TheoMeme 2
Posted by RazorsKissJul 1
Now, in the last post (see directly below), I brought up a new idea of mine.
The TheoMeme ©.
There are two reasons for this.
First:
Vox Apologia needs a retooling. It wasn’t working. This is an attempt to do so.
Second:
It’s a way to claim at least some portion of the “meme” craze for Christ. Considering it’s origin, I find it fitting. read the preceding link. You may find it eye-opening, Christian, where the word comes from. Our friend, the pragmatist – Richard Dawkins. It teaches theology to those who may need to read it, allows others to teach it, and makes us all think about it, if we get involved.
The Way it Works
We’ve all seen memes, by now. Book memes, community memes, movie memes, Star Wars character memes – whatever you can think of, there’s been a meme about it. Except Theology.
Why, Christians, is that? Are we not to take every thought captive? Let’s take one meme captive, shall we?
Ok, so here’s how it goes. The questions – every time – will be written by a pastor, or a theologian. Period. As much as I adhere to Sola Scriptura – the people who know how to succinctly, correctly phrase theological questions are theologians, and pastors. That way, we will minimize the effect of poorly worded questions on the responses. We hope đ
The additional question is as follows: “Do you attend church? If so, what denomination or congregation do you attend at?”
The purpose: To give us a “doctrinal map” of comparative theologies between branches of Christianity. This, friends, is a useful thing. Comparative theology is a pain, at best – but this may be something the blogosphere is uniquely suited for. If we take it seriously.
How to do it effectively:
A pastor writes the questions. The questions are inserted into the initial meme. That meme post “tags” 5 higher-profile Christian blogs, for a good “first seed”. (Evangelical Outpost, Jollyblogger, Adrian Warnock, SmartChristian, Parableman?) Those blogs can each seed 5 in turn – and the meme spreads. I’ll posit, though, that those 5 blogs can reach 75% of the God-bloggers within 3 links of their blog. I’d almost guarantee it. So, it would be possible to reach the vast majority of the Christian blogs with a real live theological discussion, every week.
How about that for meta-niching?
Seriously – think it over. What downsides are there? It is worth a shot, most definitely.
Technical:
Have as many blogs as possible trackback to the original meme post – include the trackback url in the meme. Have the blogs who understand technorati tags – tag their posts with “TheoMeme” – as this post (and it’s predecessor) just were. Create javascript updater, which gives current information about Meme info, which can be included on any blog, and centrally updated. (See King of the Blogs, or the New Blogs Showcase for examples)
Technorati Tag: TheoMeme
20 comments
Trackback by Vox Apologia on July 1, 2005 at 1:38 am
The TheoMeme
I just coined this word – and because I just coined it, I’m going to use it fairly soon – and I’m taking the credit for it, should it take off
I just had one of those “stroke of lightning” ideas, while I was on one of my nightly “thinking cap…
Trackback by Vox Apologia on July 1, 2005 at 1:40 am
TheoMeme 2
Now, in the last post (see directly below), I brought up a new idea of mine.
The TheoMeme ©.
There are two reasons for this.
First:
Vox Apologia needs a retooling. It wasn’t working. This is an attempt to do so.
Second:
It’s a way to cl…
Comment by Adrian on July 1, 2005 at 4:06 am
Im game. Have done something a little bit similar before- for example my recent post calling for a walk through the bible. I would be happy to set similar posts, or indeed for this blogging challenge of mine to be adopted as a theomeme.
Comment by Frank on July 1, 2005 at 9:56 am
I like the TheoMeme idea, and I hope it will help both re-engerize both you and your GREAT site. If there is anyway I can help please email and know that I fully behind supporting you in this….
Pingback by Swap Blog » Theomeme - great idea on July 1, 2005 at 10:39 am
[…] Razorkiss.net has posted to post about his new idea – TheoMeme – #1 and #2 . The Meme craze is sweeping the web and Razor is thinking that Christians should get in on […]
Comment by Sven on July 1, 2005 at 1:15 pm
Oo Oo – pick me! Pick me!
