Today we debuted the Denialism Blog, while David Dobbs of Smooth Pebbles bids farewell to ScienceBlogs. David offers cogent rationales for why he decided to leave ScienceBlogs (the proximate reason is that he just isn't posting much as far as bloggers go). One thing to note that is I don't think a blog is really worthwhile for most people without an intelligent commentariat. I've learned a lot from critiques, suggestions and recommendations from comments on my blogs over the past 5 years. Of course, the key is intelligent. Most humans aren't very smart, so they're basically just expending the minutes in your life.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
I was going to let Andrew Sullivan's departure from blogging pass without comment-- I haven't been a regular reader of his stuff in around ten years, after all-- but a couple of mysterious guys in dark suits showed up at the house and pointed out that as someone who started blogging in 2002, I…
The latest Cites & Insights (v10i11) is out and in it Walt Crawford explores some of the recent developments in the blogging landscape in a section called The Zeitgeist: Blogging Groups and Ethics. It's a very good overview and analysis of what's going on both in the science and librarian…
A few of my recent posts here appear to have struck some nerves, and I've been
getting lots of annoying email containing the same questions, over and over again. So rather than reply individually, I'm going to answer them here in the hope that either (a) people will see the answers before send the…
The series of interviews with some of the participants of the 2008 Science Blogging Conference was quite popular, so I decided to do the same thing again this year, posting interviews with some of the people who attended ScienceOnline'09 back in January.
Today, I asked one of my SciBlings and…
Yes I enjoy the wide variety of commentators on your blogs. The best I've read recently was the one on string theory, which started a really frenzied debate between some physicists. Didn't understand a word, but it was damn good fun!
.The best I've read recently was the one on string theory, which started a really frenzied debate between some physicists.
i had to opt out by the middle of that discussion, since i'm a retard re: string theory. but yeah, that was interesting for a civilian.
Yeah, I don't know what it is (blogger's block, maybe?) but I'm having a really hard time coming up with some intelligent commentary for my blog. Guess I should just wait until a light-bulb goes off or something.
Guess I should just wait until a light-bulb goes off or something.
bingo. whereof one cannot speak with joy, thereof one must remain contentedly silent.
Would frustratedly silent be an acceptable substitute?
Have any of the Science Bloggers considered "group blogging," perhaps based on commonality of interest and expertise? (Opinions don't necessarily have to match.) Or is that not permitted? I have noticed that even on most group blogs, one (or two) authors write more prolifically than others. But it still helps when you don't have to bear the entire burden of refreshing the blog all by your lonesome self.
there are a few group blogs. chimpanzee refuge, pure pedantry, and a few others. i don't know how they work the remuneration, etc. group blogging is easy in a way, i run with a group blog over @ classic. but it depends on what you want. something like dave dobbs or carl zimmer blog as a complement to their writing career, so i don't think diluting their brand by getting groupy helps. fundamentally, i think a professional writer will always have issues with blogging cuz he/she will ask themselves, "why the hell am i blogging this instead of writing this for print which gets me more serious cash?" amateurs on the other hand don't have this problem. for most SBers blogging is a sidelight, not a complement.
I've actually considered a group blog myself, and may yet join one. That would feel more like a conversation and less like shouting out one's thoughts on a street corner....