How to Blog

LAST POST WAS "MARATHON POST CORRECTION" OF 12-31-09.

As the last post was made on the 31st of December, by happenstance, this one is the first of the new year. As such, it seems reasonable to discuss this blog. Or rather, to discuss what the experienced and successful blogging world says a blog should be, and how this blog compares.

I am referring to Slate's advice, "How to Blog." This article offers tips on successful blogging, which seem to bear little resemblance to what I do here:

1. Set a schedule. Blog often.
2. Don't worry if your posts suck a little.
3. Write casually but clearly.
4. Add something new.
5. Join the bloggy conversation. And link!
6. Don't expect instant fame.
7. Keep it clean and proof read.

Ok. . . Taking them one at a time.

1. Set a goal of two or three posts a week. . . To meet the modest goal recommended, I would need 8 to 13 posts a month. Ok -- in July I had 10; in August, 5; September, 4; October, 3; November, 6; and December, 4. The purpose of this goal seems to be to provide people with something new to read on a regular basis, so they will come back to the blog on a regular basis. Since I am not blogging for strangers, perhaps I can get away with a little bit less frequency. At least, I know that I will track friends' blogs for weeks of no activity in attempts to keep up with their news (without actually letting them know I'm lurking, of course -- which may be a problem, anyway).
2. I do worry if my posts suck. But that doesn't mean they don't. My worrying, for instance, doesn't stop me from picking a diverse set of topics, on which I often have little more to offer than an opinion (perhaps an informed one) or anecdote (hopefully an amusing one). Since I have time to edit on my commute, worrying about sucking shouldn't interfere with posting.
   
3. Hopefully, my posts are casual enough but clear enough. (Recent correspondence at work makes me wonder a bit.) In the description provided by Slate, an 800 word limit to the length of the post is also mentioned, which worries me more. Estimating 10 words per line, that's 80 lines per post. Most of my posts are okay by this estimate, but some are long enough that you probably loose attention before finishing them.
4. Given that the topic of the blog is me and my family, I'm going to claim that I can't help but adding something new as long as I do not repeatedly hash through the same subject.
5. Hmm. . . Although I have been linking more of late, that is not what this item refers to. I think this item refers to interacting with other people who are posting on the same topic, which I clearly do not. This gets more discussion below, indirectly.
   
6. This is not a fame-oriented or audience-growing blog. What I should expect is that people willingly refer to it every so often. I doubt this is the case for many people, though. While two or three posts a week may not be necessary, two or three months without a post -- as happened between January and July of 2008 -- is an interest killer. The last mass invitation I sent out said I would provide updates on Liam's birth here, which for various reasons didn't happen.
7. Actually, keep it clean and proof read were my takes on the advice given as "A few other tips." Those I think I meet. Some of the ones I didn't list, though -- like "always link to primary sources" and "people like pretty pictures" -- I clearly don't.
   

In keeping others updated on our lives, we have several options. Jennifer sends e-mails to other people with details of daily events. She actively keeps them up to date. I post to this blog, so that other people can keep track without being prodded to do so. There are others who, as far as I know, do neither. They get in touch on the rare occasion that they will be in the area or something happens to prod them into checking up on a non-routine basis.

So, to the ultimate question underlying a post about posting, the answer is, "No." The question itself is, "Is this blog a success?"

The blog fails on a couple of levels. . .

• Despite what should be adequate posting activity in recent months, there have been long enough hiatuses that I have no reason to expect many people are following it.
  
• While it provides a place where people who want to can keep track of my news, it does not actively engage them and, therefore, will at some point lose their interest. That is, even if I do keep up with posting, priorities in the readers' lives will keep them away at times and there is nothing to draw them back in if this happens.
  

Perhaps these deficiencies can be solved by posting each week and reminding people that the site exists roughly annually.

-=-