School of Blog|
[Most Recent Entries]
Below are the 9 most recent journal entries recorded in
School of Blog's LiveJournal:
|Thursday, August 12th, 2004|
|Thursday, June 17th, 2004|
Subcategories II (Megabloggery)
Crossposted from my livejournal again. This is also my third official entry of my epic quest to catch up with the 30 blogs in 30 days crowd.
I swear I'm developing a stockpile of ideas here OTHER than adding more speculation to my nonesense theories of bloggerdom, but in case you haven't gathered, I'm pretty hepped up on this new theoretical field. Yesterday I mainly focused on identifiable subcategories of underblogging, so today I'm going to illuminate the topic of megablogging. I promise after this I'm going to try to keep my theorizing to schoolofblog. For those who have no idea what the crap I'm talking about, see the entry which heralds this new era of my insanity.
Let me emphasize that no, I'm not "becoming an lj elitist," these are not rules that one should try to follow, these are categories which attempt to describe pre-existant habits of lj users. When I speak of things that "ideally" and "should" be done, I'm speaking of efforts to attain the theoretical goal of megablogging, maximum readership. I am not becoming an elitist, I am becoming a blogologist. (=
It seems to me, or at least according to what a scribbled on my bookstore reciept while on the bus today, that I have identified at least three categories of megabloggists. Again, megabloggery is the general writing for readership rather than to express what you've been up to ("attention whoring" if you want to be derisive).
Let us start with what I've termed the flameblogger. These infamous individuals are commonly found in communities and try to gain attention through controversy. I had a rare encounter with one myself just today in fact. Kristy tells me I was just giving him what he wanted by responding, but hey I thoroughly enjoyed taking the unusual opportunity to thoroughly cuss at someone (if you know me you'll know how rare this is) and it would be petty of me to forego that pleasure merely to spite them.
Next we have a subcategory with subgroups of its own. This is noveltybloggers. The three subgroups are pollbloggers, quizbloggers, & memebloggers. As you can imagine, the defining feature of these groups is that they find things on the internet and decide to post them, much like birds that collect shiny objects.
nonmerci had this uncomplimentry but colourful description of the pollblogger in her eyes: "the pollblogger lacks any substantial content (whether that content be of a mega or underblogger variety), and is only able to supplement his/her journal by posting various livejournal polls that are only answered out of boredom and embarassment (as the pollblogger's friends are generally good samaritans who feel sorry for the pollblogger and wish to heighten his/her self-esteem). the pollblogger generally lives a vapid, innocuous existence, is oftentimes overweight and/or unattractive, and seeks validation through unhealthy online relationships. generally, the pollblogger will spend his/her days posting repeated polls, until either becoming a quizblogger (or a mixture of the two), an underblogger, or a permanent member of the realosphere. it should be noted that occasionally a pollblogger may elevate his/her status to that of a megablogger, but this is extremely rare and thus does not bear mentioning." (comment in schoolofblog)
Personally I think pollblogging can be done well, and I really really don't see the point of memes that process outcomes entirely based on your username and one or two other inputs (as opposed to more complex ones that actually do calculate out interesting things based on real data). But I think its important that no valuative judgements be included in the blogosphere theory, it must be an objective science.
Thirdly we have undermegabloggers. Yes I called myself a megaunderblogger initially, but on further reflection this category fits better under the general megabloggery hemiblogsphere, since the underblogs are characterized by very little concern for readership. I'd be willing to concede that perhaps there are undermegablogs and megaunderblogs.
Finally there are megablogs proper, megablogs for megabloggery's sake, and the really succesful ones, the ultramegablogs, which have such a large audience that the author can't hope to interact with more than a small number of them. Examples of general megablogs include most of the participants in the 30 blogs in 30 days challenge (follow links elsewhere if curious, I've made enough to them already for now) or say our own citizene.
Current Mood: accomplished
Cross posted from my own livejournal. I may or may not have had further revelations since the original posting of this, but as I should be studying for my last final in appx two hours (on winemaking incidentally (viticulture)), I'm not going to make any changes to this thing at that point.
Having spent much of the last few hours contemplating mega and underbloggery, the blogosphere, and what the heck I am going to write my 30 megablog entries about, I have finally concluded to write about the blogosphere (which is divided into mega & under -bloggery) for this first (second if I count the last one, which I am) attempt.
I perused my friends list and found that most of the entries there appeared to be what has been termed "underbloggery" (writing as a journal rather than for general entertainment of readers). Specifically, it appeared to me that these could be divided into three categories.
Incoherent: those who could not be bothered to ever structure their entries with more complexity than a bunch of one line thoughts either on seperate lines or, worse, in one run-on paragraph. These persons are clearly writing only for themselves and even those who would be interested in their lives find it too tedious to keep up with the reading.
