| 26 comments ]

OK, the Bloggernacle Snarker is sick and tired of this idiotic speculation over who he/she/it is, and the smug commenters who think they are so clever. So, it is time to end the speculation and disgorge some details, and then get back to snarking.

First off, let's talk about who the Snarker is. The Snarker is not one person. It is presently a collection of four front people, plus a Bored of Directors. The four front people are composed of one admin and three writers. The admin does write, but not consistently (hence the general 3 posts per day, usually one from each writer). The four front people are mixed gender, three are Mormons, one is not. The Bored of Directors is additional persons, not any of which is the four front people, of mixed gender. The Bored of Directors has no direct editorial control over the content, but they do have the power of smackdown in the event the SnarkerNacle steps over the line. Thus, there is an outside, independent regulatory body monitoring the content.

Second, let's talk about the purpose of the Snarker. SnarkerNacle is here to poke some harmless fun at people who really are big enough to take it. Hey, you go out there into the public, wanting some attention, and you get it. Don't like it, then why in the world are you blogging? In no way is it the intention of the SnarkerNacle to hurt people's feelings, to degrade, or to belittle. The Snarker just wants to have some harmless fun. What? You think you are being unfairly treated? OK, then conact the Snarker privately, and we can work something out. In the past people have been snarked, and have felt unfairly treated, contacted us privately, and we have dealt with the matter expeditiously to the agreement of all involved parties.

OK, now, gentle readers, please go back about your business. You can speculate who the Snarker is all you like, but the truth is, you have all been wrong all along, and there isn't anything that will change that short of us unmasking ourselves. Which there is no point in doing. You see, if the anonymous snarkers were unmasked, then this whole thing would be a pointed personal attack. And that isn't the intent here. The intent is for it to be a pointless, impersonal snark from a harmless source, and just have some fun. Hey, if you cannot laugh at yourself, you have no right to laugh at anyone else.

Oh, yeah, and thanks for reading the Bloggernacle Snarker.

P.S., the SnarkerNacle would also like to point out we receive a lot of tips from non-SN-affiliated Naclers, both small fry and big fishies, some of which are noted as such and some of which the submitters prefer no credit whatsoever. So, a significant portion of the posts are derived from your very own submissions, dear Naclers. So, when you want to figure out who the Snarker is, some of you ought to go and look in the mirror, beloved readers.

26 comments

Stephen said... @ January 10, 2006 at 6:08 AM

I'd rather have not known. The snarker is Banner of Heavens!

;0

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 10, 2006 at 6:42 AM

If you didn't want to know, then why did you read it?

Anonymous said... @ January 10, 2006 at 7:53 AM

No, the SN is I Love Lucy. Of course, which one is Fred and which one is Ethel?

Kim Siever said... @ January 10, 2006 at 8:42 AM

I think the Snarkernacle is T&S, BCC, and M* working together.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 10, 2006 at 9:06 AM

Curse you, Kim, for revealing the truth!

Come on, Kim, admit it. You are the Snarker.

Kim Siever said... @ January 10, 2006 at 9:23 AM

What gave it away? The yahoo.ca domain?

danithew said... @ January 10, 2006 at 10:12 AM

I like the creation of "permabore" ... soon we'll have permahosers, permalosers, etc. and etc.

Sarebear said... @ January 10, 2006 at 10:28 AM

The Four Stooges. But which one is Shemp, Curly, Moe, Larry? (Pictures a scuffle breaking out amongst you snarkers as to who gets to be Curly, the COOLEST stooge!) Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk!

The Four Musketeers (NYUM, NYUM, NYUM, chocolate. I had to work that in somewhere . . .)

The Four Tops. (What happened to the bottoms?)

No, wait, I've got it . . . .

THIS is where Gladys Knight has misplaced The Pips.

Pip Pip Pooray!!!

PGK said... @ January 10, 2006 at 10:48 AM

So the snarker is not just a hideously ugly Chihuahua but a hideously ugly Chihuahua with multiple personalities. I have looked into the heart of darkness! The horror! The horror!

