I'd like to thank all those who've taken the survey so far [top left sidebar or popup] and the responses, especially the written ones at the end, have been invaluable. However, it's thrown up the eternal problem again:Long or short posts
What to do, what to do? All right, one can run very witty little comments on something someone wrote [usually not quoted but linked to save space] and providing the links don't exceed three, it works. Tim Worstall and UK Daily Pundit use this method very successfully but it's more suited to a political blogger commenting on current events.
What though, if the blogger wants to create his own longer piece - such as Chris Dillow? Chris uses a strict 7 or 8 paragraph restriction and point form. If it doesn't fit into the space, it doesn't go in. Then it forms part of another post. Blogosphere attention spans are notoriously short so this is a good method. Chris also uses smaller fonts.
What if you need to include a fair bit of info because you're composing a serious piece using much quotation? Is there a place for these on a blog? I suggest there is.
For example, I can't see how I could have refuted that Marxist without quoting Marx and others. This takes space and then there's your own comment. Suddenly you're up to 29 paragraphs. Aaaaagh!
So some people suggested [on the survey] that the trick is to run a one paragraph summary at the start and link it to another blogpage. Yes, good idea but how many people will follow that link?
If, however they start reading and it looks like it's getting a bit long, they might stay with it because they see it's almost finished.
I don't know the answer to all this.
James, I did the survey. But I'd like to say here I like your blog just as it is - a mixture of long and short posts and a wonderful spread of subject-matter. I do like the new format, where I can scroll through all the most recent posts without everything "jumping around" at me. Now I'll confess to more stupidity and say, are we talking about blog or personal birthdays? Sorry to be daft but no one's made this clear to me.
ReplyDeleteBlog Birthday, Welshcakes. My real birthday is at the otehr end of the year. Alas.
ReplyDeleteSize always matters but sometimes short and sweet is preferable.
ReplyDeleteYou probably know I did the survey- you probably know which opinions were mine!
ReplyDeleteThe discussion that is happening now, is the discussion we all came here for.
The way we are all dealing with it it is the best bit of it.
Talking.
Discussing.
Without getting nasty.
None of us need to.
We all like and respect eachother, but want to show eachother the way we think.
And get some feedback.
So we can all move on and get the next level of discussion going.
To me, that's BLOGPOWER.
That's what I joined for.
We all came to talk.
Are we all selling that vision?
It's an amazing vision!
Open it up!
Every Voice Counts!
'Sometimes the best maxim is: "I blog, therefore I can." "I can therefore I do.';
ReplyDeleteI would quote the blogger who said that, but I won't.
You get the picture.
THE TRUTH WILL OUT.
I really think it's that simple.
I think it's worth the fight.
James,
ReplyDeleteIt's the mix that makes it interesting.
Of all the questions I prefer today's font. As for the rest
it is not whether they are short, long, funny, sad, romantic, political or what; my only criteria is are they interesting? So far, so good. Should the context demand length, do it, any regular here expects it. You did in the past use short intros with a link for more, for me that's now an utter irrelevance as I use a feed (which I recommend to everyone for simplicity and speed) and have broadband but I realise not everyone has access to broadband.
I'm a lazy sod so keep linking. I also like the journey when your link in turn links elsewhere.
I somehow don't see you as a swearblogger though I'm sure you are more than capable; your occasional epithet shows me your feeling on the subject.
Do I want your blog to more resemble others? Er, why? No.
Do I want it preserved in aspic? I think you enjoy if not need to change the appearance as you see fit. Again no.
The thought occurs, thank you but I do not want a blog designed by committee.
The thing is with the depth and variety you provide I'd be reading anyway.
STB.
James, I did parts of the survey about which I had strong feelings but I abstained on parts which I did not.
ReplyDeleteI want to say I hate with a passion posts which have a first paragraph then a click needed to read the rest. I read on a feed, although not everyone, and if I start to read a post and click to go over you see only that post. Then you have to reload the blog home page to read the other posts. Alternatively you go over to the home page, click to read further, then have to click back to home page to read the next post. This is probably not clear but I definitely find them inconvenient and quite a few medblogs I read use this method.
I also don't follow the links after the first few because it just becomes a drag. The question is does one follow the link in the middle of reading the post, or wait till the end. I usually get sucked into following the link while still half way through.
Regarding length of post.
I think we are have become accustomed to mid length posts in general but I have no trouble with long posts if they interest me. When you post multiple posts per day as you do, why not say post one long in depth one say once a week and save some of the others for the next day when you do multiple short or mid posts. I guess that can be a problem if they need to be topical.
Some rambling thoughts hopefully giving you a point of view.
jmb
Real food for thought. Excellent, excellent. I'm really thinking hard about this - it ahs to be very user friendly.
ReplyDeleteI admire Prodicus who just posts, gets it off his chest and doesn't post again for days. I just can't do this.
I know my more controversial pieces on humanists et al will not get people in, nor my biz-speak humorous posts [they are humorous!] and these I just post and be damned.
I know the quizzes are liked [one coming up today]. Blogfocus will come back soon.
I appreciate all the above comments and love getting to your blogs too.
Welshcakes, thanks for that.
ReplyDeleteUber, why do you not let people into your site?
Crushed, you're right.
STB - interesting thoughts and interesting site of yours too!
JMB - wise words.
Content Content Content
ReplyDeleteAll the other stuff is secondary.
I find it interesting that you tinker with your layout so much.
Oh and pop up windows, you can keep those.
ReplyDeleteYour narrow columns are pretty narrow, making some of your fonts a little eye scrunchy.
I think that you will find that readers can pick and choose what to read. With a blog like yours, it is impossible to interest everybody in all your posts. Peoples whims are part of the puzzle.
Providing you are posting about things that interest you, then it is likely that it is interesting to most of your readers. For me, I looked at your most recent posts and more than half were of sufficient interest to read in full. Some of the others I skimmed and two I didn't even start.
I read a lot of blogs and it is hard to give full justice to all the posts in all the blogs I read.
James, Sadly, I Had to turn my satirical ,cynical blog inbto amembers only after coming across a few who tried to use my words against me to peddle sinister wrongdoings that didn't exist....and then there was the man who hides behind his shiny blogpower role to crush & exploit vulnerable women by pretending to be what he's not you see.:)
ReplyDeleteI will send you an invite though James.
Qui? Moi? Ubermouth - ask the other ladies. :)
ReplyDeleteNever you James...you have the most honour and integrity here. :)
ReplyDeleteThat last comment was me. :)
ReplyDeleteIt's uncanny - I'm just now preparing a new post on displays of affection and here I am having a virtual affair with a cyberenigma. Life is strange.
ReplyDeleteJames,
ReplyDelete1. Thanks
2. As you well know that showed an amateur's first attempt at setting up a blog (for expediency) and your advantageous attempt to:
A. Show superiority. Tut.
B. A sublimity to suggest others view subliminally what I (correct or expand) said. Tut, TUt.
Or,
OR Sublimate;
1. Chemistry To cause (a solid or gas) to change state without becoming a liquid.
2.
a. To modify the natural expression of (a primitive, instinctual impulse) in a socially acceptable manner.
b.To transform directly from the solid to the gaseous state or from the gaseous to the solid state without becoming a liquid
I can only, therefore, presume that you think I'm an old fart who (which?) can go from solid to gas (the ultimate teenager!).
3. Perhaps draw me out to do my own blog?
How does one put this? Tut, TUt, TUT.
I'm not ready, I am still thinking.
STB.
ps it made sense to me, DOH!
STB - take your time. We're not going anywhere.
ReplyDelete