[Vit-discuss] Blogs Considered Harmful

James Britt james.britt at gmail.com
Thu Feb 24 17:00:32 EST 2005

On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 16:47:06 -0500, Todd Grimason <todd at slack.net> wrote:
> * Zach Dennis <zdennis at mktec.com> [2005-02-24 16:30]:
> >
> > 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.
> This is speaking to what I mentioned a few days ago - user personas -
> in other words, what types of users will be visiting ruby-lang. I
> think it will be mostly newcomers, manager-types (hopefully), and the
> curious. The only likely return visits by regular rubyists is likely
> to be to pull down a copy of the source, or a shortcut to the online
> docs.


> I don't really see a reason for it to be compelling for rubyists to
> return often - I think php.net is the best example - it centralizes
> conferences and user groups, and occasional "big" news. It is
> otherwise totally focused on getting php or learning it (docs). This
> lowers the need to constantly keep it up to date and "fresh", and
> avoids political decisions on who gets to say what, and where.


> Until the reason for the existence of the site is locked down,
> clearly and explicitly, discussion will go in circles...

This nails the issue.  



More information about the vit-discuss mailing list