[Vit-discuss] Blogs Considered Harmful
zdennis at mktec.com
Thu Feb 24 16:26:13 EST 2005
James Britt wrote:
> Not blogs as a whole; that's was just a cheap way to get attention.
> Why I'm against incorporating a blog on ruby-lang
> * Blogs by nature are personal voices. ruby-lang.org should focus on
> objective features of Ruby, not some people's point of view or pet
> * Many people are blogging about Ruby. Not all of them deserve to be
> on ruby-lang.org. Who picks, and by what criteria? It reeks of
ok, point taken
> * Blogs require devotion, a steady flow of content. Things look stale
> when they have an expiration date next to them. There will be enough
> things to look after as it is
ok, i agree
> * Blog content is easier to get in any number of other ways than going
> to the home page of a programing language
no one said it had to be the home page. =)
The thing I like about blogs is that blogs continually changed (except
for RubyGarden?), and it makes you want to go back and check them out.
But I think blogs could be talked about at a later date once things are
farther along if we need to bring in more content.
More information about the vit-discuss