Wednesday, May 7, 2008

What the Hell?

Went to Anchorage, just got back.

Somewhere in the four hours I was gone, a "rating" gadget appeared on the bottom of my blog posts. I didn't add that. Blogger is adding options automatically.

Hmmm, I don't know how I feel about that.

I really don't give a crap about ratings, farks, and etc. I write what I write because that's what I feel like writing right at that particular moment, all right? If people like it, fine. If they don't like it, fine. Ratings? Meh.

I'll leave it alone for a while and see what happens.

Update: aaaand the rating gadget has now disappeared. Just a little midweek randomness, I guess. Bye bye rating gadget, we barely knew ye.


  1. This will be FUN!

    I can give each post a different rating!


  2. Yep, I've seen it on all the Blogger-powered blogs I read. I see no good reason to rate posts. What's the point? If I like the blog in general, I'll read it and sometimes comment. If I don't, I won't read it. And if there's a post I don't like from time to time, oh well. As Walter Cronkite said, that's the way it is.

  3. Of course, I'm not surprised Michelle sees this as another way to have fun (her comment sneaked in just as I was posting mine).

  4. I was thinking of going through and giving all of my own posts a 1 star rating. Just because I'm that kind've guy ;)

  5. Even better?

    I can change my rating every time I visit!


  6. Conversely (following up what Vince said), it doesn't look like the ratings thing shows up on non-Blogger templates. (I have no ratings thingies appearing on Giant Midgets... my delusions of grandeur remain unassailable, ha!)

  7. And then, after I posted, the ratings thingies were gone, gone like Kiser Soze. poof!

  8. I don't see any ratings thingie when I look at your blog.

    The internet is discriminating against me.

    Who do I sue?

  9. Uh, OK - now they're gone.

    Again, what the hell?

  10. I'm sorry. I was hungry, so I ate them.

    (I figure that's more of an answer than you'll get from Blogger.)

  11. Good enough explanation as any, I guess, Michelle

  12. Okay, so I'm going to blame Nathan.

    Nathan owed Michelle chocolate. The ratings thing appeared on Jim's blog. Michelle ate them. Ergo, the ratings things were made of chocolate. The only person who would leave chocolate for Michelle was Nathan. Therefore, I conclude that Nathan caused the thingies to appear on Jim's blog. Like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle used to say, when you've removed all the other possibilities, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the answer. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle believed in ghosts and faeries, and I hope Ben Stein reads this and gives me suitcases full of money to write his next screenplay. (Crosses fingers hopefully.)

  13. OK, I was wrong, Michelle. Eric's explanation is way better


Comments on this blog are moderated. Each will be reviewed before being allowed to post. This may take a while. I don't allow personal attacks, trolling, or obnoxious stupidity. If you post anonymously and hide behind an IP blocker, I'm a lot more likely to consider you a troll. Be sure to read the commenting rules before you start typing. Really.