Comment by cwv warrior on July 2, 2005 at 12:25 pm
Ditto Sven! I am a “low life” on the blogger scene and have never been tagged before. And yes, I am feeling sorry for myself : (
So, I just hope we can include everybody, speaking for my fellow newbies and myself, who think we have something to say.
Comment by RazorsKiss on July 2, 2005 at 5:23 pm
Welp, you’ve been linked from Vox once, now – and you’re on the sidebar for Vox Contributors, too đ
I’ll make a point of doing so, cmv. Just make sure you “tag” more “niche blogs” when you do get tagged!
Sven… I just might đ
Comment by Catez on July 3, 2005 at 11:33 pm
Hi RK,
I don’t see why we need it – to be honest. I guess those who are interested will get into it. It really seems to be about getting some prominent bloggers to post on theology – which is fine if they want to.
I wouldn’t want to do a theomeme every week myself. God bless.
Comment by RazorsKiss on July 4, 2005 at 12:29 am
Yeah, who needs theology.
Actually, it’s nothing whatsoever about prominence, or otherwise. prominence just helps for the first “seeding” – as the high traffic counts expose it to more people.
Who says everyone has to do every one? If it’s interesting, post. If it isn’t, don’t.
Vox Apologia has done *ever* so much better… not.
If it isn’t about a Star Wars character, a book review, a post about politics, or an insightful expose of how “traditional” churches “just don’t get it” – we just aren’t interested.
I don’t see why we need theology, either. It’s just the study of God, after all.
Why don’t we review books for free (*cough* Mind & Media *cough*), or post what Star Wars character we are – or, maybe – why don’t we write about theology. Just perhaps.
A change is always good. Christian bloggers writing about theology… what a novel idea.
I’m being *very* sarcastic – but really – how much play do actual theological posts get? How much comparable play does a stupid meme about what freaking *Star Wars* character you are get, in comparison?
Much, much, much more. If that isn’t an indictment of the vapidness and shallowness of our supposed “spirituality” – I don’t know what is.
If the Vox topic is controversial, or gave everyone a chance to rehash some nice, juicy opinion-mongering, it was *real* popular. Something with meat to it? Hah! The tumbleweeds just blow.
I dunno. It’s certainly annoying…
We don’t *need* theology? I really, really don’t get that one, Catez. I love ya – but I don’t get that at all. Maybe I misunderstood you – but that doesn’t sound very healthy.
We don’t need Theology?
Comment by RazorsKiss on July 4, 2005 at 1:18 am
That shouldn’t have been quite as harsh as it was, Catez, sorry.
It wasn’t all steam directed your way. Some was just vented frustration. The meme craze annoys me – especially since the vast majority of it is so useless.
i still don’t have a clue what you mean – but it probably wasn’t what it looked like.
So, sorry for snapping at you.
Comment by Catez on July 4, 2005 at 3:25 am
In no way was I saying we don’t need theology. I was saying I didn’t see why we need memes on it. And of course those who want to do it will get into it. I could explain myself more but I see no point. My blog is listed in Theology Blogs – as far as I know. It was there last time I looked.
I have never posted on Star Wars or Star Wars characters. As I recall I have done 2-3 memes in nearly 2 years of blogging.
Both Christians and non-Christians read and comment on the book reviews I have done. I haven’t done screeds of them but I do like reviewing and distilling the ideas from good books. Having said all that – I blog what I want to blog.
I am not some flunky for you to rip into. I have supported you and this hurts me.
Comment by Catez on July 4, 2005 at 3:29 am
I would further suggest that you take care in calling others spirituality “shallow”. As for Vox – I do have ideas. But is it ours or yours Joshua?
Comment by Catez on July 4, 2005 at 5:01 am
Yes I know – 3rd comment. Because I was going to email you some ideas but since we’re discussing here – here’s the suggestions.
1. I let you know right from the beginning with the weekly Vox Apologia – I am not a “topic-every-week” blogger. Most people aren’t – it starts to feel like having to do an essay for school or something. And sometimes a theme develops on a particular blog. Recently mine became very much about the effective gospel, and in fact I had to do some apologetics in defense to a muslim challenge. But often times the posts don’t fit the weekly Vox.
