Leadership in Blogging
Randy Moss. Terrell Owens. Mike Tyson. What do these guys have in common? They are all the self-proclaimed best at what they do.
Of course, I use wll known sports figures because most everyone can relate to these folks. But undoubtedly, you can find these egos in your company, your church, your circle of associates, etc. They are the people who need to tell people they are the best at what they do, or that need to have the spotlight on them.
This is entirely the wrong way to promote and/or develop leadership. In a Newsweek article on how Google cultivates their workers (reprinted in its entirety at Manassy Watch), the point is made that:
At Google, the role of the manager is that of an aggregator of viewpoints, not the dictator of decisions.
Striking, eh? Most people are used to the big enchilada that makes life miserable. This perspective does not digress much from my own observations of human nature and the ebb and flow of leadership. Leadership is not a position that is given. It is a quality that is earned. In my experience, the best managers I’ve had are not the ones with the doctorates or MBAs (though they may have those). They are the ones who began their management careers unwillingly. They were given the responsibility of people or a project because they showed themselves faithful to the duties they had and were promoted.
If you talk to any enlisted sailor, soldier or Marine that has been serving for awhile, they will tell you that the officers that come out of Annapolis or West Point are generally given the respect that is due their rank, and not anything else. They don’t have the experience to be awarded the trust of their men. This is not always the rule, of course, but it is more times than those green backs care to admit.
What does this have to do with blogging, you might ask? It has everything to do with the ongoing self-congratulatory, self-propping egotistical maneuvering that is going on in the blogosphere. First it was the pajama orgy, then it was the crazy ongoing debate about “the ecosystem” which ranks blogs based on the number of folks who have linked to them and seemingly continues to be exploited for the benefit of the egos. Darren points out evidence that links don’t mean a thing if no one is reading (if I can make that logical conclusion). Now it’s the “Weblog Awards“, which seems to be another opportunity to pat the same old people on the back – the old boys club. Example, Rob (who is a self-proclaimed NON-A-lister) posts about the Weblog awards and how “it’s a new day…and you can vote again”. Granted, I believe Rob when he says it’s all for fun. But if you go to each of the blogs nominated for an award, they are all pushing and promoting themselves like they are running for a political office.
Paul Chaney makes an excellent point about why the Weblog Awards are bad.
1. Because readers do the voting, awards such as these are subjective, and subject to politicing by the nominees.
2. They remind me of the fanaticism that surrounded website awards back in the 90s. Remember all those sites touting how many awards they had won.
3. They don’t really mean anything except to the award site owner, who benefits from enhanced traffic, some Adsense sales and traffic to the sponsor site, which in the case of The Weblog Awards 2005, is apparently owned by the awards site owner. Hence, this is nothing more than a marketing tactic. A smart one, but a marketing tactic nonetheless.
4. I never seem to get nominated! Heh.
I agree.
We don’t need self-congratulatory awards in the blogosphere to make leaders. Already, I feel the influence of the so-called “A-list” is being marginalized as folks begin to realize that there are many quality blogs out there that will never even get a nod. They will never get noticed. And they will never make a difference, which is what blogging is all about at its core.
Inspired by Duncan Riley who is covering 100 Blogs in 100 Days, I’m going to review thirty great “unknown” blogs – one (approximatel) each day for a month. These blogs will be on a variety of topics that don’t just fit into what I’d put in my RSS Reader. The experiment is to demonstrate folks who really should get the recognition for a job well done but may never make the Weblogs Awards.
Added: It’s okay to nominate blogs if you email me at aaron [at] technosailor [dot] com. You CANNOT nominate yourself and the blog cannot acknowledge nomination prior to review or they will not be considered. Nominations posted in comments will not be considered either.
This is about EARNING a mention… no campaigning… no politicking. If a blog is good, the blog will speak for itself.
Pick up your copy of the WordPress Bible, a wildly popular resource for beginners and experts alike.
Written by Aaron Brazell on December 6, 2005
Popularity: 1% [?]
Aaron Brazell
Steven Fisher
Ray Capece
Carlos Granier-Phelps
Andrew Feinberg
Mike Dougherty
Chris Bachmann
Leslie Poston
Jerald Sheets
Scott Goldblatt
Mykel Nahorniak
Peter Corbett
Jonathan Dingman
Geoff Livingston
Jeremy Toeman
Rachel James
Chris Parandian
Warren Sukernek
Joseph Hauckes
Shana Glickfield
Vinnie Garcia
David Nick
Duncan Riley
Carol Ott
Darren McLaughlin
Mike Oliver
Rico Masterson
Lou P. Nuts
Great post. Someone said blogging is high school all over again. But I don’t care about the “pushier” bloggers. My concern is that I have a very nice set of tools to present whatever I write to an audience, Now I have to see how well I can get myself to write, what my limits are.
