Comments on: Fear and Loathing in the Blogosphere

By: Fraser

Fraser — Wed, 04 Jul 2007 18:23:00 +0000

In my mind it comes down to a few questions: why are you writing? who are you writing for?Are you writing to engage certain individuals in a conversation? If so please allow me to ask why?Are you writing to engage intelligent people (regardless of who they are) in a conversation? If so, then why does it matter whether it’s Bob, Andy, Sue, or Anon.?

By: Jimmy Huen

Jimmy Huen — Mon, 02 Jul 2007 02:13:00 +0000

Kent, your thoughtful post is right on. The supposed “A-List, elite” bloggers are walled in their gated community and the newcomers using experimental techniques to expose a flawed system threaten their egotistical, fragile mind.I am tired of writing about how much I couldn’t care less if my Technorati ranking is sub 200 or 1 billion, I am just glad to have a hand in exposing the inefficiency and flawed system that these walled garden so closely held as their own.It’s laughable, because as you said, everyone blog for different reasons. I suggest these “elite” bloggers check their fragile egos at the door.All the best,Jimmyhttp://FoundersCafe.com

By: Kent

Kent — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 01:48:00 +0000

Anon,Go read Jimmy’s comment to my viral tags post. That’s exactly what I did. He thought it was an oversight and used the slogan for this blog (see the top of the page).

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 30 Jun 2007 00:22:00 +0000

Kent, If there’s nothing wrong with Viral Tags why use “Technology Music Life” as the anchor text for your url in the Viral Tag list you posted? If it was all above board wouldn’t you have used “Newsome.org?”

By: RichardQuerin

RichardQuerin — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 12:29:00 +0000

Hi Kent,Fantastic post. I read your viral linking related posts, but a simple combination of too many things to do and too little interest in blog-building per se put it too low down on my list of things to do.However I think your characterization as the hardest working man in the blogosphere is an accurate one. Part of that work is experimentation. And I can understand your frustration with the gated community in the tech blogosphere. While I don’t think I’ve necessarily given up, it’s just slid down the priority list for me.Judging by the depth and breadth of your swivel feeds experiment, I think your expanding the influence of the middle classes of the blogosphere anyway – and that is a good thing for all of us. We need more of this type of stuff.One last note, Steve Gillmor has just got to be shaking his head with all this fuss over links.

By: Andy Coates

Andy Coates — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 09:13:00 +0000

Good post, I arrived here from a pingback from louises site then followed the link from hers to yours. Would that have ever happened without viralink/Viraltags?I completely agree that my technorati rankings are pretty much worthless but to be honest when i look at at blogs the last thing i look at is the technorati rank! lol.I started Viralink as an experiment and never expected it to take off as it has and be developed it to the much more SE friendly ViralTags. As with everything there are pros and cons to everything and it seems like people are getting “Ranking Envy” against those who did participate in viral linking. For me Techorati ranking does not matter (though im glad this has exposed a large hole in the algorythm which hopefully will be fixed).Atleast its gave people something to blog about if nothing else! lolAll the bestAndy

By: Dave - lifekludger

Dave - lifekludger — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 05:45:00 +0000

Kent’s Technorati rank may well be ‘bogus’ but above all I wonder if he really cares at all about what his rank is.

By: louisgray

louisgray — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 04:50:00 +0000

Kent, apologies on dropping the t in Kent in the last paragraph. Clearly, pure oversight, as I believe I got it right everywhere else and it has been corrected. I knew it was a danger you would be irked for being made an example, but if you have a better test case, I’m happy to use it. I believe that this viral link game is not an accurate way to gain influence, and it’s disappointing to see it adopted – not just here, but elsewhere.When I made my comments on TechMeme earlier, it spoke to gaining influence and attention through quality of effort and writing, not through URL tricks. I think this issue is in the same vein of organically gaining traffic and a strong reputation. The reasons I’ve linked to you in the past are the reasons I will in the future, as are the reasons you’ve linked my way. But I don’t intend to try to game the system.I do think your Technorati count is bogus. I’ve watched it grow over time, thanks to your continued linkage my way. But I think you know it’s bogus too. I tried to write what I did without making it personal, and I know it’s a fine line, but I think the practice is broken.As I noted on my site, your blog is great and you have strong content. I think it stands on its own without the viral efforts, period. I think you too should trust it will grow through your strong writing and focus as we all hope we can.

By: Mathew

Mathew — Fri, 29 Jun 2007 04:44:00 +0000

Did I remove a link to you, Kent? I’m not sure why I would do that — I certainly don’t remember doing it. At any rate, I apologize — and if you send me the link to your post, I will put it back in. We M-listers have to stick together