Quite the subjective list of blogging cliches courtesy of Jeff Atwood’s Coding Horror. Why the superstitious number? Why not 14 or 12? Step on a crack, break your momma’s …

And then he violates his own cliche list with #10. His entire post is blogging about blogging, but spoiler alert: he admits to breaking his own list at the end. I’m going to break even more than that, out of order. Non-conformist style.

Violating #10
Let’s begin with #10 (”blogging about blogging”), because I realized while leaving a comment on Sterling’s post that my words had eclipsed the length of his post. Fellow blogger readers, you’ve done that before, haven’t you? I don’t mind doing that in my own comment section, but prefer to use a post with trackback for other blogs. I’m sure Sterling appreciates the response either way.

Violating #2
I won’t violate #2 (”Random Images Arbitrarily Inserted In Text”) with a picture of me doing something somewhere, but the thought skittered across my brain. Check that, this picture fits this post and is intentionally not random. Neener, neener, Mr. Atwood.

Ahh yes, this is where we traveled last weekend. Over 6,000 feet above ground, up through a creepy moving fog. A first riding a ski lift when there was no snow and I got some video footage for a future Hmmcast (vacation days on Friday and yesterday, BTW). What does this have to do with Jeff’s list of blogging cliches? More on this in a bit.

Violating #8
Difficult to locate bylines and information about the author (#3) somewhat contradicts #8 (”this isn’t your diary”).

Wrong. It is your diary that you are sharing with your readers. Your voice. Your story. The following statement doesn’t apply at all to my reading habits: “your readers aren’t coming to your blog to read about you.”

Then from who’s perspective are they coming to read? Or are they only there to read about a story with no characters? Boring story, if that’s the deal. In Atwood’s comment section he sort of takes this back.

I subscribe to blogs because of the subject matter and the authors. Because I’m interested in you and how your adventures and experiences impact and influence whatever subject you’re writing about. If you are excised from the piece it would be less interesting to me.

Given a choice between a blog that has more interesting subject matter over a more unique voice and steady, reliable flow, I’m more likely to skim the former and read/subscribe to the latter. Machines can deliver us topics and subjects contextually, people are what make the pieces interesting and memorable. Stories are incomplete without the characters that inhabit them. People aren’t cliches, they are unique.

I’m thinking Jeff is buying into cliched thinking on the whole diary spiel. One of the major descriptions that almost nobody disagrees with when describing the characteristics of a blog are that the posts are in diary format that employ a relaxed voice stylestically.

Who is writing this, what are his/her experiences and biases how do they affect the piece? Some of what we do in life can more potently impact a piece and make it more compelling and sticky. That seemingly random picture can hook readers in like a seductive novel cover. The payoff better be the content though as readers do not like being cheated.

And then there are bloggers like dooce.com who have built a very successful following — a lot more readers than Coding Horror, I’m sure — completely off the diary format. People are twittering their daily happenings back and forth and while I think too many inane daily happenings are annoying, not interestinig, that’s up to the author to weave the textual tapestry.

Violating #9
Excuse for not blogging, or #9 (”Sorry I haven’t written in awhile”) in and of itself is annoying and I agree.

However, when a blogger leaves for an extended period of time without an explanation of where they went or why they left, it does leave an awkward hole in the flow of the ongoing narrative. Again, I don’t care for single posts with excuses about why the author hasn’t been blogging — that is a cliche — it’s very easy to weave in a one or two sentence explanation before leaving or after getting back to explain the lack of flow and post frequency. It’s a little like expecting your favorite TV show to air every Monday night at 9pm only to show up or have the DVR in place snag some sort of special in its place. Why was it preempted?

Probably my biggest complaint with Kent Newsome’s blog is the posting schedule. Hate to be a selfish reader, but if we’re being honest, we’re a demanding lot. We get used to expecting quality content with at least some desirable frequency. Kent has heard me on this one before and I hope he knows enough not to take this personally, but this bears repeating because he has indicated that he’d like to expand his readership. Posting frequency is like a fine wine formula, it takes time to get into a consistent, reliable pattern. Too much posting and people will choke on the firehose and too little and readers will be starved.

I enjoy Kent’s writing, especially his longer, more pensive posts like this recent one on online utopias and he’s awesome about responding whenever he’s linked to, but his post flow and frequency is conversely unreliable. He’s gone for awhile, then comes back, then disappears again. Watch his comments on posts where he leaves and you’ll see people stop by wondering if he’s ok. Pulse checks are usually a sign that readers are worried about you.

Being gone a few days isn’t too big a deal, that’s taking days off, being gone weeks or months is significant. With that in mind, a lot of people are worried about you, Donald Crowlis. We continue to hope you are ok. Give us a sign, smoke signal, something. Please.

I’ll never get totally engaged or engrossed as a reader with infrequent writing output, no more than somebody showing up for work when they feel like it impresses the boss. I want to be your blog fan, subscriber and reader but you have to throw me a bone. One laced with consistency.

There is a good reason why major authors follow a time release schedule with novel publishing (hardcover comes out, paperback of last hardcover available for sale). A reliable publishing cycle. Blogging can be a cycle too if you want to grow readership. I add that because some bloggers clearly state they post when they feel like it and they don’t care about number of readers. For those who do, you know what at least one prospective reader cares about.

Back to my chair lift picture above. At the beginning of 2007 I made a promise to try and publish a new Hmmcast video every weekday, but one wasn’t published last Friday nor yesterday, two chosen work days without explanation. The weekends and vacations are mine and I post when I feel like it during those times, if at all. The work days, however, gaps need to be explained.

