Jesus H. Christ, people.
1) My blogroll was/is over 200 blogs long. Some of you found it useful to find other bloggers and others find it difficult to navigate a list of links 200 blogs long with only names and no descriptions, which is why I
2) Regularly provide a list of links of notable blogs and posts that I find inspirational or thoughtful or notable in some way or another. I realize that some are interested in perusing my list of links, which is why I
3) Provided a link at the top of the page to my current reading list of blogs. Which remains around 200 blogs long.
4) Someone is convinced that my assertion that my dial-up connection impedes my blog reading enjoyment, including loading my own blog, is a load of crap. Right now on my free internet service, I am pushing about 51 Kbps. You try loading up a list like that several times a day, deciding to wander about the house or play Freecell until the damn thing has loaded. I could load this blog all to hell with bells and whistles that are fun and exciting for my readers, but I couldn’t enjoy it.
5) Several have accused me of deleting the blogroll because I am bitter that I’m not higher ranked. Sounds a lot like the criticism revolving around the Where Are The Women Bloggers? question, doesn’t it? One might also notice that in addition to removing the blogroll, I also removed the links to Technorati and TTLB. Gross oversight, no?
6) Frankly, I’m trying to convince myself to continue with blogging at all. I don’t care about the rankings, I care about the discussion, and questions of ethos aside, a static list of links doesn’t do much for discussion. How I ended up in the ranks that I did is baffling to me and sometimes, as in times like this, I wish I weren’t so highly ranked. Which is why I
7) Don’t mind being delinked.
But it seems instead that the accusations surrounding my removing the blogroll are in fact bitterness about rankings and visibility. Considering that I do my best to provide links and visibility on what I consider meritable or of interest to my general readership, and considering that I directed everyone to the link to my blogines account (all of which is public) at the top of the page, and considering that I regularly allow others to post on my blog, I think these feelings of anger directed at me are unfair.
Such silly drama.
My feelings on the discussion surrounding my blog and blogroll are perfectly summed up by the comments by Michelle of JMP at Krista’s blog.
She writes (here and here):
Why should other bloggers have the authority to place obligations on a blog owner of what they should do w/their space? Even in the name of “a cause.” Peer pressure and strong-arming in the blogosphere is not the way to retain contributors to a cause.
…Most people are too interested in being read to alienate themselves by removing the blogroll. While it’s obviously a helpful referential tool, if 95% of blogland is running a blogroll, those who choose to discontinue it shouldn’t be held culpable for the imagined breakdown of communication in the blogosphere.
Dorothea Salvo responds with my exact sentiments on the unseemly adoration of blogrolls:
I lost my blogroll some time ago (though like Lauren’s, it’s still sort-of available as a link to my public Bloglines subscriptions — and before you ask, all but my ego-searches are public). I did it because I had it made crystal-clear to me that blogrolls (and, more specifically, the act of removing someone from a blogroll) can exert a style of social control that I just don’t want any part of.
I’m not sure we should discuss the social positives of blogrolls without also discussing the social negatives.
Shelley has also responded to the criticism she has received since I revived the whole debate.
Anyhow, with the amount of protest I’ve received in removing the blogroll, including a comment left by Bitch Ph.D. at Roxanne’s and a thoughtful post by Pig at Epigraph, I will bring it back in some form or another.
But it will take time. I have to figure out a way to keep it useful for me as well. After all, this site is my endeavor.