Skip

The four noble truths of blogging
December 14, 2001 8:40 AM   Subscribe

The four noble truths of blogging
1. Painful Mediocrity (Kutaifishi)
2. Cause of Painfully Mediocre Blogging (Jittaifishi)
3. Cessation of Mediocre Blogging (Zeitgeistidiota)
4. The Path (drole la voie d'acces)

posted by riley370 (14 comments total)

 
the associated link to a decalogue of schlegelisms is even more interesting.
posted by grabbingsand at 9:02 AM on December 14, 2001


Reading my grocery list is even more interesting than that.

The world has enough navel-gazing and mentalbation as it is; anybody but me consider that quality should be the goal, not quantity?
posted by UncleFes at 9:18 AM on December 14, 2001


as with any hobby or creative endeavor, the enjoyment and personal satisfaction of the person doing it should be the goal.
posted by centrs at 9:29 AM on December 14, 2001


as with any hobby or creative endeavor, the enjoyment and personal satisfaction of the person doing it should be the goal.

What sort of "personal satisfaction" do bloggers derive from never having an unexpressed thought?

Oh, that's right -- loads.
posted by KLAX at 10:06 AM on December 14, 2001


When you publish, you admit an audience, and when you admit an audience, the audience garners the right to critique.
posted by UncleFes at 11:04 AM on December 14, 2001


I thought Fishrush did a hilarious job. As for any audience garnering the right, the right is earned by how they behave and are responsible in their critiques to offer value, clarity or to extend an article.
posted by riley370 at 11:15 AM on December 14, 2001


The right is assumed by the widebanding of the document. If it wasn't, there would be no pans.
posted by UncleFes at 11:44 AM on December 14, 2001


When you publish, you admit an audience, and when you admit an audience, the audience garners the right to critique.

Brilliantly stated.
posted by rushmc at 2:26 PM on December 14, 2001


critique is fine, but i don't think anyone should stop blogging because of bad critiques. i guess i just took unclefes' comment as people who can't come up with "quality" content shouldn't be blogging. i say it's their perogative if they enjoy doing it.
posted by centrs at 3:04 PM on December 14, 2001


Well, not shouldn't, I suppose. If they enjoy it, there's nothing stopping them from doing so, and I certainly wouldn't censor them. But if they publish publicly, then they open themselves up to criticism, good and bad. If they do not want the bad criticism, then they should reconsider widebanding the URL to their blog - or simply keep a written diary, for themselves or to show to selected people who will not criticize. If you keep a diary, your creative endeavor is your own, and no one (well, maybe your mom if she finds it) will criticize the contents. But if you publish a blog, then you are basically opening your diary to the entire world - you are bringing it to an audience. And that inherently allows for criticism.

That being the case, if you assume an audience, and therefore open oneself to criticism, then quality should be a goal. You can be as sloppy and boring as you want in your diary; but if you are writing for the entertainment and/or edification of others (the unstated but very real goal of publishing), then you should strive to provide your audience with the best quality material you can.

Otherwise, why publish?
posted by UncleFes at 3:24 PM on December 14, 2001


That being the case, if you assume an audience, and therefore open oneself to criticism, then quality should be a goal.

*I* agree with you, but I can see how not everyone might feel the pressure to produce quality work or consider their audience at all in creating such output. Just because you make yourself available to criticism doesn't necessarily imply that you care one whit about it.
posted by rushmc at 5:35 PM on December 14, 2001


Just because you make yourself available to criticism doesn't necessarily imply that you care one whit about it.

Meaning you won't mind if I criticise.
posted by walrus at 4:53 AM on December 17, 2001


Please do. Unlike some, I may mind some, but I acknowledge that I may also benefit from it.
posted by rushmc at 6:06 PM on December 18, 2001


Sorry rushmc, I was being flippant. I suspect we think along similar lines on this subject. By the way, I get a 404 for the page listed on your profile. Not that I was going to criticise it, you understand ... just went for a glance ;-)
posted by walrus at 3:59 AM on December 19, 2001


« Older Google Catalog Search   |   Can things at Notre Dame football get any worse? Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post