[Vit-discuss] Blogs Considered Harmful

Zach Dennis 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
> projects


> * 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
> AmIOfficialRubyOrNot.com

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 mailing list