Thursday, May 12, 2005

Blog Conversation: Links vs. Comments


blog conversation: is linking an act of communicating? or is commenting? Posted by Hello



It almost flew right past me--like a bulbous bat in an attic.

It's such a juicy controversy--I'm ashamed of myself--so busy that I almost missed it.

Here it is.

(is that:--that intrigues, puts hums and hymns in text reserve, roaring with forced laughter, eyes sparkle and disembark on adventures all over the philoso-scape of this contrivance)



Blog Conversation:
Links vs. Comments




Friends, I stumbled upon this interesting artifact, a spacing introduced between two heretofore complimentary aspects of the blog (connectivity via links and interactive intelligibility, reading more and responding quickly, links-and-comments:

"Conversation Does Not Need Comments"


(LOL, already, All Read Y, the title text violates the very definition of conversation: two-way communication based on assertion/question/comment followed by negation/affirmation/question/comment) at:

Corporate Blogging.Info
http://www.corporateblogging.info

...a site I am becoming convinced may be one of the premier, "must read" sites for corporate blogging insights, applications, and dogma.

The post author, Frederik, of Corporate Blogging.Info, discussed the conflict between advocates of linking (Jorn Barger/Rebecca Blood "pre-surfed web") versus advocates of commenting.

One faction asserts that "blog conversation" occurs when links to other blogs are embedded in the blog posts, and perhaps all links, sidebar, top navbar, graphic buttons, graphic fields, are somehow "conversing" or enabling "conversation".

With all due respect to those groping for the truth, and who end up here, this is ridiculous.

Absurd.

What Conversation Really Is


Conversation is two entities exchanging information. Both hear/read and both talk/write.

Going from one spot to another is called travelling, not talking.

Linking is navagation, not conversation.

Linking, at best, is passive reading of what others have thought. It is the opposite of activism.

To merely click/select a link, then view a page at another online location, why this is passive, non-interactive, non-exchanging, non-transformational...

...thus, not conversation.

Conversation without comments? Sounds like "now just shut up and listen to, and obey, what I say!" Can you say "main stream media (MSM)"? Broadcasting? Mass Marketing?

Here is a quote from "Conversation Does Not Need Comments" by Frederik, and I'm sorry friend from the astonishingly excellant Corporate Blogging.Info site, but I disagree in my typical Vaspersian manner:

"In summary: Blogging is about conversation. Comments is a very good tool to strenghten conversation, but the fundamental tool is linking. Defining blogs from a "comments or no comments"-perspective is nothing but a way of making blogs a less profound change of communication than they are."


What I Posted in a Comment
at the Linking vs. Comment post
at Corporate Blogging.Info


[QUOTE by Streight]

I love how your comments to a post about comments not being as important as linking actually are saying something about blog conversation that the links do not.

Thus, once again, comments preside in triumph over linking.

Linking is reading. Reading what others have thought.

Commenting is writing. Writing what you think.

Writing is closer to mind than reading.

Thus, as everyone can now see clearly, comments occupy a much higher level than linking.

Linking says "if you like this, you'll like that"

Commenting says: "here's what I think"

I'd rather people think than link.

I'd rather people write than read.

But I'm the world's first Jakob Nielsen-Jacques Derrida deconstruction-based blogologist.

Let us know peer into the Interplanetary Internet.


steven streight aka vaspers the grate | Homepage | 05.12.05 - 12:14 pm |


[END QUOTE by Streight]


LINKING = connectivity

COMMENTING = conversation

I allow comments at my other blogs via email only. Reason = blog comment spam storm. So commenting must be understood in terms of both direct user posting at the blog, via a comment form, and posting comment to blog author, via email.

At best, linking takes you to other conversations, but without comments, there would be one-way broadcasting, not interactive blogging.

Linking and commenting both provide the means of building online communities around activist agendas, which is the benefit of blogs.

Not self expression. Not simple communication. Not connectivity via links.

Primary Purpose of Blogging = inspire action via persuasive or profound writing. ACTIVISM for SOCIAL/INDIVIDUAL TRANSFORMATION.




NOW...

...what do YOU think?

Which is more vital to "blog conversation":

(1.) linking

OR

(2.) commenting


I really hope to hear from you on this one.

This is a fascinating topic, one that could alter the course of blog development.

Do you prefer to follow links, write and post a comment, or neither...

...when you visit blogs?

Do you ignore links?

Do you eagerly wonder what comments a, especially a controversial, post received?

Post a comment here...or email me your opinion.

Thanks,


[signed] Steven Streight aka Vaspers the Grate aka Leopold the Told

No comments: