Speedlinking, small posts, big posts?
I recently came across a post of someone that declared that if you only posted “speedlink” type posts you’d be out of his feedreader. It’s a fact that I myself don’t like blogs that only link stuff, but I do that a lot, I run a cron job that retrieves my daily links from delicious and makes a post out of that. There’s a reason for this, I save links that I think will be useful and interesting to the people that read this.
The question is, can “speed linking” be considered content? My answer is yes, although you are not directly producing it, you are giving ways to reach it.
My other question is, what kind of posts of people prefer? Small but very assertive posts, where you give a brief intro on the subject, leave your opinion and provide ways for readers to learn more, or big posts where you detail everything and write like you where creating the new bible. My choice is obviously the first, I tend to jump over posts that require me to scroll, first because I do most of my reading during work hours (you didn’t read that) and second because if I leave my readings to post-labour hours I’ll be too tired to deal with huge posts.
February 27th, 2007 at 15:00
Actually, what he says is that if a blog is nothing but speedlinking posts, it will be removed. He says he’s got no problem with mixing speedlinking with real content.
February 27th, 2007 at 15:30
Like Pedro says, I have no problem with speedlinking posts. I have lots of problems with exclusively speedlinking. Hope that clarifies.
February 27th, 2007 at 15:47
Corrected.
February 28th, 2007 at 10:16
Depending on the type of post it is, I’m okay with both formats.
Though if a weblog is just links on every single post, or the opposite (filled with huge posts) I tend to get bored.