Beyond the struggle for fame, there must be a whole lot of people out there doing the same thing. Sounds as if you are out to find a few of them.
Great post. Someone said blogging is high school all over again. But I don’t care about the “pushier” bloggers. My concern is that I have a very nice set of tools to present whatever I write to an audience, Now I have to see how well I can get myself to write, what my limits are.
Beyond the struggle for fame, there must be a whole lot of people out there doing the same thing. Sounds as if you are out to find a few of them.
Great post. Someone said blogging is high school all over again. But I don’t care about the “pushier” bloggers. My concern is that I have a very nice set of tools to present whatever I write to an audience, Now I have to see how well I can get myself to write, what my limits are.
Beyond the struggle for fame, there must be a whole lot of people out there doing the same thing. Sounds as if you are out to find a few of them.
I think, to a certain extent, all blogging is pretty much ego-driven. Some more than others, but it takes a certain amount of ego to start a public blog to begin with. If none of us really cared about readership we’d all pen our rantings on cocktail napkins or on legal pads.
I also think that going on and on about egotism in blogging (complaining about PJ Media, complaining about the Weblog Awards) is itself a bit of ego-stroking. Not to be rude or anything (just mildly critical) getting all sarcastic and caustic about people getting together to leverage some advertising dollars (PJ Media) or getting together to have some silly fun (Weblog Awards, even though some take it pretty seriously) is sort of silly.
If the Weblog Awards truly are meaningless, what’s the point in getting upset about them?
And don’t take this the wrong way, I just think you’re making mountains out of molehills.
I think, to a certain extent, all blogging is pretty much ego-driven. Some more than others, but it takes a certain amount of ego to start a public blog to begin with. If none of us really cared about readership we’d all pen our rantings on cocktail napkins or on legal pads.
I also think that going on and on about egotism in blogging (complaining about PJ Media, complaining about the Weblog Awards) is itself a bit of ego-stroking. Not to be rude or anything (just mildly critical) getting all sarcastic and caustic about people getting together to leverage some advertising dollars (PJ Media) or getting together to have some silly fun (Weblog Awards, even though some take it pretty seriously) is sort of silly.
If the Weblog Awards truly are meaningless, what’s the point in getting upset about them?
And don’t take this the wrong way, I just think you’re making mountains out of molehills.
I think, to a certain extent, all blogging is pretty much ego-driven. Some more than others, but it takes a certain amount of ego to start a public blog to begin with. If none of us really cared about readership we’d all pen our rantings on cocktail napkins or on legal pads.
I also think that going on and on about egotism in blogging (complaining about PJ Media, complaining about the Weblog Awards) is itself a bit of ego-stroking. Not to be rude or anything (just mildly critical) getting all sarcastic and caustic about people getting together to leverage some advertising dollars (PJ Media) or getting together to have some silly fun (Weblog Awards, even though some take it pretty seriously) is sort of silly.
If the Weblog Awards truly are meaningless, what’s the point in getting upset about them?
And don’t take this the wrong way, I just think you’re making mountains out of molehills.
You’re welcome, obviously, to disagree, Rob.
You’re welcome, obviously, to disagree, Rob.
You’re welcome, obviously, to disagree, Rob.
I don’t object to heavily self-promoting bloggers per se. But the problem is, they make it more difficult to find those bloogers who devote more of their energies to just, frankly, running great blogs. The self-promoters divert limited resources (attention and money) that would nourish lesser-known bloggers. Some real revelations get steamrolled by the elbow-throwers. That’s my concern.
A great blogger, Robert Scoble, said to “blog down” the food chain. Most bloggers “blog up”, that is, quote blogs higher up the traffic scale. The rich get richer. Problem with doing that is that everyone has seen the big bloggers’ posts/ By blogging down, you can promote less-trafficked blogs, and post items that are more unique (i.e., they weren’t shown to the world on Instapuundit already). These days I do mention Instapundit now and again, but I remain predominantly mindful of wonderful lesser-trafficked bloggers who have found items that the big boys missed.
