91Èȱ¬

Hats off to the Bevan Foundation for organising last night's very well behaved Welsh blogging debate. Sandwiches were provided and much stick for anonymous bloggers.
Not accountable? True enough. Not reliable sources? Fair enough. Malicious? Some can be. Unchristian? Now hang on ...

One Labour AM seemed astounded, if not disturbed, that I read anonymous blogs at all. He threw in words like 'sources' and 'quote' that I didn't. I simply said that I read anonymous blogs because in this ever so small country of ours, there will be people with insightful things to say and who can only share them in blogs. The problem is I don't know which ones they are any more than you do. Buyer beware but I'll carry on reading thanks.

If you stayed away because you had a sneaky feeling that bloggers, both open and anonymous and 'occasional users' of blogs (what's the blogging equivalent of not inhaling?) debating the merits of blogging - in Wales - might sound just a little bit incestuous, you're not far off perhaps. Still hats off to them for offering up six navels at which you can gaze .

We pro-bloggers reckon we won on the grounds that the Bevan Foundation's Director, Victoria Winckler - the blogger who instigated the debate - has decided to carry on blogging despite anonymous nastiness and her disappointment in the quality of the online debate. Eleanor Burnham, who kicked off the 'no' camp's argument, now wants to start one.

The Ayes had it.

Meanwhile our eyes and ears today are on the Welsh Conservative camp where something is afoot. More later.

• Bookmark with:
• |
• |
• |
• |
• - What's this?