Washington City Paper Part 2

[jsteele]

So, after casting everyone here as nothing but rich, argumentative bitches, the WCP's City Place blog has decided you are all simply starved for sex:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2011/01/21/d-c-urban-moms-hate-your-stroller-because-they-arent-getting-laid/

The WCP is making some mileage out of poking fun of our users. As they say, "all is fair in love and war and new media". Well, maybe they don't say that, but they they should. Let me just say that I will put our users up against posters anywhere. I won't even mention Washington Post commenters because, well, let's just say they are "special". But, the WCP has a lot of glass in it's house when it comes to posters. Check out this article:

http://www.tbd.com/articles/2010/10/anonymous-commenters-frustrate-intermediaries-25520.html

Can you imagine two lamer commenters? These guys might meet each other, or they might not. It's like two adolescents getting someone to pass notes between them. The article is simply painful to read.

So, okay, City Blog. Maybe some of our users could use a little more of the wild thing, but when they want to hook up, they hook up:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/145747.page

None of this "I'll tell him my name if he tells me his name first" business.

So, there.

[Anonymous]

Shows what she knows. Not only are we having sex, DH and I broke the bed last night. Clearly someone had a giant glass of Haterade before pulling that *piece* out of her ass.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:So, after casting everyone here as nothing but rich, argumentative bitches, the WCP's City Place blog has decided you are all simply starved for sex:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2011/01/21/d-c-urban-moms-hate-your-stroller-because-they-arent-getting-laid/

The WCP is making some mileage out of poking fun of our users. As they say, "all is fair in love and war and new media". Well, maybe they don't say that, but they they should. Let me just say that I will put our users up against posters anywhere. I won't even mention Washington Post commenters because, well, let's just say they are "special". But, the WCP has a lot of glass in it's house when it comes to posters. Check out this article:

http://www.tbd.com/articles/2010/10/anonymous-commenters-frustrate-intermediaries-25520.html

Can you imagine two lamer commenters? These guys might meet each other, or they might not. It's like two adolescents getting someone to pass notes between them. The article is simply painful to read.

So, okay, City Blog. Maybe some of our users could use a little more of the wild thing, but when they want to hook up, they hook up:

http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/145747.page

None of this "I'll tell him my name if he tells me his name first" business.

So, there.

Why is it the City Paper's fault the TBD article is lame?

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:Why is it the City Paper's fault the TBD article is lame?

It's not the article that is lame, it's the subjects of the article. Clearly, those two guys are lame. Equally clear is the fact that they represent every single commenter at WCP. See, that's how this journalism business works. So, all WCP commenters are lame. What more proof do you need?

[Anonymous]

Clearly I missed something in Biology 101, or Health class. How do you (generally speaking) become a [DCU]Mom without having sexual intercourse, aka getting laid?

[Anonymous]

Wait, why is her lack of a sense of humor a reason for us to get laid more? I'm all for more reasons to get laid more often, but her reasoning seems like a stretch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Clearly I missed something in Biology 101, or Health class. How do you (generally speaking) become a [DCU]Mom without having sexual intercourse, aka getting laid?

Have you heard of IVF?

[Anonymous]

(generally speaking), you need to get laid to get pregnant and become a Mom. Generally.

[Anonymous]

Yes, the author certainly gets into some really important issues facing our nation today. Such as:

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2010/10/28/tbd-envisions-national-mall-of-menstruating-fake-protesters-desperately-searching-for-tampons/

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/citydesk/2011/01/19/tbd-tries-softcore-porn/

yawn, yawn. It seems this lady's shtick is just to mock others. What's the point of wasting energy on a story like this? The city paper used to produce thoughtful, interesting writing. I didn't always agree but thought it was at least worthy of reading. Now it's like a big circle-jerk of bottom feeders congratulating one another for a blindingly mediocre product that stands out only for its ability to achieve new lows. Where are the editors? It's like a bunch of kids running around without adult supervision. The first article had half a point, but what's this saying (other than the author has a LOT of time on her hands, and very little story fodder?).

[Anonymous]

Well, I haven't read the City Paper in about 9 years, and we refer to it in our house as the Crabby Weekly. I'm just sayin.

[Anonymous]

I just posted the following in the comments section. Admittedly not very eloquent, or indicative of what the more articulate DCUM communicty can bring to an internet party. But I try.

I am glad that you "solved a mystery" that seems to elude the rest of us parents out there. As a self-identified "young woman living in DC," you surely have enough time on your hands to visit the rest of the fora on Jeff's site. If you did, you would realize you saw a very small piece of the larger DCUM picture.

I am trying to be gracious, but you really pissed me off with your cursory review of the site, and subsequent judgements. Get back to us when you have a legitimate reason to use DCUM, and I can guarantee that people will be kinder to you than you are to them with this bullshit piece.

I almost made a clean escape without profanity.

[Anonymous]

I commented after you, I'm single dingle. (I was dill smith last time around. I like making up pseudonyms).

Jeff, if I were you, I'd blog about this on your post, leave a single comment back to your blog on the original (more thoughtful) piece and then just milk this for a few blog hits and build up your readership. NOt everyone who reads the city paper articles are as douchey as the commenters or the authors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I commented after you, I'm single dingle. (I was dill smith last time around. I like making up pseudonyms).

Jeff, if I were you, I'd blog about this on your post, leave a single comment back to your blog on the original (more thoughtful) piece and then just milk this for a few blog hits and build up your readership. NOt everyone who reads the city paper articles are as douchey as the commenters or the authors.

single dingle. . .great advice. jeff, don't defend yourself. just show up and do what you do.

[jsteele]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I commented after you, I'm single dingle. (I was dill smith last time around. I like making up pseudonyms).

Jeff, if I were you, I'd blog about this on your post, leave a single comment back to your blog on the original (more thoughtful) piece and then just milk this for a few blog hits and build up your readership. NOt everyone who reads the city paper articles are as douchey as the commenters or the authors.

single dingle. . .great advice. jeff, don't defend yourself. just show up and do what you do.

Okay, I just posted a blog article on the home page. I'm not sure that I want to join the fray on WCP's website, but they will probably discover it eventually. It would be nice if some of you who have had good experiences on DCUM would post about them on the blog article to demonstrate the overlooked value of this site.

[Anonymous]

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why is it the City Paper's fault the TBD article is lame?

It's not the article that is lame, it's the subjects of the article. Clearly, those two guys are lame. Equally clear is the fact that they represent every single commenter at WCP. See, that's how this journalism business works. So, all WCP commenters are lame. What more proof do you need?

Brilliant!