The road less traveled and all that.
I don’t object to heavily self-promoting bloggers per se. But the problem is, they make it more difficult to find those bloogers who devote more of their energies to just, frankly, running great blogs. The self-promoters divert limited resources (attention and money) that would nourish lesser-known bloggers. Some real revelations get steamrolled by the elbow-throwers. That’s my concern.
A great blogger, Robert Scoble, said to “blog down” the food chain. Most bloggers “blog up”, that is, quote blogs higher up the traffic scale. The rich get richer. Problem with doing that is that everyone has seen the big bloggers’ posts/ By blogging down, you can promote less-trafficked blogs, and post items that are more unique (i.e., they weren’t shown to the world on Instapuundit already). These days I do mention Instapundit now and again, but I remain predominantly mindful of wonderful lesser-trafficked bloggers who have found items that the big boys missed.
The road less traveled and all that.
I don’t object to heavily self-promoting bloggers per se. But the problem is, they make it more difficult to find those bloogers who devote more of their energies to just, frankly, running great blogs. The self-promoters divert limited resources (attention and money) that would nourish lesser-known bloggers. Some real revelations get steamrolled by the elbow-throwers. That’s my concern.
A great blogger, Robert Scoble, said to “blog down” the food chain. Most bloggers “blog up”, that is, quote blogs higher up the traffic scale. The rich get richer. Problem with doing that is that everyone has seen the big bloggers’ posts/ By blogging down, you can promote less-trafficked blogs, and post items that are more unique (i.e., they weren’t shown to the world on Instapuundit already). These days I do mention Instapundit now and again, but I remain predominantly mindful of wonderful lesser-trafficked bloggers who have found items that the big boys missed.
The road less traveled and all that.
From a certain perspective, all the “A-List” bloggers already do a lot of the “blogging down.” Glenn, with his “instalanches,” is famous for it. That’s how they get such large readership. They aggregate the voices of the smaller bloggers.
I also try not to post anything Instapundit already has (unless I have something good or unique to add) but that’s mostly because if he’s posted it pretty much everybody has already seen it.
From a certain perspective, all the “A-List” bloggers already do a lot of the “blogging down.” Glenn, with his “instalanches,” is famous for it. That’s how they get such large readership. They aggregate the voices of the smaller bloggers.
I also try not to post anything Instapundit already has (unless I have something good or unique to add) but that’s mostly because if he’s posted it pretty much everybody has already seen it.
From a certain perspective, all the “A-List” bloggers already do a lot of the “blogging down.” Glenn, with his “instalanches,” is famous for it. That’s how they get such large readership. They aggregate the voices of the smaller bloggers.
I also try not to post anything Instapundit already has (unless I have something good or unique to add) but that’s mostly because if he’s posted it pretty much everybody has already seen it.
Well, I’ve thought for some time that the blogosphere is being used by the Top 100 bloggers. We are being pillaged by them for their own benefit. When the media, etc refer to the blogosphere, they are referring to the top 100, and not the bottom 49,999,900. The blogosphere is quoted as being 50 million (or so) strong when the focus is on those in the Top 100.
And we let it happen. We idly sit by and pay into this false perception by paying homage through linking, blogrolls, etc. It’s an easy mistake to make, especially for new bloggers who don’t know any better, but the reality is that the blogosphere is being fleeced by the carnivores on the top.
We pay homage to them. They pay homage to each other. They never pay homage to us. It’s classic proletarian/bourgeois politics.
Well, I’ve thought for some time that the blogosphere is being used by the Top 100 bloggers. We are being pillaged by them for their own benefit. When the media, etc refer to the blogosphere, they are referring to the top 100, and not the bottom 49,999,900. The blogosphere is quoted as being 50 million (or so) strong when the focus is on those in the Top 100.
And we let it happen. We idly sit by and pay into this false perception by paying homage through linking, blogrolls, etc. It’s an easy mistake to make, especially for new bloggers who don’t know any better, but the reality is that the blogosphere is being fleeced by the carnivores on the top.
We pay homage to them. They pay homage to each other. They never pay homage to us. It’s classic proletarian/bourgeois politics.
Well, I’ve thought for some time that the blogosphere is being used by the Top 100 bloggers. We are being pillaged by them for their own benefit. When the media, etc refer to the blogosphere, they are referring to the top 100, and not the bottom 49,999,900. The blogosphere is quoted as being 50 million (or so) strong when the focus is on those in the Top 100.