I feel obligated to mention why that happened for continuity and flow, but don’t need to make an entire excuse post. Instead, I can weave in a teasing picture about a future post. Foreshadowing, yes, that’s it. Ahh, there I am in the post, not random, not unintentional. A picture near text in a post doesn’t always have to be about that very post, it could be a series or part of a greater collection.

I think Atwood is looking too much at every blog post as a single, separate work which is flawed for those of us who see our blogs as ongoing stories. Frequent readers, especially long time subscribers might see it that way too. Bloggers can help by referencing related posts so new readers and visitors understand the chronology.

When does your blogging journey end? When does mine end? Only one of two logical scenarios: when I’m finished writing here or death, whichever comes first. The former is unlikely as there are too many exciting stories to tell and new things to explore, and the latter is certain. Current mortality tables give me roughly 40 more years (2047 or thereabouts until the reaper stops by). But even death doesn’t mean a friend, family member or both won’t take over the story and keep sharing their adventures.

Not violating #1, 3-7
I’m totally in Atwood’s corner on #3 (”no information on the author”) the importance of a clear byline. Hiding and/or not providing some details about who is writing what is like hiding the football from the quarterback. Always give readers context about who, what, where, when and how.

As for the calendar (#1 “the useless calendar widget”), the sidebar and other stuff (#4 “excess flair”, #6 “nebulous tag cloud”) I find most of that more valuable to authors than readers and think that should be handled by a conditional template or switch. One could always display a different template with all the useful components to the author(s) and another to readers/visitors/SE with a one line conditional. In WP template code terms, something like this:

As for #5 (”the giant blogroll”), that’s more efficiently handled with an OPML file as Atwood suggests and/or link to a single dedicated page to share the linklove which is Sterling’s thinking. I link to mine off the homepage so it’s only one link away from home. No, that’s not as good as having every link on the homepage, but again, I don’t think readers mind making the extra click. Yes, other bloggers would rather be on the homepage, but those on my reading list have a greater chance of being linked more than once inside posts and every link there shows up on the homepage for a short time.

I’m split between Sterling and Atwood as to these lists sometimes being spammy. The way AOL/Weblogs, Inc does it is spammy. They are clearly interlinking all their properties for a certain purpose, relevance be damned. That’s not the same thing as Sterling, Atwood or I sharing our actual reading lists.

And now we arrive at a pet peeve of mine, #7 (”excessive advertising”). I try very hard to find the right balance with ads at this site. It’s ultimately up to readers to grade the use of advertising more than it is to me. Some readers might define “excessive” as any ads period, but that’s not realistic for a blog with any sort of traffic and reach. The more traffic, the more bandwidth burned, the more time spent working on posts, the more money is required to at least break even. I’d hazard a guess that most blogs operate at a loss when the time spent is factored in. Not losing one’s shirt while sharing seems reasonable to me. That’s where I put advertising in as a perspective. This blog is expected to turn a profit and thanks to you, friendly reader and visitor, it does. We don’t need to be greedy about it and try not to be, but again, readers will decide what is and isn’t excessive.

It’s kind of silly with ad blocking tools to make your site too ad excessive anyway. Readers will just turn on the plugins to block all the ads and there goes any chance of making some ad revenue. I prefer respectful, related advertising as a reader, not intrusive, unrelated advertising.

Violating #12
Lists like the one that inspired this one and hence the response are violating #12 (”Top (n) Lists”). I disagree completely with Atwood that lists are “a substitute for critical thinking.” Look at sites like Mashable.com who lately have been publishing tons of lists. People love reading, bookmarking and sharing lists. Adding to my to-do list that I should be making more lists.

My favorite non-violation: #13
Hopefully you won’t ever see this blog violating #13 (”No Comments Allowed”). I believe strongly that a blog should be a conversation — and practice what I preach — which means giving you an equal floor to correct mistakes I’ve made or disagree with my opinion as I’ve done with a number of items in Mr. Atwood’s list. If those corrections become too long then add them to your own blog and trackback in. Both methods of continuing the conversation are welcome and encouraged.

Violating #11
Good place to end by violating #11 (”Mindless Link Propagation”). The thing that makes the web different than traditional press are links. What’s “mindless” about regular people commenting on the news? I like hearing different perspectives about the news.

No, I don’t want to read dozens or hundreds of different bloggers simply restating the news with nothing new or personal added (revisit the diary violation: how did this news impact or affect you?), but carefully consider the excellent point Mike from Techdirt mentioned yesterday in the post titled: People Want Analysis Of The News, Rather Than Just Facts:

In fact, despite the claims of an internet “echo chamber,” one of the things that makes the internet such an interesting medium, is the idea that anyone can respond and discuss stuff. If someone disagrees with our interpretation of the facts, we want to know about it, and we want to discuss it. That’s how we all learn and we all become smarter.

Maybe Atwood wants the facts from vanilla brand news agencies, but a growing number of people actually like receiving news from bloggers colored by their individual perspectives, experiences and opinions.

Score card summary
Let’s see, think I’ve violated six of Atwood’s thirteen cliches. Does this mean he will dismiss my rebuttal because it’s ridden with too many cliches? Don’t know. I do know that whatever the subject matter, leaving you out of a blog post makes it less interesting to me.

Oh, the horror!

Related Posts

• Why you should never use a default blog theme
• Boris tired of the guest blogger craze
• How to write headlines even a corpse would read
• Hey Shelley, here’s a link from a guy!
• Transparent Adsense posts
• Look more forward than back, two million in the distance