I took this photo yesterday morning as we began our journey home from holiday. It was taken at the Wiveton Hall Cafe run by the Norfolk Tea Company, looking out over the marshes to the sea. And yes, I do drink tea, not least after already enjoying two double-shot black Americanos in a morning. Their tea is very good: some came home with us.
The place was fairly quiet (although I was recognised by one customer), and we had the chance to reflect on a few days off.
The lesson for me is that I do not need to try to do so much, and that some things can wait. In truth, most of what I do probably isn't quite as time-critical as I usually think it is. I could probably, in fact, sometimes take more time to advantage.
But there was an unresolved question. I have noticed that some of the more technical articles here, like the ones on myths and the glossary posts, attract fewer reads. I think they are important. Both Jacqueline and I also think the quantum posts (which we know do not excite everyone) are significant because, in the background, they are deeply informing my thinking on the politics of care and the economics of hope. But is there just too much variety here? Are there any priorities I should note?
So, might I ask a few questions? What matters most on this blog? You can answer as many times as you like.
Loading ...Comments
When commenting, please take note of this blog's comment policy, which is available here. Contravening this policy will result in comments being deleted before or after initial publication at the editor's sole discretion and without explanation being required or offered.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
Does it matter if people don’t engage so much with certain series? I know it would be nice for every piece of work you output to have a lot of (external) impact, and the metrics would look better, but…
The impression I get, from over a decade of reading your blog, is that you’ll create these pieces regardless of external feedback. That’s not a bad thing. As you’ve said yourself, many times, writing is how you process ideas. Some of that writing will, inevitably, miss the mark with many of your readers. Does that matter? Not really, in my opinion. You were going to do the writing – it’s part of your creative process – better that it’s out there and a few people might have lightbulb moments, than worry overly that it won’t get as much engagement as some other content.
The flip side to this, is that you can use the content that doesn’t land so well to inform you how to reframe topics for better engagement. If your output was low, then the argument would be for increasing focus. But your output is high. You can afford for bits and pieces to miss, despite the hit to the ego this may illicit from time to time 🙂
As always, thank you for your prodigious efforts! And keep up the good work!
Thanks
And even this comment will help inform a discussion here in 30 minutes time…
Personal preference: I don’t often watch your videos but would be lost without the transcripts. I’m used to reading stuff, and it’s so much easier to go back and check some detail in what you’d said.
Noted
Gotta kiss those frogs to find those princes! And other phrases to that effect…
🙂
A lot of your work enables me to engage in a more informed debate elsewhere. I can’t be the only one.
Different people will draw on different aspects and that is good. One tune bands have limited impact.
Agree with Johan above.
Thanks
I’m always amazed at the number and variety of posts you put out here and although – like many others – you are usually my first port of call every day, I might not read everything on the day you post it, especially if it requires a bit more brain power! (I haven’t read much of the quantum series yet, but definitely plan to) One of the many beauties of your blog is that I can come back when I have more time and headspace (work still interfering with that 🙂 to give them the attention they deserve, so I hope you will continue to post on anything and everything that you feel is important – I’ll get to it. To pinch a phrase – KUTGW!
Many thanks
Even if I only understand some small point in your technical pieces, they are still worthwhile reads. Your variety of posts is valuable. Keep them coming.
Thanks
I couldn’t engage with the ‘quantum’ series at all. I think that was because I did not understand what they were on about, primarily down to the language used. I have never understood why quantum mechanics uses the word quantum. Similarly with the ‘questions’ series I found them difficult to engage with when I didn’t know enough about the people involved. Both my responses there were strange as I have no problem engaging with many of your posts when I knew nothing about the subject matter to begin with. It may be that I knew I had difficulty with earlier posts in the series, so didn’t try. Perhaps if they had not been flagged as part of a series I may have tried each one and done better?
However, as someone else has said, does it matter if some posts have less engagement? There is still huge engagement anyway.
Noted, and thank you.