And we let it happen. We idly sit by and pay into this false perception by paying homage through linking, blogrolls, etc. It’s an easy mistake to make, especially for new bloggers who don’t know any better, but the reality is that the blogosphere is being fleeced by the carnivores on the top.
We pay homage to them. They pay homage to each other. They never pay homage to us. It’s classic proletarian/bourgeois politics.
Rob, Instapundit is the exception to what I just said
Rob, Instapundit is the exception to what I just said
Rob, Instapundit is the exception to what I just said
Rob, I respectfully disagree. Yes, Instapundit “blogs down”, but only because that blog is at the top of the food chain (it could scarcely “blog up”). What I meant to say is that the top bloggers rarely blog THAT FAR down. Actually, Glenn does it more than most, but in gerenal they tend to link to other high-trafficked bloggers. I’d guess 80% of their links are to the top 100 or so ranked sites.
Which leaves need and opportunity at the ‘lower ends’ of the spectrum. I mean, this is what a midranked or lower end blog ought to do – find and promote lesser-known blogs. That’s my opinion, anyway, and that’s what I tend to do, especially when I assemble blog carnivals (I do the Big Apple Carnival occasionally) and so on.
Rob, I respectfully disagree. Yes, Instapundit “blogs down”, but only because that blog is at the top of the food chain (it could scarcely “blog up”). What I meant to say is that the top bloggers rarely blog THAT FAR down. Actually, Glenn does it more than most, but in gerenal they tend to link to other high-trafficked bloggers. I’d guess 80% of their links are to the top 100 or so ranked sites.
Which leaves need and opportunity at the ‘lower ends’ of the spectrum. I mean, this is what a midranked or lower end blog ought to do – find and promote lesser-known blogs. That’s my opinion, anyway, and that’s what I tend to do, especially when I assemble blog carnivals (I do the Big Apple Carnival occasionally) and so on.
Rob, I respectfully disagree. Yes, Instapundit “blogs down”, but only because that blog is at the top of the food chain (it could scarcely “blog up”). What I meant to say is that the top bloggers rarely blog THAT FAR down. Actually, Glenn does it more than most, but in gerenal they tend to link to other high-trafficked bloggers. I’d guess 80% of their links are to the top 100 or so ranked sites.
Which leaves need and opportunity at the ‘lower ends’ of the spectrum. I mean, this is what a midranked or lower end blog ought to do – find and promote lesser-known blogs. That’s my opinion, anyway, and that’s what I tend to do, especially when I assemble blog carnivals (I do the Big Apple Carnival occasionally) and so on.
Did you guys ever consider that there are only maybe 500 or so really good political blogs out there (that number increases if you start including other topics, obviously) and that maybe these bloggers get the majority of the traffic and links because they’re the best?
I don’t buy into the idea that Instapundit and Malkin (another good linker) are “using” smaller bloggers. They link to what they think is interesting. Just like I do. Am I “using” Technosailor if I post an excerpt in a link to a piece here on my blog?
I really think you guys are making too much of this.
Did you guys ever consider that there are only maybe 500 or so really good political blogs out there (that number increases if you start including other topics, obviously) and that maybe these bloggers get the majority of the traffic and links because they’re the best?
I don’t buy into the idea that Instapundit and Malkin (another good linker) are “using” smaller bloggers. They link to what they think is interesting. Just like I do. Am I “using” Technosailor if I post an excerpt in a link to a piece here on my blog?
I really think you guys are making too much of this.
Did you guys ever consider that there are only maybe 500 or so really good political blogs out there (that number increases if you start including other topics, obviously) and that maybe these bloggers get the majority of the traffic and links because they’re the best?
I don’t buy into the idea that Instapundit and Malkin (another good linker) are “using” smaller bloggers. They link to what they think is interesting. Just like I do. Am I “using” Technosailor if I post an excerpt in a link to a piece here on my blog?
I really think you guys are making too much of this.
Rob, you’re obviously not getting the point because if you were, you would realize this really has nothing to do with the Awards. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back. This is about recognition for a job well done, something that WAY too many people do but never get credit, and may never want credit for.
I’m writing a book that encourages people to blog because it is for everyone. You better believe I’m going to go to the mat for the little guy.
Rob, you’re obviously not getting the point because if you were, you would realize this really has nothing to do with the Awards. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back. This is about recognition for a job well done, something that WAY too many people do but never get credit, and may never want credit for.
