To Nibras Bawa, VIC And Sittingnut

This is a kind of open letter, one that hopefully will ask you guys a question that's somewhere in my mind and not yet fully formed. As I write this post I'm very optimistic that the aforementioned question will form some time before the end. Otherwise, things could get pointless.

I'm no kid, though I have a couple of my own. I consider myself a fairly mature and experienced business person and, in my more lucid moments, a pretty rounded individual, though lots of sit ups should help with this. I'm telling you this in an attempt to establish my credibility, for my question might appear as naive to many. Incidentally "naive" is a word I always have a problem spelling first time around, do any of you guys struggle with it? (that's not the main question by the way)

As most people who read this will know, all three of you have blogs.

Mr Bawa, you appear to be the newest entry into the Sri Lankan blogosphere, or the Lankanosphere as one of my heroes has called it. I find your blog captivating, interesting and annoying, all in extremes. It seems that you are successful in your chosen field with some strong opinions and it's fair to say that much of your blog centres around the Lankan advertising industry and its close relatives.

Mr In Colombo, you are known to most in the Lankanosphere. When you write a post we read. I usually disagree with you, but I respect your passion. Many people also agree with your opinions, that of course is their right. As far as I can make out your very popular blog has been in existence since May 2006, which surprised me as I thought it was older than that. I also hope that one day you'll allow me to call you "Voice" as I know your friends are allowed to do.

Mr Nut. What can I say about you that people haven't already thought to themselves? From what I can make out your blog began in August 2005 with this fledgling post. That means you're the longest established blogger out of my three chosen people. Like VIC you don't need much of an introduction to the people who may be reading this.

Now I sincerely hope that you interpret my question in the spirit in which it's intended, one of genuine interest in something that I honestly don't understand. It's this:

Why do all three of you choose to try to present your points, arguments and views in such confrontational and insulting demeanours?

Seriously, it puzzles and bothers me and I'll try to explain why this is so by telling you a bit about my mentality.

I believe that there is little more effective than constructive and positive dialogue. And this is by no means a post in which I advocate peace talks as a current way of solving the situation in Sri Lanka. I'm merely talking about blogging and life in general here.

I respect the way people like Indi and Dinidu articulate their views, though I don't always agree with them as well. They present their points in what seems to me to be a thought out approach, weighing up pros and cons and talking intelligently. Apart from the rare deviations in which a "fuck off" or similar might have appeared they come across as level headed guys.

You three, VIC, Nibras Bawa and Sittingnut have clearly made some kind of decision that the way forward for you is to slag off the people who don't share your opinion. You name call, you insult and you make a habit of hitting below what most people would define as the belt, even on a sarong where it can float a bit. Again, I'd like to emphasise that I mean this as accurate commentary, not some sort of attack on any of you. Once I filter out what I see as the wholly unnecessary padding you often make good points.

Surely it would be better to make those points without all the shouting and name calling, so others would view you with more credibility?

For example you Mr Bawa have made what many seem to think are some insightful and constructive comments on the Sri Lankan ad industry, yet you've managed to do it under a cloud of homophobic and insulting writing. Why did you choose this approach? Perhaps you took a calculated decision that some sort of sensationalism would get peoples' attention quickly. Maybe I'm missing the point here.

VIC, in one of your posts you talk about Dinidu like this:

"Do you hear the “tone” of a sucking LTTE ass licker who is fed by all the rich NGO’s headquartered in Colombo? A tone of a real traitor, who’s enjoying a tiniest of a victory to the tigers?"

Why? I don't get it, just because you have different views?

Sittingnut, you write things like this

"by peaceniks i mean people who think peace is worth any cost (even cost of human rights, justice, democracy, and freedom ). that is people like paikiasothy saravanamuttu, jehan perera, jayadeva uyangoda, sunila abeysekera, sunanda deshapriya, nimalka fernando, rohan edirisinha, jeevan thiagarajaha, and their ilk (and their underlings like sanjana hattotuwa). and their fellow travelers in the sl blogosphere like hypocrite indi.ca/padashow.wordpress (son and tool of a corrupt political appointee) and his cronies."

And I really fail to see what you think you'll gain from that kind of delivery. If it's because you want to appeal to some people then surely you'll only succeed in appealing to the people who already share your opinions anyhow?

There it is, my question.

Why have you adopted these approaches?

I don't know if any of you will read this but I'd really love to hear your answers, though I may be wise to wear body armour!

If anyone else can help me with this please feel free too.

Good weekend in the hot, hot heat of Colombo all. I'd much rather be complaining about the heat than the cold!