More or less what I was hoping for by lobbing some silly big rocks into the blog pond. Rightfully so, pointed out that
- blogs are blogs without comments
- comments are a curse (spam, overload, marginal value) and a blessing
- blogs can work well as pure publishing, or info sharing
- blogs can be news scoops or personal rants
- and much more…
Yup, I asked for a whupping, and got one.
I was trying to make a subtler point, that likely missed the mark. Not the first or last time. No one can really singularly define or categorize something as broad, diverse, sprawling, evolving, morphing as weblogs.
Scott Leslie remarked about how he gets lots of comments asking for this “simple defintion” of a weblog. We all have our personal theory based on our immediate experiences (I blogged perhaps what my own is, but why would I expect it to to mesh for everyone out there?), but there are quite a few more out there that are just as valid.
So it is all blogging. Or none of it is. There is no universal law on the subject.
it is kind of funny because my thoughts about comments started when I had read something at Tom’s Tuttle’s SVC blog, and wanted to send him some thoughts. Lacking comments or an email, I just wrote my own blog entry about it. Somehow, in a day or two, he caught it, perhaps via RSS or a referral, and I got a nice email note from him. The connections can work in a multitude of ways (see the small pieces philosophy) not just one.
Thanks for joining in the fray, as I tried stirring up the Abbey soup. And yes, I really ought to turn this thing off and get some work done.