Speculation
The good thing about being human and doing human things that matter to self is that one does not have to justify everything.
I like lasagna, do I have to explain to you why? No.
Are there really valid reasons for my liking lasagna? Of course.
Do you have to know? No.
But you can speculate, given the collective facts that I'm a sucker for cheese, for tomatoes, for spices, and how eating them visibly makes me high. You can even use the fact that I like Italian food in general, the fetuccine, spaghetti, pizza kind. Then, you will find the reason, as it suits you, why I like lasagna.
Just the same, that's speculation. And hopefully, it's not lined with malice. Ultimately, I alone know the reasons why I like lasagna, which may or may not coincide with your theories. And due to constraints, I don't feel like elaborating.
The reason for this rather off post is this collection of theories by Mr. Moderator of the NUS Chika blog, as to why I wanted out of it. Nice, it was an instant response to my previous post. Another instant response is the sudden total makeover of NUS Chika. Suddenly no more blog feeds from any of the individual members (but maybe that's just for the meantime). (edit[13/4/05]: the original NUS Chika blog has just been renamed/moved to NUS Noypi, apparently) All this suddenness in contrast to the absence of reply I got for my repeated requests to remove my blog, before I cornered him during lunch.
Now, if I were to use my Evaluating Academic Arguments module learnings to critique my own argument, I would easily say this is a case of false analogy. Yet, it cannot be denied that ultimately, in matters pertaining to self, I don't have to justify anything to anyone.
I would love to do so actually, to share my thoughts and reasons, but not with people who put malice in the things I do. I am sorry, Wayne, but you again have placed malice in my actions, not unlike the Varsity Voices incident. I highlight some points regarding his post:
What is the relevance of the title, "Ako ang may K", to the post? Later, he says, "According to him (referring to me), he is the one who has the "karapatan"(right) whether he should be there (in NUS Chika) or not." Are you trying to refute my claim that it is indeed my right? If so, your argument isn't substantiated. You didn't comment directly on the statement, except perhaps through the title? I still maintain it is my right to decide to have my blog displayed in NUS Chika or not.
With regard to your amazing theories, I am saddened by the malice again hurled against me.
On Theory 1: Malice in insinuating that I yearn for increased hits by removing my blog from NUS Chika. Because really, I'm not after hits. I would elaborate, but that would be too complicated. Let's just say I'm going for quality, not quantity. That's a bad analogy of sorts, but it makes sense to me.
Everyone can go get Bloglines, as Wayne suggested, and I would not complain at all with the reduced hits. I've recently even got a Bloglines account myself (got the idea originally from Sherene though).
On Theory 2: Isolating who and how many people visit? Sure I want to know who visits my blog, since I'm baring myself here and I don't want lurkers, but I never thought of it this way. The ideal situation is for people who do read to please speak up and tell me something. But to remove my blog from NUS Chika to check my visitors? Heck no.
On Theory 3: "Is it because NUS Chika has a scandalicious aura about it that would engulf anyone belonging to it?" This is the type of insinuation I recognize only in tabloids and showbiz talk shows. Don't do it, Wayne. It's not good. And that joke by someone about INQ7 and NUS Chika on different levels: not funny.
On Theory 4: I am most struck by this theory, and I'll post the entire paragraph here:
"My fourth and least probable theory would be that he does not want any one to link to his blog. Why would a guy join INQ7 blogger of the day if he did not want that attention. For the information of the uninformed, to be a blogger of the day, drop joeyalarilla@gmail.com a line and he'll check out your site. Then he'll ask you to fill up a questionnaire. That's too much effort to go through to not want being linked to by a ton of sites."
False assumption. Do you seriously think that I wanted to get linked by "a ton of sites" by going through that "too much effort"? MY GOD. I am appalled.
Someone please tell me I'm not weird for joining the INQ7 YOU Blog Addict thing because I wanted to do my blog a tribute. That I wasn't trying to have my blog linked by "a ton of sites" (and it didn't happen too). As far as I know, the only new site that linked to me after the INQ7 thing is the same INQ7 feature itself. Sure it gives me more hits, and I'm not complaining, but that was not my aim. Quality over quantity, I repeat. As I've said to a person who commented on my previous post, I did not join the Blog Addict thing to lure many people to my site and have a shot at fame. I'm indeed addicted to blogging, and thus I qualify. And really, I was doing a tribute to the blog that has kept me sane.
Too much effort? Do you seriously think so? Is it so difficult to write an email and fill up a questionnaire of less than 10 questions? As a side note, have you applied for it too, Wayne?
OK, this has been a long enough, heavy post. I am saddened too, Wayne, if you must know. I hope you figure out why you're experiencing "confused sadness". I know I'm sad because some people still think maliciously of me.
P.S. Ugh. I hate posting stuff like this.