Kim Siever said... @ January 10, 2006 at 11:11 AM

Good point, PGK. Maybe the snarker just thinks s/he is more than one person.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 10, 2006 at 11:15 AM

Multiple personality disorder, eh? No, that prefrontal lobotomy I had a few years back took care of that.

Come on, Kim, could one person really produce this much volume day in and day out. Think about it.

Brian Duffin said... @ January 10, 2006 at 11:47 AM

Actually, it's not just the Mertzes (from I Love Lucy), but the Ricola Mystery Cougher. Oh, yes. I caught the Snarker coughing on my blog this morning. Too bad I didn't have any cough drops handy...

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 10, 2006 at 12:02 PM

Sorry about that, Brian. Next time I'll cover my mouth.

Stephen said... @ January 10, 2006 at 12:06 PM

If you didn't want to know, then why did you read it?

Because I can't resist this site.

Kim Siever said... @ January 10, 2006 at 12:46 PM

Considering the quality of the volume, yes I think it is possible.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 10, 2006 at 1:24 PM

Thanks, Kim. You just earned yourself some extra Snark, one-word-title-boy.

Kim Siever said... @ January 10, 2006 at 3:04 PM

Surely, I am shaking.

Chad Too said... @ January 10, 2006 at 3:55 PM

Kim, don't call him Shirley.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 10, 2006 at 5:05 PM

Hey one-word-subject-boy, I bet my posse can beat your posse, at anything, any day of the week.

Eric Russell said... @ January 11, 2006 at 12:26 AM

Why does Snarkernacle need an "outside, independent regulatory body monitoring the content."

How often do the poor Snarker writers go outside their bounds? Does the Bored vote on potential posts? What does this Bored actually do?

You know, if you just made that whole thing up, it's pretty funny. But if you're telling the truth, that's even funnier.

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 11, 2006 at 5:19 AM

Eric,

The SnarkerNacle doesn't need an outside independent regulatory body to monitor it, that is just the way things happened. I would also mention this Bored of Directors was appointed, they were not volunteers. This is not to say they are unwilling participants, only that they did not seek the office.

The Bored of Directors does not review posts before they are posted, they only see them after they are posted. And, as previously stated, they have the "Right of Smackdown". Meaning, they can tell the SnarkerNaclers they have crossed "the line" and need to back up.

The Bored of Directors has exercised their right of smackdown precisely zero times. However, there has been unsolicited constructive crticism offered and there have been deliberate consultations on SnarkerNacle-related issues between the authors and Bored. The Bored of Directors has also requested library records exactly zero times under the new Patriot Act regulations.

The SnarkerNacle has crossed "the line" exactly zero times as far as I am concerned. That is not to say we haven't deleted a couple posts because some people got riled up, only that we do not feel we crossed "the line" in riling them up, they got riled up of their own accord (its never our fault).

Um, would you believe it is mostly true, and therefore mostly funny?

Anonymous said... @ January 11, 2006 at 5:58 AM

So you're saying that I've been exchanging emails with a committee? Hmmm...

I don't think I would have been so unguarded if I knew 15 people were reading my correspondence.

-NFlanders

Snarkimus Prime said... @ January 11, 2006 at 7:05 AM

Ned,

Stop playing around. Everyone knows you are on the Bored of Directors. Playing dumb in public isn't going to help anyone.

Sarebear said... @ January 11, 2006 at 1:06 PM

Shouldn't princess_leah mom insert a comment right now, something about, "I am NOT a committee!".

We all know SHE is the Bored of Directors. She's got the white stuff for the job, and those BUNS! Can't have better lookin' buns than that, unless you are a Cinnabon.

Stephen said... @ January 11, 2006 at 6:27 PM

I'd always wondered how the Snark kept up what is a fantastic level of output, or why it/he/she kept getting better.

It is the committee and the reviewers.

Now, if the Snark can only find DKL for me, after the BCC thread, I think I want a guest post from him on my blog.

Ann said... @ January 11, 2006 at 9:50 PM

Of course one person could produce this much volume in a day, if that person was a lawyer.

Post a Comment