Re: ::scr Blogging

[Simon Batistoni <simon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 23/11/01 14:29 +0000, jo walsh wrote:
>
> i can't advocate the priesthood, 

Neither can I, where it genuinely exists, but bear in mind that to a
lot of inexperienced computer users, we all appear to be "the
priesthood", making pesky rules about how websites work, and how
this and that isn't possible in the medium...

> but the perceived barrier to entry is/was
> a good thing in that it gave the writer time to reflect on how they are
> presenting themselves, whether it's justified to expend the energy to say
> what they are saying; 

Even a privately written diary will often reach greater heights for
this reason. There's no chance to re-edit, there's limited space on
the pages, and for any half-competent typist writing is a fairly
hard manual task in comparison (unless you've got RSI :( )

> > think the web is the wrong medium for this kind of writing,
> 
> i don't think anyone can say what the web is for.

Badly phrased; the "i think" was important. I just cannot imagine
why anyone would want to write out their personal pain (in
particular) for all the world to see. It may *feel* cathartic, but
having gone very near breaking down publically amongst my friends,
I'm convinced that what feels like release and support in talking
endlessly about what's wrong often becomes a very, very deep wound
later on.

I also think the advent of things like archive.org, and even
google's cache mean that people need to be more careful about what
they publish online. The web can feel very transient - if you get
fed up with something, you delete it from the server, but if more
and more of it is squirreled away for posterity without your direct
knowledge, old diaries and memories you'd long since buried may come
back to haunt you.

> i do worry that the utility of broad public indexes is diminishing.
> balkanisation again, and its desirableness or not. 

I think some balkanisation is desirable. I've enjoyed reading stuff
on your site in the past, and check back once in a while to see if
you've added anything new. But I think a large part of my engagement
with it is that I know you, and therefore I have personal contexts
against which to set your writing. If it was joe stranger's site, I
wouldn't be anywhere nearly as interested.

So having your site available in the circles in which you move may
be a good thing. Its value outside that circle may be less.

> the world around you is full of shallow gloss - look at it!
> i don't know what we can do about that, retreat, engage, adjust our
> filters.

Your last option is the best. Filter the gloss, and find the things
that engage you. An overly high gloss:interest ratio can be tiring,
though.