I’m writing a book that encourages people to blog because it is for everyone. You better believe I’m going to go to the mat for the little guy.
Rob, you’re obviously not getting the point because if you were, you would realize this really has nothing to do with the Awards. That was the straw that broke the camel’s back. This is about recognition for a job well done, something that WAY too many people do but never get credit, and may never want credit for.
I’m writing a book that encourages people to blog because it is for everyone. You better believe I’m going to go to the mat for the little guy.
I didn’t think I was still talking about the words. I was talking about reality. Blogging is a market with a wealth of products but a finite number of customers. Of course some damn good bloggers and posts are going to get overlooked. That’s just what happens. If you want to be big, you have to be good on a daily basis for a very, very long time. Competition is a bitch, but you can’t exactly demand attention either. If you’re good, people will notice. It really is just a matter of time.
And I don’t know what to say about the people who don’t want any credit. Why would they care what the A-listers are doing? If they truly don’t care, that is.
I didn’t think I was still talking about the words. I was talking about reality. Blogging is a market with a wealth of products but a finite number of customers. Of course some damn good bloggers and posts are going to get overlooked. That’s just what happens. If you want to be big, you have to be good on a daily basis for a very, very long time. Competition is a bitch, but you can’t exactly demand attention either. If you’re good, people will notice. It really is just a matter of time.
And I don’t know what to say about the people who don’t want any credit. Why would they care what the A-listers are doing? If they truly don’t care, that is.
I didn’t think I was still talking about the words. I was talking about reality. Blogging is a market with a wealth of products but a finite number of customers. Of course some damn good bloggers and posts are going to get overlooked. That’s just what happens. If you want to be big, you have to be good on a daily basis for a very, very long time. Competition is a bitch, but you can’t exactly demand attention either. If you’re good, people will notice. It really is just a matter of time.
And I don’t know what to say about the people who don’t want any credit. Why would they care what the A-listers are doing? If they truly don’t care, that is.
“I don’t buy into the idea that Instapundit and Malkin (another good linker) are “using†smaller bloggers.”
Never said that.
“Did you guys ever consider that there are only maybe 500 or so really good political blogs out there (that number increases if you start including other topics, obviously) and that maybe these bloggers get the majority of the traffic and links because they’re the best?”
Actually, I have considered my position quite carefully.
As a marketer, I know empirically that the superior product or service does not necessarily win out on the basis of its superiority. Other forces besides merit are at play. (The old Betamax vs. VHS chestnut is the best known example, but there have been many others.)
Huffington is a good example of inequality in the blogosphere. In her case, money has bought audience share of a number of (mostly ghostwritten) “names” who are posing as bloggers. There are many examples where circumstance, rather than skill, has dictated various bloogers’ station in the pantheon.
I think Malkin and Instapundit are excellent blogs, and have more than earned their positions. There are others about which the same can be said. But there are many who game the system in various ways, that are inferior to lesser-read blogs. Some inequalities may be wrung out over time, but on the other hand many potentially superior voices will wither away and die.
Malkin is clearly skilled and hard-working. She also has a circumstantial advantage over many bloggers in that she does not need to earn a living. There are many bloggers enjoying similar strategic advantages, who are read for that reason rather than because of the superiority of their skills. It’s not just money and/or availability of unstructured time: Some writers got a head start because they had early access to technology which others did not. Others are in the tech business and their opinions are read becausee techies tend to be online.
Some perspective: At least we HAVE a means by which many new voices can be heard. An unknown law professor became a ’star’ because of blogging, and we are all better for it.
But is everyone’s traffic earned and justified on merit? Well, my experience in blogging, and life, says it just isn’t so. Nor can I believe that some aren’t crowded out of the blogging space by voices which are merely louder.
Of course, I am open to an explanation as to how blog traffic is earned by merit and merit alone.
“I don’t buy into the idea that Instapundit and Malkin (another good linker) are “using†smaller bloggers.”
Never said that.
“Did you guys ever consider that there are only maybe 500 or so really good political blogs out there (that number increases if you start including other topics, obviously) and that maybe these bloggers get the majority of the traffic and links because they’re the best?”
Actually, I have considered my position quite carefully.
As a marketer, I know empirically that the superior product or service does not necessarily win out on the basis of its superiority. Other forces besides merit are at play. (The old Betamax vs. VHS chestnut is the best known example, but there have been many others.)