Emo: Don't think these are necessarily persons who habitually are bedecked in scarves and messanger bags, in this category I'd place any entry which seems to have been posted by emotional neediness, "whininess" even you might say.
Underblog Proper: those that survived without falling into the other two categories (discounting a few that had combinations of these traits which stumped my finals-dazed mind), livejournals as journals.
Now all these category names are certainly up for replacement with more apt names; in my neurotic mid-finals stage this was the best I could do. But I'm not even sure "underblog" isn't on a basic level demeaning to underbloggers (the system having been invented by megabloggers, though they claim the two styles are equally viable) and would entertain propositions of better names for the same concepts.
In its highest form it seems to me that megabloggery should be generally understandable to all, rather than specific to a smaller group. This is something I think I need to work on myself since (to take a completely random guesstimate) 40% of my friends live in Davis, 40% in Orange County, and the remaining in neither, and I think I tend to write "for" whichever group I'm currently living among (which for example is about to change to OC). This very entry, for example, is probably only interesting to those who have already contemplated the blogosphere, and everyone else is probably like "WTF... mate?" Entries should also probably be humorous rather than an opinion on a highly theoretical topic... ::caugh::
I've also heard rumours in my six hours or so of familiarity with the topic, that "megablogs shouldn't have polls" and "megablogs shouldn't have pictures." These "rules" sound highly suspect, and I urge those who theorize on the topic to be careful of making rules with such tangent relevance to the main point of megabloggery. The "Golden Four" for example use pictures quite successfully in many of their best mega-entries.
Megabloggery also, I theorize, should be based on originality rather than regurgitation of things one finds on the internet that are amusing (this very entry: regurgitation of someone else's theory, or valuable additions to it?), but I think at its lowest level, livejournals that do little more than continually post things they found interesting on the internet are more uninspired megablog than underblog.
Anyway, in conclusion, for one reason or another, I'm guessing that no one will like this entry. Discussion of the blogosphere theory via comments is highly encouraged, otherwise, read my last entry, I liked that one.
Current Mood: contemplative
|Monday, April 5th, 2004|
Current mood: lonely
Current music: on my own
~ The Used You know what is one of the most painful feelings? When you really just need your friends, and then you realize, you don't have any.
I can't decided what's sadder about this post. The fact that they actually posted something like this, or that they were expecting people to comment with flattering words. One might say the saddest part by far is that, with a friend list of like 50 or so, this person will only get one comment. if you can't get sympathy from people on live journal, then i ask you, who can you get sympathy from?
This is the person only posts about once every month or two updating her anticipating
audience on the status of her, "perfect boyfriend", and she might pity others who arnt in her postition...this position of love
coincidently you could take a stab that this post is referring to the a loss of a boyfriend, a perfect boyfriend
if that comment link button isnt turned off, then you know just how bad this person is crying for reply to such a harsh post.
the lone comment: really...call me...i don't have any either
|Tuesday, February 10th, 2004|
He really turned the School of Blog into the School of Jokes!!
"Hey. Yeah, you. What do you think you're doing?
You're going to a party?
You know what I think of your party?
Yeah, fuck you."
How many times have we seen a startlingly lame post like this one? Just once is far too many. When in the blogosphere, don't address your readership entirely in second person
. It's LAME. If you're going to do that, I don't know... Learn some fucking magic tricks or something. You might be more suited to that field of entertainment. Here's the hierarchy of entertainers, for those of you who are confused.
4. Stand-up comedians
5. Guys who jump off of bridges and shit like that
8. Comedy writers (including bloggers)
See? Make a choice, fuckface.
|Tuesday, February 3rd, 2004|
Here is a whole pasted article on how Bush is a terrorist.
Don't believe me? Go to this link
, the same article is right there.
|Tuesday, January 27th, 2004|
|Monday, January 19th, 2004|
least favorite entries
I've determined my least favorite type of entry. Perhaps it would be a good idea to share yours, as well.
I'm really annoyed when a teenage girl (or any person, for that matter, but this only occurs with teenage girls) makes a one line post about a new boyfriend or something, and only refer to him as a gender pronoun. Every time this happens, the post is like this:He is amazing.
See how annoying that shit is? Let's try again.He is the world to me.
You can try it if you'd like, but yes, these may be the worst posts ever made. For one, they're silly. No one cares about anyone else's boyfriend, unless he is an awesome megablogger.
That's rule number one for ANY PERSON you might talk about in the blogosphere. I mean, at the very least, he or she should be a potential megablogger. Beyond that, they're pretentious. We don't know (or care) about your romantic life to know who you're referring to with the third person gender pronoun. Even if you've made five posts about him this week, we've skipped over them. I'm sorry.
I'm sorry for the School of Blog turning into the School of Hard Knocks, but you gotta learn how to fly (blog) before you fuck with the eagles (megabloggers).
|Sunday, January 11th, 2004|