About this weblog - profile and policies

Updated June 5, 2005

[Home]

If the reality described herein changes (e.g. if I become a paid corporate shill) I'll update this page to reflect it.

I've lived in Nevada County for over 15 years, am originally from the Bay Area.

My identity iswas pretty much an open secret - the people I write about knew, as I suspect did most of my readers. Last Monday, I was outed by the local newspaper: without my consent and against my explicit request, they printed my full name, Anna Haynes.

If I have a day job I won't blog about it, and I won't blog about anything related to it, without disclosing the connection.

I do have opinions on local politics, but am not actively involved in political groups or campaigns.
(Disclosures: I used to give money. I've had signs on the lawn several times. I made phone calls one time. I collected signatures one time, possibly twice. I set the tables for an event one time. I made a campaign website once, that nobody visited. And no, I never received any "valuable consideration" in return for any of these activities.)

• Our Pronoun
  We have decided to quit being pretentious and stick with the first person singular, since all this 'we' shit has become tiresome. At present, the NCFocus team consists of just the proprietor; but following this lead, we believe that sounding pretentious (we,we,we) beats sounding self-absorbed (I,I,I).

• Format

  • Quotes are in gray boxes
    Text in a gray box is a quote from somewhere else; I link to the source if possible, and also try to link to whoever it came from, if possible.

  • Comments no longer require registration
    Might have to re-require it in future - unfortunately; not everyone with something to say in this county has been civil. For now though, open comments seem to be working.

  • Posting private email
    Sorry, this is a case of "I know it when I see it" - but am not too good at articulating it. Here's an attempt:
    • Abusive email or other email outside the bounds of civilized discourse may be printed.
    • Email that clarifies the position of a public person may be printed. (where otherwise you'd be stuck with my paraphrasing or summary, and wondering if it was accurate)
    • As for other email... still undecided as to a system that makes it clear what can and can't be printed. (If the subject of your email might be construed as blogworthy but is not intended for the blog, it'll help if you say so.)
    • I don't believe in outing people; in cases of doubt (and no egregious behavior) I'll make every effort to get your permission first.

• Ethics

  Modified from the original:

  I swear that I have never taken money or received services -- whether directly or indirectly -- from any political campaign or political group or government agency -- whether federal, state, or local -- or anyone else -- in exchange for any service performed in my job as a journalist (or commentator, or blogger, or whatever you think I should be called).

  Rebecca Blood's The Weblog Handbook suggests some weblog ethics:
  1. Publish as fact only that which you believe to be true.
     Yes
  2. If material exists online, link to it when you reference it.
     Yes
  3. Publicly correct any misinformation.
     Yes
  4. Write each entry as if it could not be changed; add to, but do not rewrite or delete, any entry.

     "Don't make mistakes"? Fat chance; unfortunately this is not our strong point (please help, when you find any, by pointing them out.)

     "Add to, but do not rewrite or delete" - this is where I part company with Ms. Blood.

     • I freely edit within an hour or so of putting the post up, where its flaws are more readily visible,without marking the changes.
     • Frequently edit older posts too; try to mark the changes, although later (maybe a week or a month or more) I might go around and tidy it up so the marks disappear. This may sound undesirable, but if you saw what they looked like before the cleanup, you'd understand.
     • I try, hard, not to obscure* or otherwise paper over observations/assertions in older posts that make it clear that I am a complete fool - although the message would probably still get through regardless. I think I did delete some obsolete dreck once last fall, but where the info was removed is marked. What's needed is a change control system that would let you see the prior versions...
       *with the proviso that, within a post, content-free inanities which make their author cringe will be silently deleted.
     • Would probably bend the rules on changing/deleting a post if it involved someone else and in some way the original wasn't appropriate.
     • Will also feel freer to delete insubstantial personal posts than Rebecca would. Not often though.
  5. Disclose any conflict of interest.
     Yes
  6. Note questionable and biased sources.
     Yes

• Motto

  Just a reminder, "belaboring the obvious" has two meanings. Either it seems obvious to me but am not so sure it's obvious to you, or it feels fresh and marvelously new to me but is eye-rollingly clear to everyone else. The latter is typically more applicable.

[Home]