Huffington is a good example of inequality in the blogosphere. In her case, money has bought audience share of a number of (mostly ghostwritten) “names” who are posing as bloggers. There are many examples where circumstance, rather than skill, has dictated various bloogers’ station in the pantheon.
I think Malkin and Instapundit are excellent blogs, and have more than earned their positions. There are others about which the same can be said. But there are many who game the system in various ways, that are inferior to lesser-read blogs. Some inequalities may be wrung out over time, but on the other hand many potentially superior voices will wither away and die.
Malkin is clearly skilled and hard-working. She also has a circumstantial advantage over many bloggers in that she does not need to earn a living. There are many bloggers enjoying similar strategic advantages, who are read for that reason rather than because of the superiority of their skills. It’s not just money and/or availability of unstructured time: Some writers got a head start because they had early access to technology which others did not. Others are in the tech business and their opinions are read becausee techies tend to be online.
Some perspective: At least we HAVE a means by which many new voices can be heard. An unknown law professor became a ’star’ because of blogging, and we are all better for it.
But is everyone’s traffic earned and justified on merit? Well, my experience in blogging, and life, says it just isn’t so. Nor can I believe that some aren’t crowded out of the blogging space by voices which are merely louder.
Of course, I am open to an explanation as to how blog traffic is earned by merit and merit alone.
“I don’t buy into the idea that Instapundit and Malkin (another good linker) are “using†smaller bloggers.”
Never said that.
“Did you guys ever consider that there are only maybe 500 or so really good political blogs out there (that number increases if you start including other topics, obviously) and that maybe these bloggers get the majority of the traffic and links because they’re the best?”
Actually, I have considered my position quite carefully.
As a marketer, I know empirically that the superior product or service does not necessarily win out on the basis of its superiority. Other forces besides merit are at play. (The old Betamax vs. VHS chestnut is the best known example, but there have been many others.)
Huffington is a good example of inequality in the blogosphere. In her case, money has bought audience share of a number of (mostly ghostwritten) “names” who are posing as bloggers. There are many examples where circumstance, rather than skill, has dictated various bloogers’ station in the pantheon.
I think Malkin and Instapundit are excellent blogs, and have more than earned their positions. There are others about which the same can be said. But there are many who game the system in various ways, that are inferior to lesser-read blogs. Some inequalities may be wrung out over time, but on the other hand many potentially superior voices will wither away and die.
Malkin is clearly skilled and hard-working. She also has a circumstantial advantage over many bloggers in that she does not need to earn a living. There are many bloggers enjoying similar strategic advantages, who are read for that reason rather than because of the superiority of their skills. It’s not just money and/or availability of unstructured time: Some writers got a head start because they had early access to technology which others did not. Others are in the tech business and their opinions are read becausee techies tend to be online.
Some perspective: At least we HAVE a means by which many new voices can be heard. An unknown law professor became a ’star’ because of blogging, and we are all better for it.
But is everyone’s traffic earned and justified on merit? Well, my experience in blogging, and life, says it just isn’t so. Nor can I believe that some aren’t crowded out of the blogging space by voices which are merely louder.
Of course, I am open to an explanation as to how blog traffic is earned by merit and merit alone.
Never said that.
Never said you did. Aaron did.
As for everything else, nobody said that free markets (and that’s what I see the blogosphere as, a free market of thought and opinions) are perfect. They’re not. Some people game the system, etc. But if there’s a better way I don’t know of it.
I just don’t see where there’s anything to get excited about. Yes there are blogs that get lots of attention that don’t deserve it. Jeff Jarvis, for instance. I can’t stand the guy. I think he’s an ass, yet I probably get about 1/10th of his readership. Does that make me angry? No. I don’t get it, but I don’t dwell on it either.
This is just life. Some people stumble into good situations, others work hard to achieve them. Still others work hard and never achieve anything. It sucks, but this is nothing new.
Never said that.
Never said you did. Aaron did.
As for everything else, nobody said that free markets (and that’s what I see the blogosphere as, a free market of thought and opinions) are perfect. They’re not. Some people game the system, etc. But if there’s a better way I don’t know of it.
I just don’t see where there’s anything to get excited about. Yes there are blogs that get lots of attention that don’t deserve it. Jeff Jarvis, for instance. I can’t stand the guy. I think he’s an ass, yet I probably get about 1/10th of his readership. Does that make me angry? No. I don’t get it, but I don’t dwell on it either.
