I have so much stuff I should be doing instead, that I’m blogging all the time. Where should I put it all? I can stick some stuff at Applied Statistics and the Monkey Cage, but I’m always afraid that anything I don’t put here will bypass you, my loyal audience. But if I post everything here, it’s just overwhelming, I’m afraid some of the stuff I love will get lost in the shuffle. When I started this blog I was posting 5 times a week but now it’s feeling more like 5 times a day. My blogging behavior also seems to have had the unwanted side effect of driving my co-bloggers away!
Some options, going forward:
1. Continue with the status quo. Put almost everything here, occasionally crosspost at 538 and New Majority, and a few times a week put things at Applied Statistics or the Monkey Cage and link to them.
2. Put everything here; sometimes crosspost to the other blogs too.
2. Find some logical dividing line and put some categories of topics here and some categories at Applied Statistics.
3. Use Applied Statistics in some creative way, for example having a different topic every month. That could be fun, but it would involve even more effort and also wouldn’t really solve the too-much-stuff-being-posted-here problem.
4. Continue posting timely items, but keep an every-lenghening backlog (currently I have about 40 entries in the queue) to be auto-posted, one a day, at some period when I feel like taking a break.
And, of course, there’s option 5, Blog Less. I know this is the right thing to do, but I can’t quite bring myself to go there yet.
Any ideas??
P.S. As befits the topic, I hate to post this–i’m afraid it will distract from several important items below. For example, my blog on Type M errors and my all-important postdoc ad. It’s tough to simultaneously play the roles of judge, jury, and executioner^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H author and editor.
I'd vote for number 2 "Put everything here; sometimes crosspost to the other blogs too." After finding some interesting items at the Applied Statistics blog, I was more annoyed that I missed them than I have ever been annoyed by a post on this blog which I did not find interesting.
i vote for 2, "Put everything here; sometimes crosspost to the other blogs too."
OK, with a sample size of 2, that decides it! Option 2 it is. But you're not worried about people not noticing things amid the flurry of blog postings?
My vote is for digest posts. That is, once a day link to your posts elsewhere with a lede to motivate the link.
I'm interested in what you have to say. It's much easier to find everything here (option 2). I don't think you have to worry about people missing things. Irregularity is the nature of blogging. I read lots of blogs that have higher and/or more irregular posting intervals than you. I don't think I read anybody who posts on as many different blogs as you do.
2, and cross post as much as you like.
I have both applied stats and this blog in my RSS reader, so I come across the content on both blogs with equal ease. If anything, it is slightly annoying to see the same post show up twice in my reader, but I don't really mind. It is better when the two posts have the exact same title, so that I don't have to click on it to know that it is redundant.
I read the RSS of this blog and haven't felt the need to add the Applied Statistics feed, but I might if there would be interesting posts that will not appear here. In any case, for the people that "visit" the actual blog it might be useful to have a widget with the feed of the other(s) blog(s). Also, reduce the amount of Recent Posts and add a calendar or month archive widget. I always find them useful, both as blogger and reader.
Another vote for option 2.
Per your question, I'm not worried about overlooking things amid a flurry of blog postings. Like most of your readers, I read lots of blogs and use a feed reader (Google Reader) to keep things sane. Further, even if you doubled or tripled your posting rate, the increased flow would amount to a few extra droplets in the firehose from which most of us are already drinking.
So post as much as you want! But be sure your feeds are set to include the full bodies of your posts. (Nothing earns an "unsubscribe" quicker than forcing readers to click-through to read below the fold, which destroys the convenience of using software to manage and organize subscriptions.)
Cheers,
Tom
i originally intended to vote for option #2, but i also like OneEyedMan's suggestion that you do a digest (daily digest seems about right).
i have two of the three blogs in my RSS feed, but since i sort all posts in chronological order, i don't get mixed up about what i've already read on SMCI&SS vs. Monkey Cage.
More co-bloggers. Take a look at the other stat blogs you have given links to over the years and see who (1) writes good stuff, but (2) doesn't post often enough and therefore (3) doesn't get a regular audience for their own blog.
What about Radford Neal, for example? He had some interesting stuff, but perhaps he wasn't up to blogging as often as required to keep an audience. http://radfordneal.wordpress.com/ has its last entry last March.
also for option 2 – I assume most people do RSS – it takes me 2 secs to scroll by a post I'm not interested in.
Much more annoying to have a another RSS added to my already way to many.
The decision has been made, but just incase there was any doubt: 2.
Option 2.
I vote for Option 2 too… RSS is a real time-saver for readers.. and I think it's a good idea to have all your stuff on your personal page.. Makes it easier when someone wants to figure out your views on something- just search one blog rather than multiple blogs…
I vote for #2 too. And I agree that rss feeds make it much easier to follow a high volume of posts (and in relative terms, your volume is not that high). Also, you're consistently interesting, and it's really useful to have everything available through one main feed.
As a sometime co-blogger, I'm happy with any model that works for you. I will say that I'm not going to bother posting something if you are posting several times per day, so if one of your goals is to have more posts from co-bloggers, you'll have to decrease your own posts. But why on earth would that be one of your goals? Your readership seems very happy with the way things are currently going, so keep it up.
solution to the interesting stuff being buried problem: a number of blogs I read will post a weekly summary message which recaps the subjects covered during that week with links to individual posts. That can be helpful to those who are occasional readers. As for the regulars, we are reading everything so your fear may be misplaced.
Option #2 (the first one) sounds good. But #3 does sound like fun — I really like the idea of a series of posts exploring some theme, light or heavy. I don't think it needs to be monthly — you could decide in advance if it's going to take 4, 5 or 10 posts and then take however much time you want. Mark Chu-Carroll at Science Blogs does something like this. As you say, it won't address your primary issue, but I thought I'd cast a vote in that direction in case it sways your decision. :)
With fear of unduly distracting from other posts/tasks, you mentioned earlier that having grad students fill in for you on the blog did not work well – but are there other people/ways you could off load some tasks or take breaks (by "away" one week a month)
A small one might be to have an "editor" to post a weekly summary message …
One thing I think that helps on this blog is the apparent tolerance to let things go and not feel compelled to respond to every query/opinion.
Keith
I lean towards digest – I tend to read some of the other locations anyway. A post every few days with links to anything not here would do.
But if you want to post everything here, that's okay.