Comments on: Why you never see people complaining about “knowledge overload”… https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/7000/2010/01/23 Researching, documenting and promoting peer to peer practices Mon, 13 Oct 2014 19:40:37 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.5.14 By: Chris Watkins https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/7000/2010/01/23/comment-page-1#comment-443617 Mon, 11 Oct 2010 03:30:05 +0000 http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=7000#comment-443617 Well put. Much blog content is more suited to a static source of information, or (even better) a slowly evolving source.

I think a big part of the “blog frequently” idea is that it’s good for SEO… and yet the grand ruler of search rankings is Wikipedia, which is a slowly evolving source of knowledge.

Thank for prompting me to think again about how I blog.

]]> By: Zbigniew Lukasiak https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/7000/2010/01/23/comment-page-1#comment-421433 Mon, 25 Jan 2010 14:28:56 +0000 http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=7000#comment-421433 Another complication is that you need to write a lot and get feedback from readers to become any good at it.

]]> By: Zbigniew Lukasiak https://blog.p2pfoundation.net/7000/2010/01/23/comment-page-1#comment-421361 Sun, 24 Jan 2010 11:34:15 +0000 http://blog.p2pfoundation.net/?p=7000#comment-421361 I totally agree that we need a new ecology of information with more quality and less quantity. But this is only the starting point – the important question is why frequent is equal with success online and how this could be changed. I can see several problems here: to interpret a blog post it is helpful to know about the author so there is a natural tendency to read the same author again and again, a really insightful text requires a lot of effort to read and understand and nobody would do that for some anonymous source, I would speculate that there are also some reasons in our neuronal circuity that rewards more frequent signals than sporadic stronger signals (for positive signals).

]]>