The 10th Marquess of Queensberry (rules for the nonmartial sport of blogging)

I was thinking about what prevents blogging from being an effective exchange of ideas. Having blogged for millions of nanoseconds, I am already a veteran of the best and worst of what perpetually, as I have learned, occurs in the virtual ring of ideas. Encouraged by one co-respondent, I thought I would try to evolve a set of rules by which these encounters might be restrained to effectiveness. And this line of thought led me to recall the rules put forth by the 9th Marquess of Queensberry for the sport of boxing. Bearing in mind that my tongue is somewhat in my cheek (not wise for a boxer of course) I will try to adapt the time honored rules to this century and to contests of thought... Queensberrys rules will be denoted by a Q in front of a number. The new rules, applicable to blogging shall be denoted by a B in front of a number. 

Rules

Q1.   To be a fair stand-up boxing match in a 24-foot ring, or as near that size as     practicable.

B1.   To be a fair sit down blogging exchange on two or more virtual chairs, separated by a virtual table. This rule may be the most critical. Participants, be they bloggers or posters, shall interact as they would sitting across a table from one another.

Q2.   No wrestling or hugging (clinching) allowed.

B2.   Moving from the concept that wrestling and hugging are not boxing, (however passionate the former and cordial the latter), blogging participants shall be limited to an exchange of ideas and opinion. Character attacks, boyish provocation, cat fights, insults, and mockery will not be allowed.

Q3.   The rounds to be of three minutes duration, and one minute's time between rounds.

B3.   After the initial post, replies shall be economic. The participants must stay with the point addressed and speak as briefly as possible, avoiding attachments, links to lengthy sites that relate to the topic however obliquely, meandering ideas, etc.  

Q4.   If either man falls through weakness or otherwise, he must get up unassisted, 10 seconds to be allowed him to do so, the other man meanwhile to return to his corner, and when the fallen man is on his legs the round is to be resumed and continued until the three minutes have expired. If one man fails to come to the scratch in the 10 seconds allowed, it shall be in the power of the referee to give his award in favour of the other man. 

B4. Well, there is no referee. That may be a challenge. In a blog, when someone is beaten down or is being beaten down it is usually due to a participant who has an axe to grind and is using the blog to relieve anger. This leads to a slap fight scenario in which respondents and bloggers resort to cheap shots, name calling, denigrating language, etc. A blog can be an intense and enlightening exchange of thoughts, or it can quickly fall to a taut festival. Hence the New Rules....

Q5.  I dont know what Q5 was... I lost it. 

Q6.  No seconds or any other person to be allowed in the ring during the rounds.

B6.  "Seconds" do appear in blogging...sort of like tag teams in professional wrestling. Particularly evident with folks with a propensity for thinking the world is a bunch of monolithic chunks, and so speak about "conservatives," or "liberals," or "Americans," as if these terms had some concrete meaning, seconds tag in and leap over the ropes in the first few rounds. In the New Rules it will be normal, at times, to seem agreement, but clarity of thought will be encouraged so that the aim is not ganging up on other participants so much as refining ideas. 

Q7.   Most of the other Queensberry rules seem misalligned with blogging. The fact is, Queensberry was probably shooting for allowing that boxing be as physical as possible just shy of killing one of the two participants. We hope that blogging is not a martial art. This one original rule, however, underscores some of the first ideas I am laying down.

...That no shoes or boots with spikes or sprigs be allowed

B7.   Boxing, as violent as it is, clearly would have become more barbaric had boots with spikes or sprigs... (spurs?) been part of the gear. Likewise, bloggers should leave the verbal spikes and spurs at home. Insulting other humans is not a way to compare ideas, let alone to persuade them to the soundness of your points of view. Insulting someone is aggressive...it is a challenge to a real fight not to a debate, and certainly not to continued conversation. 

Seriously folks, while I like original thoughts, out of the box thinking, an intense change of ideas and passion for beliefs, I am tired of watching blog thread after blog thread fray into what reminds me of nothing so much as the schoolyard in seventh grade. If that is the forum model adults want to hold this to... so be it. Count me out. My sense is that great ideas, or even good ones, should be able to stand on their own. They will have the power of attraction, or at least be thought provoking, if presented clearly. My other thought is that insults are the preamble of war, microcosmic or macrocosmic.

Lend me your thoughts and leave the spikes in your closet.