Aight! "There seems to be a misconception in some areas of the blogosphere that to be successful, you must be non-confrontational."
I agree with that, this is truely a misconception.
I think there are different assests which (can) define a "successful" blog:
1. The author writes interesting stuff and/or posts new stuff that wasn't posted anywhere else yet ("creativity").
2. The author posts news from around the web (e.g. noteworthy links)
3. The author writes about topics that (s)he cares about (e.g. some of your recent posts; most of Sean's posts; etc) regardless of the possible reaction of his/her reader(s)
4. Reason x
..
x. Reason x+4
I think that discussion is always a positive thing and so it's just fine that you'll do what you do...and yes, I will continue to do what I do ;-)
Jerald Sheets
· 5 years ago
I would agree to a degree. Problem is, most organizations don't have the money for that, and then the management in place encourages marketing folk to just bring in the numbers, and they'll sort out the problems caused later.
Just sign on the line.....sign on the line....
Carol
· 5 years ago
Okay. Now I can actually put some thought into this instead of posting randomly.
For what it's worth, I don't think Aaron's a bad person -- just a careless writer. The two are not intertwined to the point of no return, and careless writing has no reflection on one's moral character -- at least not to me.
After the election, I made a few posts that were...careless, and Aaron pointed that out -- in fact, I think that's how we "met". Anyway, after thinking about what he said -- I realised he was right. There's no sense in spouting off just for the sake of spouting off, which is what I felt Aaron did with his MLK post. But it certainly doesn't change how I view Aaron as a person. Free speech is free speech, period.
All Comments
I agree with that, this is truely a misconception.
I think there are different assests which (can) define a "successful" blog:
1. The author writes interesting stuff and/or posts new stuff that wasn't posted anywhere else yet ("creativity").
2. The author posts news from around the web (e.g. noteworthy links)
3. The author writes about topics that (s)he cares about (e.g. some of your recent posts; most of Sean's posts; etc) regardless of the possible reaction of his/her reader(s)
4. Reason x
..
x. Reason x+4
I think that discussion is always a positive thing and so it's just fine that you'll do what you do...and yes, I will continue to do what I do ;-)
Just sign on the line.....sign on the line....
For what it's worth, I don't think Aaron's a bad person -- just a careless writer. The two are not intertwined to the point of no return, and careless writing has no reflection on one's moral character -- at least not to me.
After the election, I made a few posts that were...careless, and Aaron pointed that out -- in fact, I think that's how we "met". Anyway, after thinking about what he said -- I realised he was right. There's no sense in spouting off just for the sake of spouting off, which is what I felt Aaron did with his MLK post. But it certainly doesn't change how I view Aaron as a person. Free speech is free speech, period.