Joining the “I like Guy” club

Robert,

How so?

I’m not sure I want to have conversations on the net because I want a life!

Guy

I’ve seen quite a few people who were not so involved in the blogosphere that became boring after they ended up way too involved. The best way IMHO to stay sharp and clear is to write about what you know without getting your feet too wet on the medium itself. It may not work for everybody but I know it works for some.

Guy is sharp, clear and knows how to deliver the message. I like him this way.

Do you mean that he rarely replies to comments? If then, yes, you are right. I’m still waiting to see the response to my question on one of his posts.

On any blog, I’d rather see no comment section than the blogger ignoring questions. That seems to be the case on too many blogs (yours is a huge exception, which I commend you for).

Count me in too!

Guy: It’s a rare post that I see where you’ve linked to anyone else. Or acknowledged anyone linking to you. It’s like you’re writing a book on your blog. It’s cool, but it hasn’t tapped into some of the features of the medium.

Yay for Robert’s first coComment

The number 1 way to kill a high profile blog is to keep it as one sided as he is at this point; I was very disappointed to basically see him using a fire and forget it mentality…someone PLEASE make him start commenting as well, I bet the threads would be amazing!

Score one for Guy at least. “Conversations”, if compelling, can be “one-sided”. Grep Guy and grep Nick Carr, grep JCD, grep snarky but real El Reg, grep press-release-rewrite happy CNET, grep ole skueel knuckle and thumb real journalism Mary Jo’isms. And for the fruitcakes: Grep Tara, grep Scobleizer, grep Hugh. You can play the game your own way, no ‘conversational rules’ need be enforced. Have “conversations”? Fine. Don’t want them? Fine again. What you gonna set up a Web Conversational Police Force?

Yes I’ve been enjoying reading him since he started his blog, and yes more cross-linking would even make it more valuable but, hey, that’s also a way of doing. his traffic stats seem to support that it’s apreciated.

on an other subject, I like Guy’s concept of publishing stats, what about making it a build-in feature for the blog-sw and also coComment?

I read the title too fast. I thought it read ‘Joining the “I like Guys” club’ not that there’s anything wrong with it…just the past couple of blogs the past couple of days it wouldn’t have suprised me. You know the five geeks in a hot tub…Chris in bubble wrap…to be quite honest I was almost expecting a post like that.

consider yourself a charter club member, Robert

Guys,

This is how I figure it. There are several kinds of blogs:

- Rant and rave. “Can you believe how stupid Sony Music is?”

- Inform. “I read every blog and news source that I can. This is what I think you’d find valuable.”

- Inspire. “This is how to, and why to, do something.”

I want to be in the third category. I think there are plenty of blogs that do the first two categories very well.

It takes me 2-3 hours to write a typical blog entry.
If I were to answer every comment, then I wouldn’t have the time the write as many blog entries.

The standard I’m trying to achieve is that most blog entries should be roughly equal to “chapters” in a book.

Guy

Guy: I don’t think anybody here expects any blogger to answer every single comment made on his blog — that’s dramatizing the issue somewhat

Even if your aim is to be inspirational rather than informational (I like your distinction between blog ‘raison-d’être’s), why would that mean you can drop a line in your comments every now and again? A comment specificially does not have to be as intense as a blog post — that’ the whole point of them, for me.

For me, having comments on our blog means we think our readership can add value to what we write. The comments are displayed on the blog, which means they can benefit other readers — and sometimes us. If a blogger never reacts to any comments he gets, isn’t that sending the message that these comments can add value for the readers, but not for the blogger himself? To me, it puts the blogger in a kind of “guru” position, as in: “you guys learn from one another, I’m above all that”.

Now, don’t get me wrong. I don’t think that is at all what you intend. This is just how I, as a reader, would perceive it.

Steph,

Thanks for the input. Here are some stats for you. I have made 54 posts in my blog. This hss generated 1307 comments. I made 42 of the 1307 comments.

I would love to learn what you think the right ratio is.

Thanks,

Guy

Guy: I’m not sure the “right way of doing things” lies in a ratio

I have to say that listening to the discussion here, I had got the impression you /never/ commented on your blog — I see I’m wrong, glad to learn that. Your posts seem to generate quite a bit of reaction (20-30 comments per post, if I estimate correctly), but it all depends on the type of comment you get.

Jeremy says in one of the early comments of this thread that he asked a question in a comment and didn’t get a response. Does that happen often? If people ask questions, I think they should get responses (if not an answer).

Do people post comments that you /could/ react to? or are they the “me too” type of comment? Are they comments that reply to you, or are they just an extra bit of info or a thought for other readers? Do some comments make you think further?

It’s up to you to judge, at the end of the day, but it seems some of your readers feel you’re not participating in the conversation as much as they would like you to (maybe they are just a couple of curmudgeons (sp?) and all the others are perfectly happy.)

Disclaimer: I was just trying to contribute to the discussion here — I don’t follow your blog, so I
wouldn’t be able to say if I think you comment enough or not enough on your blog.

I think the ratio is not at issue, it seems to me that the point Robert was making was that conversations on the web sometmes mean building chains of informational and inspirational posts and comments – connecting the ideas and the people via links. To give credit for good thoughts and good people, connecting with the broader community.

Of course, it need not be this way – what Guy has done in such a short time since jumping into the blogosphere is really inspirational (and valuable), so there is no one right way or wrong way. If that is the best use of his time, we will all still be the better for it.

But I think it would be great to see a bit more of Guy’s filter and lens in the mix – what matters to Guy – who else out there has something valuable to contribute to the global conversation from Guy’s perspective. This is not as a singular approach, it is one element of creating value by connecting your thoughts to the thoughts and ideas of other people as opposed to solely listening to Guy’s voice at the beginning of the conversation.

It is about participating as well as leading.

As I often tell my clients, control is an illusion in the world of social media – dont try to control the situation, participate and facilitate – then your relevancy will jump 10 fold. We still want and need the lkeader’s editorial voice and suggested directions – but we also hope the leaders will join in the scrum occasionally and talk with everyone like real human beings that they are.

Chris: makes total sense. I think I limited what a conversation was in my mind by only thinking about the commenting aspect. It’s way more than that, of course. (Blame the fever and the wicked deadline.)

a club like egosurf?