Thursday 20 January 2011

Irritating Blog Habits

When it comes to following other people's blogs, I have a few pet peeves. One has to be those blogs, thankfully few in number, that consist of links - and little else - to other blogs and web pages. The worst of these send the reader down a whole series of rabbit holes (links to links to links) before delivering - if you're lucky - the expected content. I mean, why bother?

Then there are the bloggers who post long items, but provide only a teaser on the main page. You have to click "read more" to get the full posting. Blogging is the art of writing concisely. Those of you crazy enough to read Otagosh regularly want short items with a clear main point. At least that's the assumption I work under. Essays belong on web pages, not blogs. When casual readers see that "read more" link the standard reaction is... nah.

But brethren, yesterday that all changed. First someone explained to me the secret of putting that "read more" thing on Blogger posts. Then an angel sat on my shoulder (a red one with horns, tail and a pitchfork) and saith unto me, "Repent! Thou knowest that thou lusteth to trieth this out."

And I wept sorely for it was so.

Thus, was I led astray and, probably for the first and last time,
did it.


  1. In the spirit of leaving "links", this is for all you anti-"British-Israelism" folks out there who just love to bash the theory....

  2. You do a damn fine job with your blogging. Keep it up.

  3. Those "read more" things are for making a blog into a "web page" without having one.

    John Loftus makes good use of it on his "Debunking Christianity" blog.

    Now if I could figure out how he does all that other neat stuff on his comments page...

  4. Larry, STOP IT, you'll go blind!

  5. Technically, no one can have a theory without 99 incidences of the hypothesis being demonstrated.

    Since British Israelism doesn't even rise to the point of being a scientific hypothesis, it cannot be even a theory.

    Analogies are not proof, although propositions like British Israelism might qualify as Science Fiction as alternative history. A warning though, it's not the sort of thing which would be accepted for publication in either Analog or Asimov's -- they seldom do alternative history as science fiction, and since this would be bad science fiction, it would never make it past the editors (which should have been the case in the Radio Church of God when the material was plagiarized from narcissistic nut cases).

  6. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  7. You fellows are very interesting. While I and many others, are willing to recognize British-Israelism as a theory, there are some who post here who have an antagonism toward it that goes WAAAAYYY beyond irrational!!!

    Can someone explain this??

    I have my own ideas why this might be the case, but have never heard an explanation from someone like PH or Becker?

    And, if I ever want to be insulted, I always know where I can go.

    And, no one seemed to have much to say about the rather erudite article (in the link) which accurately describes the real world....

  8. Larry, I skimmed over the new criterion article. It certainly deserves a place on examples of irritating blog habits.

    TLDR - Too long, didn't read.

  9. Wow! Tony, that was too long??

    I guess we shouldn't consult you on complex issues....

  10. One more irritating blog habit for the list Larry; off topic comments. Or is there some relevance to a newspaper column on an unrelated subject by a well-known bigot?

    (Rhetorical question, no reply needed.)