I think – as a suggestion – that it would work better if people just submitted their best apologetics post of the week in Vox Apologia each time. The best of those could be added to the librarium under the appropriate categories.
2. Speaking of the librarium – I wonder if having so much latin really works. An idea would be to make some parts of the Vox site a bit more visitor friendly. e.g. Daily Apologetics instead of Dies Apologia, Library instead of Librarium. Not everyone gets latin. Personally I would be more likely to go look at Daily Apologetics.
3. It is difficult getting other women interested in Vox – the site and the weekly carnival. Maybe it’s because there’s a big sword up there – I figure you don’t want to change that. But combined with the latin it seems very guyish. I mean no offence by that, but that’s the thought I’ve had for a while as I’ve pondered how to get other women into it.
4. As you know, I can’t post directly onto the Vox site due to a tech problem. I can’t add anything because of the same tech problem. As you became very busy and were out of commission for a time I have not wanted to load you with any more links to post. I do have some.
5. There are now two apologetics group blogs – as Daniel has invited Vox people to join his, and some have. I was invited to be a contributor there but have not taken up that invitation. I need to get to know a blogger before committing to a group blog – and am in Vox Apologia anyway. I’m wondering if people are posting to both group blogs – and if so then one set of posts becomes redundant. If visitors can read it on one blog why go to another to read the same? Or – have they stopped posting at Vox and just now post at Apologia Christi? I’m not sure but those are possible reasons why Vox isn’t getting hits.
I have a few more ideas/suggestions but that’ll do for now. If you don’t like these suggestions please do not rip into me – that is unnecessary and hurtful.
If people go for an idea it’s great – if they don’t then they don’t have to. We cannot control what people do, or what they blog about. Re: the theomeme – as I said, people who like the idea will get into it.
I thought your comment about Mind and Media was uncalled for. Stacy Harp has worked really hard on that and it has generated a lot of good posts, and discussion sometimes too. Yes, the books are free. So? I have reviewed books that I didn’t get for free too. I recall you did a series on one of Schaeffer’s books yourself that was quite good. Putting down something that is actually really good and does often generate meaty content doesn’t make sense to me.
These things do not have to be either/or.
I am, and always have been, extremely resistant to “shoulds” when it comes to blog content. Since I first read your blog and your comments on others you struck me as also being some-one who was not into things being controlled.
Joshua – if people want to meme they can meme – be it Star Wars or theomemes or whatever. Sometimes after a day at work which was heavy a person just wants to lighten up a bit. Sometimes memes help create connections. I’ve only done a couple and they were not silly ones – and some good connections were made.
Re: my question as to whether Vox is ours or yours. I shouldn’t have left that hanging. It’s ours but when you blow up like that it sounds like it’s really yours. I don’t know where all that came from with you – you did say sorry but you left it up too – which suggests you want people to read it. All I can say is that each man gives an account for his own work. You blog as your conscience says, and I’ll blog as mine says. It is too easy to read a lot of blogs and react because of some posts that one disagrees with, or that aren’t where one is at. Yet the diversity of blogs all serve their purpose – and what amazes me are some of the blogs that tend to get looked down on because they aren’t “serious” or “intellectual”. Yet some of those blogs have a lot of hits and have made online connections with non-Christians in a way that many probably would like to.
You know I’ve supported you, and at times I’ve prayed for you too.
God bless you.
Comment by RazorsKiss on July 4, 2005 at 9:12 am
Well, I *did* say that you may have meant something other than what it looked like.
Why don’t we “redeem the memes” by meming theology, instead of all the shallow, vapid crap that gets memed? I don’t get the opposition. Why oppose something where the subject matter is true, what is honorable, what is right, what is pure, what is lovely, what is of good repute, is excellent, and worthy of praise – why can’t we dwell on these things?
And of course those who want to do it will get into it. I could explain myself more but I see no point. My blog is listed in Theology Blogs – as far as I know. It was there last time I looked.
I could have been in theology blogs too – but I turned it down, because I’m neither a theologian, nor do I have a theology degree. I don’t want to profess to be something I’m not. I’m not saying you shouldn’t be – I’m saying I’m not, because I’m no theologian – and why I said pastors should be doing the questions, not me.
My point was – why *don’t* we need theology – in meme form, or not? That’s what I don’t get.
I am sick to death of reading Christian blogs that never talk about Christ. I can’t even post anymore, without getting immensely frustrated at what all I just can’t seem to get anyone involved in.
I’m sure you haven’t. I don’t do them all that often – if ever. That’s my point. Most memes are completely retarded.
Cool. Whatever. I’m not all that hot on the Mind & Media concept. I don’t like people making money off me for the price of a book. That’s a bit below minimum wage đ
I never said you were a flunky. If you were, you’d be a bit more sycophantic, wouldn’t you, now? I blog what I want to blog, too. If I owned your blog, I could tell you what to write. I don’t, so I can’t – and I wouldn’t, anyway.
Yes, you’ve supported me – as I’ve supported you, many times in the past. That doesn’t mean I agree with you, nor do I have to. Whenever I come up with something new, you always say “do we need this.” Fine. I really don’t care about that. I just don’t get why.
As for hurting… really, I’m sorry it hurts you. But, really, we’re talking ideas, here, not personal attacks. I think that you’re not getting where I’m coming from – and it’s hard to gauge intent from text. I’m *very* frustrated about a lot of things right now. You aren’t even on my frustration radar, Catez. I’m not upset with you – and I think you think I am. I’m not.
I said “our”, incidentally. As a statement concerning the play a post about theology gets in comparison to the play a post about a Star Wars movie meme gets on Christian blogs. If you don’t think THAT is shallow – there’s something wrong. Read what I wrote.
It’s not all about you đ
Mine, until someone other than me contributes regularly. I own the domain name, i pay for the hosting, and I’m the only one who posts, even though there are 9 other users with posting privileges. Nine.
You’re a special case, as I’ve said. Still, unless someone wants to actually DO something on Vox – it’s mine. Answer your question?
Well, that’s why I said Vox was “something different”.
So why bother having a Symposium, if there’s not even a topic? You’re asking for a Carnival – and this isn’t one. Who’s going to organize it? Who’s going to post it? I can’t even get someone to collect a couple posts a week.
I mean, really. Everyone is SO jumping to get involved with this – as long as it means traffic to their blog. If it’s to a blog that doesn’t get them the preening comments, and the attention – why should they bother? It’s all about bringing traffic, for a Carnival. That’s why I moved it to it’s own domain. I don’t want the “I want to host, so I can get traffic for my blog” crap. Cynical? You betcha.
Eh… is it *really* that hard to read Latin? Seeing as it’s the root language for just bout every western tongue? It’s not hard to figure out Librarium means “Library”. Anyone who’s into apologetics knows what apologia is. It’s not like I picked hard words, or anything.
Sword… of the spirit. And stuff. Latin was spoken by both men and women, for a long time. What, is an ancient language sexist or something? I was under the impression it was just a “scholar’s tongue”. I don’t know why that has anything to do with the sex of the reader. It’s not like it’s as dark as my site. I made it a lot lighter for that very reason.
And really.. who else is gonna design it đ
Well, send ’em on, then. I wasn’t *really* out of commission. Just freaking annoyed at the lack of interest shown (not you – I guess I should qualify that). My frustration is due to the fact that if I don’t do Vox, and promote it, and type it all out – it doesn’t get done, and it doesn’t get done in such a way that it is consistent, and nicely formatted. I don’t like link soup, and I don’t like a bunch of text-only nonsense.
I want something that looks as if we actually, you know, cared about what we’re talking about.
Actually, Cadre Comments was around waaaaay before Daniel did his. Actually, noone but me has posted to Vox in quite, quite, a while. Tim posted twice, Jeff Downs twice, and Phil once. Everything else was mine. Every Vox, every link added, etc, etc.
So, if anyone is posting, on any other apologetics group blog – that’s more than Vox. Which I’m fine with. Vox is an *aggregator* of apologetics, and not really an independent content blog. It’s purpose is to point to YOU. But, noone but ME wants to point. I don’t have the time to run two blogs, build others, AND move my girlfriend into her house, AND job hunt. I don’t have the time.
It’s not about me ripping into you. It’s about me being frustrated – and there’s really nothing you can do about that. it’s just how it is.
I suppose. I should just drop the whole freaking bit. I don’t why I keep Vox up. Well, it’s not like it’s wasting bandwidth. I mean, I get a sum total of 60 visitors a day here – and *7* at Vox.
67 visitors a day – 2 gigabytes of bandwidth a month. I think I can handle it.
I guess. No, YOU have generated a lot of good posts, and discussion – which would have gone on whether Stacy Harp, or whoever, sent you free books. It just would have been different books, perhaps.
Oh, wait…
What was it you were saying about theomemes earlier? I was waiting for you to draw the parallel. That was why i said that – because i knew it would draw a response.
You do know what Mind and Media is doing, right? Creating a meme out of book reviews. In all seriousness – I don’t see anything wrong with that. I was waiting for the parallel to be drawn. You have a habit, Catez, of criticizing anything new, and saying “do we need that”.
Do we need to review books for Mind and Media? It’s the same principle – and I don’t see why you would be opposed to that, either. I’m not a Mind & Media reviewer for one reason – i don’t have time. But I made that comment for one simple reason – to get your defense of Mind and Media, and it’s meme tactics. Which I admire, incidentally. it’s a form of pyromarketing.
Exactly. So why is an either/or about my meme – but not yours?
Rebel! Shoulda kept the green hair. Just kidding. Whether blogging falls into that category is something else – but I think you saying “do we need this” is just as much a “should” as any you think I’m directing. And from a blogger with your traffic weight – it means much, much more.
I’m not, actually. Don’t let the rocker theme fool you. I’m actually extremely conservative, in many ways. I think there definitely are “shoulds”.
You do realize a comment like that on your blog would effectively kill this idea, right? I see your traffic, compared to mine. That’s the power of a high-traffic blog. In fact, the fact that you commented on this will affect others, too.
I guess. I think the memes are stupid, just the same.
No, you were right – it’s mine, until someone wants to do something on it. I mean that, very seriously. I pay for it, it was my idea, and noone’s done a whole lot on it except for me. So, until someone steps up and takes on at least a part of the load – it’s mine. I keep asking for it, and noone wants to. So, whatever.
If someone wants to take equal responsibility, and equal time in creating and maintaining content, they’re welcome to it. Until then – heck yeah it’s mine.
I don’t delete my own comments, even if they make me look bad. You responded. I don’t delete content that has been added to my site, unless it violates my commenting policies.
Sure. It’s when you go to someone else’s blog and say “do we really need that”? That it totally undercuts the argument you just made. You like to tell me “blog what you want” – but then you, a much-higher-traffic blogger than I, comes in, and comments saying “do we really need this?” “I guess someone might be interested, I suppose”, “It’s about getting prominent bloggers to post on theology”, and “I wouldn’t want to”.
Hello, welcome to “smackdown”. It smacks – if you’ll excuse the pun – of a distinct lack of support. It misrepresents what it is, as a way to get “prominent bloggers to post on theology”, it says, no less than 3 times, that you don’t like it, and wouldn’t do it, and further, discourages anyone from doing, by saying “we don’t need it.”
I know, and thank you – but that doesn’t mean we can’t disagree.
God bless you too.
Comment by Catez on July 4, 2005 at 7:58 pm
Joshua this is way out of proportion. I originally just left my first impressions in a short comment. It wasn’t intended as a “smackdown” and I honestly thought that some people will get into your idea and do it. I noticed Adrian Warnock was very keen. I just responded quickly – you did ask for upsides and pitfalls (or something like that) . Admittedly I was too brief and I could have explained more but after your response decided not too.
I don’t always say “why do we need this” – that’s unfair. I do want to say that I was not saying Vox is sexist – I was just thinking about the graphics/latin and wondering if it was a factor in the limited readership. If something isn’t working thn I look at the different parts and think of possible reasons/changes. That’s all.
I am not “opposed” to your idea. Let me expalin again – I think those who really like it will get into it. The fact that it’s not really for me every week is not some huge influential statement – people will do what they want. If some-one doesn’t like Mind and Media it doesn’t stop others doing it.
I don’t think of myself as a “much higher traffic” blogger – I have no idea what your traffic is and I don’t make those comparisons. I just think of you as a blogging friend and we’re discussing something. I’m not sure why you’ve said that about me – it isn’t how we usually communicate.
I do often support new ideas and I think that particular criticism – that I “always say do we need this” is not true and not fair.
If it’s not about me then please don’t springboard off me because it then does become about me. It is not worth the possible discord in what has been a good blogging friendship. By that I mean I think the blogging friendship is very important. I don’t know what all your frustrations are – but if they stop you posting then maybe let some things go? In saying that I don’t know what the things are so I’m not specifically thinking of anything but have found that when I get barriers to posting I usually need to put something aside – in my head or timewise. That may help – if it doesn’t, put it aside too.I wanted to help with Vox but perhaps this isn’t the right time for analysis.
Comment by Catez on July 4, 2005 at 10:15 pm
Joshua – having thought some more – I’ll leave sending the links for the moment. Some things aren’t sitting right for me just now and I want to pray before doing anything else.
Thanks.
Comment by RazorsKiss on July 5, 2005 at 2:44 am
Yeah, you’re right – it just struck me wrong for some reason, and I was already annoyed about something else. So.. yeah, I probably blew it out of proportion. I apologize.
Yeah, I know. Like I said, it struck me wrong, for some reason. The limitless perils of textual expression…
Yeah, you’re probably right. I was just remember a couple times you and I had discussed a new “plan” (I always have a new plan :D) and you had disagreed with me about it. i was painting over-broadly. i apologize again.
I really don’t think that’s it, personally. I think it’s more of the “niche” content, and the format, more than anything else – plus the fact that I duplicate most of what I do there, here. I need to wean my apologetics stuff off of this blog more.
I understand what you mean, now. The original comment just… struck me wrong. I can’t explain it very succinctly – all I can chalk it up to was a bad impression.
It was just a statement about the importance the higher traffic gives, in the relative weight of your commentary. I mean, neither of us are Joe Carter – but in terms of readership and “opinion-making”, you far, far outstrip me. That was pretty much the gist of it – not any sort of attack.
You’re right, you do often support new ideas. I apologized for that statement above.
Eh, I see what you mean – but I disagree slightly. When you are a higher-profile blogger (you are #150 on the TTLB, incidentally) your opinion carries more weight. Which means that this little exchange will likely end up hurting me, in the long run. Regardless of the outcome.
I know you’re a good friend – and I’m hotheaded sometimes. I really am sorry if I offended you. The response was partially about your response, and partially a stillborn rant about the relative merits of memes and common topics on nominally Christian blogs (not yours). I didn’t delineate the two, which caused problems. I didn’t see what you were saying in your comment, either. So, I suppose it’s a misunderstanding, mostly.
I dunno. It’s more of a pet peeve thing. My “blog time” is mostly limited to late-night sessions, when I’m already tired – and I’m usually just too tired by that time to do something where I really have to dig, and put the effort I usually do into actual, content-heavy posts.
So, since my time situation is that way – I’ve become more of a “service-oriented” blogger – and an ideas man, of sorts. Since I just don’t have time to post anything of meaningful substance, my bailiwick lately has been whati can do for others, and how I can try to improve both the apologetics community, and beyond. That’s something I can do in the snatches of time I’ve had of late – and something that has pretty much defined my blogging experience, lately.
When I come up with something that i think would be cool – I tend to set it up so that *others* can use it – since I don’t have time to do it myself. I think that’s why Vox has frustrated me so much. It’s meant to be a service for *others* to use, and set up in such a way that the time investment *really* is minimal. It’s not the sort of thing where one person “breaks trail” – it’s set up so a large group of people can combine their available free time, and talents, to better serve the apologetics community – and noone is using it.
That is what frustrates me.
I understand, Catez. I really do. I’ve pretty much dropped the weekly Symposium idea, for lack of interest. I might move it to monthly. The Theomeme thing is a replacement idea for the current Symposium format – which was why I probably came across so doggedly defensive about it. I’m pretty defensive about my pet projects – I always have been.
Basically, it has some of the same drawbacks as Vox does – but I’m trying to engineer out some of them.
First, lack of promotion.
In order for people to know it exists, it has to be promoted – or there really won’t be any posts submitted. Which means I had to do all the promotion.
Second, the format style limits the exposure.
I DO NOT want a Carnival-style thing to be the centerpiece. That is essentially what the Dies Apologia is supposed to be – a mini-carnival type link roundup.
Third, the narrow focus.
The Symposium is a targeted discusion of a single topic, in order to get at the issue from multiple angles, and multiple perspectives. It really shouldn’t be a weekly deal, the more I think about it. Give people a month to think it over, and you just might get better results.
Fourth, the “startup” factor.
When something is not already well-established, you have to work – like hounds are nipping at your heels – to establish it. I was counting on the fact that the workload could be shared among a bunch of people to make it over the time constraint/work level problem. It didn’t work out as planned.
I posted like a madman to get this blog noticed – and, as soon as I did, i started branching out, to make a ministry that wasn’t going to take over my blog. Well, instead of helping me by regaining my blog, and helping you all by providing you with everything I was doing here – I just killed both. This aggravates me. Compound that with a *severe* time management predicament, and you have a recipe for annoyance. Which is where some of this is likely coming from.
I’m trying to be “all things to all” – and it’s not working well.
So, Vox needs to be retooled, and revised, and staffed – or, I need to go in a totally different direction. Only time will tell which ends up as Vox’s role. It’s got way more features, and way more flashy stuff available than this blog does. I just can’t use it as I’d like, since I don’t have the time.
That blog has SO much potential – and it’s lying fallow, for a plethora of reasons – and it really, really grates on me, every time I look at it. That’s where my frustration is coming from. I want to help, and I want it to be *helpful*, and I need to feel liek I’ve accomplished something. It just doesn’t look that way to me, as I’m sitting here. I’m just not the type to “let it go”. I keep tweaking until it works.
I’ve done it with my blog here over the past few months, visually – and I’ve got it to where I want it. It’s essentially “perfected”.
Now, since I don’t feel guilty anymore about neglecting my own blog, I’m back in “idea mode” for Vox. I suspended it after 3 straight weeks of minimal submissions – and I’m retooling it for something… I’m experimenting with what it should be. I’ll keep adding features, and tweaking them, until we find a combination that works.
That’s what I do. I come up with ideas, float them, and see what i can see. If that doesn’t work, I try another one. I’ll keep trying until I find one that does.
*shrug*
I’m frustrated, but not despondent or anything. I’m sorry i took it out on you. I took what you said the wrong way, it seems.
I just want this to WORK.
Comment by Catez on July 5, 2005 at 6:31 am
Hi Joshua,
I’m ok with all that except this:
“When you are a higher-profile blogger (you are #150 on the TTLB, incidentally) your opinion carries more weight”
No brother – it’s just a number. I think too much stock can be put in the TTLB thing. There is no reason for an exchange between two friends to end up hurting you. It is not about who has a higher number, and when you keep referring to that I feel Like I’ve been a bit backhanded somehow. I do think you are too focused on my blog (which is not what this is about). We’ve had a discussion on your blog and worked through some things. So let’s leave it on a good note. People have commented that they’d like to do the theomeme and I suggest working with those who want to run with it right now. I have to go in a minute – so this is brief. God bless.
Comment by Catez on July 5, 2005 at 6:36 am
Well almost brief. My suggestion – and it is just a suggestion – is that you take the part of your comment explaining the theomeme – the numbered points part – and post that in another post. Pull it out of this thread which diverged somewhat and post it by itself – which separates the thememe idea from a rather long discussion. That’s my thought before I fly.