Mark over at Weblog Tools Collection asks "How many posts are too many posts?" and compares a selection of blogs with different posting frequencies. He doesn’t really come to a conclusion, other than that it depends quite a bit on post length and type.
For me, it also depends on how much time I have to catch up with updated blogs and how much I enjoy reading that particular writer. When time is short, I prefer blogs that don’t update too often and avoid those that do, simply because seeing too many unread posts in my aggregator can be a bit overwhelming. Instead of thinking “Cool! Lots to read!” I think “I’m never going to get through that lot in time” and so I never start on the backlog.
Read the rest on Strange Attractor.
|
||||||
|
Login
stalker gen
 I've now permanently moved my blog over to http://chocolateandvodka.com/ and will no long be updating this version, other than with the occasional summary of new posts. Please do not leave comments here, but instead find the equivalent post on my new site, and comment there instead. Comments left here will not be published, as I'd like to keep things all together on the new installation. Sorry if this is an inconvenience. |
Comments
Re: How many are not enough?
by
Anonymous
on Sun 26 Sep 2004 02:47 PM BST | Permanent Link
You hit this right on the nose! I really enjoy your weblog and I was so fascinated to find you discussing this exact issue after having had a conversation with a friend on the topic last night. I'll be visiting here often, do you mind if I add you to my blog list?
Re: Re: How many are not enough?
by
Suw Charman
on Sun 26 Sep 2004 02:58 PM BST | Profile | Permanent Link
OK... this post is obviously spam. First time I saw it over on Strange Attractor I thought it was a genuine comment, but I keep seeing it over and again on different posts, replicated word-for-word. So it has to be spam... what I don't get is what the point is? There's no url!
|
|||||
