Blatant Optimism

It would be a great shame if you did give up Blatant, as I and obviously many other people love checking back to read the latest of your musings and enthusiasms. Still, you should follow your instincts, etc. How long have you been doing this, by the way?

Almost exactly two years now. Lots of water under the bridge during that time. I'm trying to work out if the bridge has been eroded enough that I need a new one.

Selfishly, I keep getting annoyed by the fact that whenever I think of shutting down WYA, somebody else considers an extended hiatus, which means that I can't go ahead with it for fear of copying them. Sigh.

And even that gives you something to blog about, so you look a fool.

I am insisting on keeping all my posts in these comments until I think of something properly interesting to say. (Thinks: Is that even *more* navelgazing than a whole bunch of posts about my current feelings on the dilemma?)

I would like more celeb stories and photos of dogs or amusing vegetables.

Seriously, don't give up! I really enjoy reading your blog.

marthax

Another vote for keeping it going, here.

A key thing is not to feel pressured by time. I see plenty of great blogs that only update once a month or so. Personally, I update in bursts. Nobody's paying you to do this - sure, you're writing for an audience, but ultimately you should set the rules to whatever suits you.

I haven't yet worked out if defining the selfish version may be part of the problem. I'm always at my best when I've got 'a cause' or a belief. Perhaps there just aren't enough people behaving like idiots in the interactive sphere at the moment? If there was more stupidity my high horse would come back...

You just dare trying stopping, young man...

besides, it's virtually impossible to stop. Although it does give you an enormous feeling of awesome power to axe a daily-updated website: When I axed Liverpool Hoopla and it was like licking heroin from a dancing girl's armpit, I can tell you...

Give up.
Or re-focus.

If you're updating sporadically about interesting but not focussed things, why not use a mailing list? It pushes (ah, there's a blast from the past) the info directly to people who want it.

Blogging, IMHO, is only acceptable for frequently updated chunks of data in a circumsubscribed subject area. Some good examples would be Belle de Jour, or Paranoid Fish. Whenever you visit there's going to be something interesting if you're interested in that subject.

Unfortunately the majority of blogs don't have a focus, which makes them high-noise-low-signal *unless you already know the poster personally*.

Blogging your life like that is the equivalent of masturbating in public. Fun, but is it something that everyone needs to see?

Matt Jones argues that writing for an audience of your friends is still a useful endeavour. I agree with his axiom, but don't think that blogging is the best way of writing for that audience.

Blogging is an endeavour that is indexed and public, meaning that when a blogger has something on their mind that isn't for public consumption *they can't use their blog to tell their friends*. Thus neatly defeating the use of the blog as an update tool.

Then there's the blogging evangelists. If I ever hear the word blogosphere spoken in my presence, someone is going to get a damn good kicking.

Take a stand and move away from blogs, before the BBC declares it the future of the Internet. Blogging is the push technology of the early 2000s.

Piers

well, i like it. so don't stop whatever *it* is and however *effective* it is. so keep at it sir.

You could always just comment at length on other people's blogs. Like Piers, for instance.
:-)

Hey, I take my kicks where I can get 'em.

:)

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

URL:
Remember me? YesNo

Comments: