Dear Scott,
blogging April 12th, 2008
You’re breaking up with me? I thought we had something…
So many comments/pingbacks/etc. Be careful what you wish for?
A few thoughts, comments, replies, etc to Scott et al…
First, I just want to be VERY clear that I NEVER used the word “elite” or any form of that word in any of my posts. Never. In fact, I very specifically and carefully wrote that there was “an awesome cocktail party conversation…” Meaning, there was great stuff being said. Also, I basically retracted the cocktail party metaphor in my subsequent post. I think it’s really dangerous to inject one’s interpretative, normative language into someone else’s reflections. Remember, all, these were reflections…I continually started with “I feel…” Those are the key words in any form of reflective practice. I should know; two of my dearest colleagues wrote the book.
Second, Scott, I’m having trouble reconciling Facts 1 and 2 with the rest of the brutal facts. If I build it and nobody is going to come and nobody cares about me anyway, then why does it matter that there are things I can do to build traffic and that there are people who can help. With what would they be helping me? And, patient for what? Nobody cares and nobody’s going to come anyway, at least according to facts 1 and 2. And, you were one of the first to write about comment intensity. So, help me with the logic here.
Third, many of the comments suggest something to the effect of “don’t blog for the stats.” Again, I never said that I was blogging FOR the stats. Furthermore, how do I reconcile comments/replies that suggest that I shouldn’t worry about stats, I should use blogging as a form of reflection and focus on the kids. Well, I am absolutely committed to the blogsophere as an author and as a particpant because I want to effect change; I want to improve the lives of school-aged children and those who work with them directly or indirectly. But, if I’m authoring a blog as a reflective exercise and nobody’s listening, how am I achieving my goals? So, I’m not blogging FOR the stats; I’m simply looking at the stats to gauge my progress. That’s also a key component of reflective practice; staring the data in the face and using them for growth.
Fourth, I’m stuck on (at least) one issue. Kate Olson (Hi Kate, and welcome to my Bloglines account!) wrote: “When you directly quote another blog and share your response and opinion, it’s just plain NICE to encourage everyone to visit the blog you are referring to. So, because I’m naturally a little, let’s say - contentious - I’m going to ask that you please share your thoughts on the original topic with Jon, this post wouldn’t be here without him.” Vicki Davis responded with, “The conversation doesn’t BELONG to anyone! It just doesn’t - we can talk any place, anywhere that we want!” I agree that conversations don’t belong to anyone, but isn’t Kate’s way one very small step towards putting some very light boundaries around a conversation? IDK…this one’s tough.
Finally, THANKS. Thanks to all who’ve commented, replied, taken the conversation away (c’mon, that was a joke people!). Scott, I couldn’t agree more about being gracious. A wise professor once told me that if I do nothing else in life, I should pay my bills, pay my taxes and write my thank you letters. So, thanks all for aiding my reflective exercise.
Now go away! (again, a joke people…)
Yours in the blogoshpere,
JB
Tags: blogging
Aw c’mon, revel in your popularity today. Show us some more stats. I’d LOVE to see today’s spike. Vicky Davis has asked for it too, hasn’t she?
If you respond directly to someone’s post, please link to it, so we don’t have to guess what it might be on the basis of a first name.
I agree — you should link to Scott’s post — it is not good netiquette. In fact, the very first time I posted the item about yours, I had forgotten to link to yours and figured it out pretty quickly and rectified it. We all make mistakes, however, just link back.
Think of all of the FREE press and links you and Scott are getting. However, I think it is time to move on and talk about education. Although some won’t see all of this until Monday, it is important to put the bulk of our energies towards what is most important…teaching our students.
None of us teach for ego (I don’t think.) Neither should we edublog for that reason.
Welcome to the edublogosphere… catch you later.
Yes, thanks Stephen and Vicki. Believe it or not, I wrote the post reasonably quickly before leaving for a…get this…cocktail party (actually, more like a chili party), and spent a large part of the time rhuminating over the realization that I hadn’t linked back to Scott’s letter/post. My bad, Scott et al.
They’ll only come - and maybe stay - if you do the things in #3 consistently. And they’ll also leave, and maybe never come back. If you want your traffic to increase - and obviously many don’t care about that - then all you can do is hope you gain more than you lose. But most of all, it does NOT happen in 3.5 months. It may not happen in a year. But I’m guessing that you’ll have more readers in 18 months than you do now. ‘Cause you’re blogging good stuff. Which is why I said get back to me then.
So now it comes down to what Ric Murry said (see http://snipurl.com/becker): “You now have an audience. Many of the people whose names you included in your post have responded, and in doing so, they have given you an audience (that’s how I found you). Now for the hard part: What will you provide to keep us coming back? You have invited yourself to the buffet. You have knocked on the door to the inner circle. You have made your presence known. You have said, as all of us have, ‘I am somebody. I am important in the conversation.’ What will your role in the conversation be?”
We eagerly await - over the next many months - your answer.
Hey Jon - Your technorati rating jumped 10 points in 2 days - I’m buying stock!!!
Seriously, Being a fairly new blogger myself I’m glad you opened this can of worms. It has made me evaluate why I blog and my connection to the edublogosphere. For me it’s all about L-E-A-R-N-I-N-G and absorbing as much as I can from any resource that is available.
Good luck and happy blogging!
Not only is my technorati rating up, but my “Reflections…” post has been viewed 621 times as of now.
Gotta go figure out how to keep my stock up!
I think the debate has become polarised between a false dichotomy. Either working like a Van Gogh to be discover postmortem (or at least RIP in the blogscape) to the ‘American Idol - now that you’ve won what are you going to do’ model. Recognition is needed to motivate and should not be seen as some betrayal of values.
I think this has been a great riff Jon and has inspired me to post up my thoughts 4WIW.
Intelligent or Unintelligent design? A blogger’s conundrum.
I offer my own dichotomy hopefully a good one – Stephen Jay Gould in one of his books said dichotomies were powerful because of the synthesis of their adversarial relationship, providing you were comparing the correct opposites points of view
Gilbert
I’d be one to visit more often if the new “SnapShots” pop ups went away. I don’t think they are terribly “usable”, in a web-design kind of way.
You don’t like the pop ups? I’m mixed myself. They do prevent me from following a broken link, but that’s about it. I’m thinking of disabling them.