This is just life. Some people stumble into good situations, others work hard to achieve them. Still others work hard and never achieve anything. It sucks, but this is nothing new.
Never said that.
Never said you did. Aaron did.
As for everything else, nobody said that free markets (and that’s what I see the blogosphere as, a free market of thought and opinions) are perfect. They’re not. Some people game the system, etc. But if there’s a better way I don’t know of it.
I just don’t see where there’s anything to get excited about. Yes there are blogs that get lots of attention that don’t deserve it. Jeff Jarvis, for instance. I can’t stand the guy. I think he’s an ass, yet I probably get about 1/10th of his readership. Does that make me angry? No. I don’t get it, but I don’t dwell on it either.
This is just life. Some people stumble into good situations, others work hard to achieve them. Still others work hard and never achieve anything. It sucks, but this is nothing new.
Well then it’s not an issue for you, Rob. No problem. I don’t expect you to bear my cross. But it is my cross because, the way I see it, it may be life but it doesn’t mean it’s right and if it’s not right and no one ever challenges the status quo, then life will continue to be exactly how it is.
You have to remember that the blogosphere is relatively new. In many ways, it is still taking shape. The prime time to shape behavior, attitudes and the “how things are” stuff would have been would have been 2-3 years ago in its infancy. That said, it’s not too late to affect change.
Well then it’s not an issue for you, Rob. No problem. I don’t expect you to bear my cross. But it is my cross because, the way I see it, it may be life but it doesn’t mean it’s right and if it’s not right and no one ever challenges the status quo, then life will continue to be exactly how it is.
You have to remember that the blogosphere is relatively new. In many ways, it is still taking shape. The prime time to shape behavior, attitudes and the “how things are” stuff would have been would have been 2-3 years ago in its infancy. That said, it’s not too late to affect change.
Well then it’s not an issue for you, Rob. No problem. I don’t expect you to bear my cross. But it is my cross because, the way I see it, it may be life but it doesn’t mean it’s right and if it’s not right and no one ever challenges the status quo, then life will continue to be exactly how it is.
You have to remember that the blogosphere is relatively new. In many ways, it is still taking shape. The prime time to shape behavior, attitudes and the “how things are” stuff would have been would have been 2-3 years ago in its infancy. That said, it’s not too late to affect change.
I don’t blame you for trying Aaron. You do kind of hit a nerve for me when you say that the top-tier blogs “use” smaller blogs, but whatever.
I’m interested: How do you propose things change?
I don’t blame you for trying Aaron. You do kind of hit a nerve for me when you say that the top-tier blogs “use” smaller blogs, but whatever.
I’m interested: How do you propose things change?
I don’t blame you for trying Aaron. You do kind of hit a nerve for me when you say that the top-tier blogs “use” smaller blogs, but whatever.
I’m interested: How do you propose things change?
OK, sorry about the misunderstanding, re who said what.
I realize this tends to fall into the “life is unfair” category. If you look at my blog, you’ll see I don’t whine about my traffic numbers or situation. (Actually I’m prettty content with it. I have a few blogging relationships, I’ve gained a few readers in a relatively short time. Can’t complain.)
All any of us can do, really, is play the hand we’re dealt – and try to stay in the game!
OK, sorry about the misunderstanding, re who said what.
I realize this tends to fall into the “life is unfair” category. If you look at my blog, you’ll see I don’t whine about my traffic numbers or situation. (Actually I’m prettty content with it. I have a few blogging relationships, I’ve gained a few readers in a relatively short time. Can’t complain.)
All any of us can do, really, is play the hand we’re dealt – and try to stay in the game!
OK, sorry about the misunderstanding, re who said what.
I realize this tends to fall into the “life is unfair” category. If you look at my blog, you’ll see I don’t whine about my traffic numbers or situation. (Actually I’m prettty content with it. I have a few blogging relationships, I’ve gained a few readers in a relatively short time. Can’t complain.)
All any of us can do, really, is play the hand we’re dealt – and try to stay in the game!
Well, Rob, as you have undoubtedly notice, I’m bringing lesser known blogs into the forefront. In addition, excepting special circumstances, I dont’ quote, link to or otherwise contribute to the upper echelon. They have their followers. I respect that. I am not one of them.
Well, Rob, as you have undoubtedly notice, I’m bringing lesser known blogs into the forefront. In addition, excepting special circumstances, I dont’ quote, link to or otherwise contribute to the upper echelon. They have their followers. I respect that. I am not one of them.