not respond to violations of the code. It may not be possible of the blogmaster to deal with many violations.

It is important that the code not limit free speech. I personally object to outrageous profanity in discussion but I realize that outlawing all profanity may not be in the best interest of free speech. I feel the blogmaster should never use profanity. I feel this presents a bad example and encourages this posting behavior. Do we see the editor of a newspaper use outrageous profanity?

The standard should be the behavior that occurs in a face-to-face discussion.

Banning an IP address should only be considered for multiple severe violations and banning an IP address should never be done because of philosophical or content differences. That would be a violation of free speech. If Internet blogging is to have any value Free Speech cannot be suppressed.

My thought process is that this will create an environment that will foster communication between people with different viewpoints. Whether any consensus will be reached is not as important as the opportunity and environment for meaningful discussion and discourse.

Bill,

Point of clarification. Dave Winer encouraged folks around the country to organize "BloggerCons" and welcomed them to use the BloggerCon name. Ed Cone did precisely this in Greensboro, NC.

That said, I think Dave has done a great thing in creating the BloggerCon conference and has done a great job in organizing the first three. It's easy for those of us who don't put in all the leg work to nitpick. Let's rememember Dave runs an event that IS open to all and does not require any payment. My concern at BCIII in Palo Alto was not that non-lefty bloggers were not invited or welcome but that they elected not to attend. And I think one of the best ways to solve that is to hold the event in an area that is more likely to draw a more diverse crowd.

If it were up to me, I would want an "official" Dave Winer BloggerCon in Tennessee of some other Red State.

Okay. Let's make it happen. Nashville, 2005. Who does what next?

BloggerCon in Nashville would be fun, but I am not going to hold my breath. I think it is cool what Belmont is doing (I used to work there and I used to be a student their too).

I do think that Bob is missing the point of blogging a little bit (but he is not alone). There is a subset of (new) bloggers that are trying to get blogs accepted as "legitimate media", and that bloggers should follow journalistic standards. While it is cool that journalists are paying attention to blogs, just because they want to be a part of the fad doesn't mean we (bloggers) need to adopt their standards. If a blogger wants to pretend they are NYT or CNN, so be it. Readers shouldn't make that assumption regardless.

I'll drive down from Knoxville. Maybe South Knox Bubba will give me a ride in his electrical car.

I know Johnny from Right on Red would drive up from Birmingham - I think he may have done some time in Nashville as well.