Not linking starts a conversation

Let’s see, I don’t link to Fred Wilson’s blog, but Fred notices anyway. Diane Ensey, over on A List Review, says me and Gillmor are keeping blogs for the elite. I almost didn’t link to Diane. I only don’t link to my very favorite blogs. So, I’m keeping Diane out of the elite just by linking to her. :-)

No, I think we both noticed that there are lots of ways to draw attention to someone. Here, try this: Matt Mullenweg is the #1 Matt in the world (according to Google). I won’t link to him. He’s already part of the elite — and is one of my most favorite blogs. How do I know that? Cause he wrote on his blog that he got invited to a wedding via Facebook. Speaking of which, there’s a little “I love WordPress” icon contest underway.

Oh, and Shelley Powers? I ain’t linking to her either. She’s part of the blog elite too. Is the #1 Shelley Powers on Google.

And Jory Des Jardins? Hell no. I ain’t linking to her either. She already runs the world. How do I know that? She’s the #1 Jory. 

Whos’ the #1 Joel? Guess. He’s one of my favorite blogs too. I don’t even need to use his last name. You’ll still find him. I loved his post the other day where he asked “does your programming language do this?”

When I say “Doc.” You know who I’m talking about, right? Well, he’s #2 on Google for that word. His post today was about the Religious broadcasters creativity in getting onto his Sirius radio.

And Dave Winer today notices I’m going on a road trip. You can find him on Google too.

Damn elites. :-)

Seriously? I’m not gonna stop linking. I actually don’t agree with Gillmor either. But, I do appreciate that he tries to do something different which gets a conversation to start. If we were all the same this world would be so damn boring.

75 thoughts on “Not linking starts a conversation

  1. I have commented about this on my blog. I would have linked to your post, but I thought: Nah, let’s just do some “gesture”, whatever it is. So, no trackbak, you’ll have to dig my post up (not hard at all, actually).

  2. I have commented about this on my blog. I would have linked to your post, but I thought: Nah, let’s just do some “gesture”, whatever it is. So, no trackbak, you’ll have to dig my post up (not hard at all, actually).

  3. I have commented about this on my blog. I would have linked to your post, but I thought: Nah, let’s just do some “gesture”, whatever it is. So, no trackbak, you’ll have to dig my post up (not hard at all, actually).

  4. Robert,

    I noticed sometimes you dont hesitate to link to Maryam and Patrick`s sites ( and also to other sites you talk/refer about).

    Reading you regularly makes me realise you link whenever its required, that should do.

  5. Robert,

    I noticed sometimes you dont hesitate to link to Maryam and Patrick`s sites ( and also to other sites you talk/refer about).

    Reading you regularly makes me realise you link whenever its required, that should do.

  6. Robert,

    I noticed sometimes you dont hesitate to link to Maryam and Patrick`s sites ( and also to other sites you talk/refer about).

    Reading you regularly makes me realise you link whenever its required, that should do.

  7. Actually, searching on my full name returns the URL for the weblog I’m no longer updating. However, if you search on my first name, only, you can access some of my poetry, and even a horror story I wrote.

    It’s good. Really. It has monsters and everything.

    The poetry is kind of sucky, though.

  8. Actually, searching on my full name returns the URL for the weblog I’m no longer updating. However, if you search on my first name, only, you can access some of my poetry, and even a horror story I wrote.

    It’s good. Really. It has monsters and everything.

    The poetry is kind of sucky, though.

  9. Actually, searching on my full name returns the URL for the weblog I’m no longer updating. However, if you search on my first name, only, you can access some of my poetry, and even a horror story I wrote.

    It’s good. Really. It has monsters and everything.

    The poetry is kind of sucky, though.

  10. I think your elitism point is an interesting one. Again I speak from no great knowledge but it seems to me that your top 100 status which means that your links are more “potent” than most is not your “fault” You earned it and had it bestowed on you.

    You can do your bit for “socialism” by linking to lesser known people you think merit attention but, as you ‘ve witnessed, people want the convenience of links so if you think a high-ranked blogger is making a point that’s worth spreading then I think you’re stuck with being “obliged”to provide the link.

    It would be great, as you imply, if ranking systems could distinguish between old and new links because that would be more meritocratic, but for the moment I think the most meritocratic system is that of linking to whomever we think is interesting to our “audience” or ourselves.

  11. I think your elitism point is an interesting one. Again I speak from no great knowledge but it seems to me that your top 100 status which means that your links are more “potent” than most is not your “fault” You earned it and had it bestowed on you.

    You can do your bit for “socialism” by linking to lesser known people you think merit attention but, as you ‘ve witnessed, people want the convenience of links so if you think a high-ranked blogger is making a point that’s worth spreading then I think you’re stuck with being “obliged”to provide the link.

    It would be great, as you imply, if ranking systems could distinguish between old and new links because that would be more meritocratic, but for the moment I think the most meritocratic system is that of linking to whomever we think is interesting to our “audience” or ourselves.

  12. I think your elitism point is an interesting one. Again I speak from no great knowledge but it seems to me that your top 100 status which means that your links are more “potent” than most is not your “fault” You earned it and had it bestowed on you.

    You can do your bit for “socialism” by linking to lesser known people you think merit attention but, as you ‘ve witnessed, people want the convenience of links so if you think a high-ranked blogger is making a point that’s worth spreading then I think you’re stuck with being “obliged”to provide the link.

    It would be great, as you imply, if ranking systems could distinguish between old and new links because that would be more meritocratic, but for the moment I think the most meritocratic system is that of linking to whomever we think is interesting to our “audience” or ourselves.

  13. I’d dip my fingers in, but I find the whole point and counterpoint, itself but a pointless waste of time.

  14. I’d dip my fingers in, but I find the whole point and counterpoint, itself but a pointless waste of time.

  15. I’d dip my fingers in, but I find the whole point and counterpoint, itself but a pointless waste of time.

  16. Sorry Robert but I don’t agree that if you are no 1 on your name then you count as blogging elite. I am the No 1 Sarah Blow (& no 19th Sarah on Google with safe search on)and am even above all the p*rn sites but I don’t count that as being an elite. It is more than just that… it is an entire presence and a persona. Something that very few have.

    You captured it by saying the bit about Doc… everyone knows who he is and it has nothing to do with his google rating… It has to do with web presence which is about talking about the people and in some cases linking to them. Fair play you don’t need to link to Doc… but those who are not so well known it does help people discover them.

    BTW glad you & Maryam had fun at Blog Her!

Comments are closed.