In earlier October 2003, I opened an account with Blogger, added my first post, and wondered if anyone would ever bother to read my fledgling blog.
Three years, 1,637 posts, and 45,462 comments later, I'm still asking that same question.
When I first began blogging, Technorati was tracking 1,158,452 blogs; today, they track 56.7 million. This exponential growth in blogs has made the question even more pressing. How do you get the attention of readers when you are one in 56.7 million?
It helps, of course, to have started ahead of the crowds. By most standards, I'm a relative old-timer in the blogosphere and have benefited immensely from my relative status as a “first-mover.” So for this third blogiversary I thought I would forgo boring you with the typical self-promoting fluff and instead offer what few kernels of practical wisdom I've been able to glean from this experience:
On the Mixed Blessing of Free Books – Within the first few months of blogging I made an astounding discovery: If you write stuff (even drivel), publishers will send you books to review. Write stuff; free books. For an avid reader like discovery a recipe for alchemy. At first I didn't even mind the fact that the books they were sending me were ones that I would never, ever have chosen to read. The fact that there even existed such a concept as “free books” seemed beyond my comprehension so I dutifully took what was offered. I soon realized, however, that “free books” weren't exactly free at all and that I would be paying for them with the only currency that ever really matters: Time.
Soon I became much more discerning about the books I agreed to review when I realized that the publishers or authors actually expected you to review them. If you haven't written a book review since 12th grade English class, you probably forget just how difficult it can be. Add to that the guilt that piles up alongside the 27 review copies stacked in the corner and you realize that buying your own books isn's so bad after all.
[Note to authors: I may be slow, but I'm also honest. I took each book with the agreement to read and review it and I vow to do just that. Starting next week I plan to start cranking out reviews that are long, long overdue.]
On Guilt: The longer I blog the guiltier I feel. I feel guilty about receiving books that I haven't reviewed. I feel guilty about the comments that I don't take the time to answer. I feel guilty about the email from readers that languishes in my inbox. I feel guilty about the time I waste blogging instead of spending time on more productive activities. I feel guilty about not spending enough time blogging because I'm spending time on unproductive activities. I feel guilty when I blog about trivial current events. I feel guilty when I blog obscure topics. I feel guilty about not linking to other blogs enough. I feel guilty about not promoting other bloggers. The guilt shifts around but it never goes away.
On Impact: On two different occasions I've had the honor of being on BBC Radio. Each time I spoke to an audience of millions and each time within ten minutes of my interview few of those people would have been able to tell you who I was or what I had said. Having a large audience, I now realize, doesn't mean you'll have a large impact. I'm not saying that would turn down an opportunity to be on the radio. But I prefer to speak to a dozen people who were truly listening than to thousands who were simply trapped during drivetime.
On Newspapers (part 1) -- The first time I was interviewed about my blog by a newspaper was for an article in The Fort-Worth Star-Telegram. The reporter and I talked for nearly two hours, discussing everything from the economics of blogging to the future role of Godblogs in the church. I had rehearsed a half-dozen sound bites that would look good in print and delivered them flawlessly. I was thrilled to see that the story had made the front page (bottom corner) and bought several copies to show to my friends and family. I read through the article and found myself mentioned in the last paragraph. The only quote they used was an off the cuff remark I had made in a moment of candor: "My wife hates that I blog." My wife read it and snickered. No one else ever mentioned the article. Newspaper coverage is overrated.
On Newspapers (part 2) -- This past March my blog was mentioned in The New York Times. From this experience I gleaned the following six insights: (1) No matter how many times a blogger trashes the Times, they are excited to see their blog mentioned in the Old Gray Lady. (2) The most respected newspaper in the world still manages to get basic facts wrong. (3) No one actually reads the NYT unless their name is mentioned in an article. (4) Being mentioned in the NYT will not increase your site traffic. (5) Being mentioned in the NYT does not impress as many people as you might think. (6) Getting a two paragraph mention in the New York Times is not as significant for your blog as being recognized with a link and a one word response by Glen Reynolds.
On Instalaunches – I've been linked by Glen Reynolds exactly once. Being mentioned on Instapundit will not increase your site traffic for more than a few hours, nor does being mentioned on Instapundit impress as many people as you might think. Also, repeatedly using the terms Glen Reynolds and Instapundit does not significantly increase the chances of an Instalaunche. Glenn Reynolds, the pundit of Instapundit, is not swayed by such sophomoric attempts to gain his attention.
On Comments: Bloggers crave feedback which is why we love comments. Yet just as with most other areas of blogging, there is not correlation between numbers and quality. In fact, the more comments you have on a post, the less likely it is that the commenters are writing about what you wrote. After the first 20 comments on my blog, they cease to be about my post at all and are more about engaging the other commenters. And if a post has more than 100+ comments the last fifty will be nothing more than the rantings of a 2-3 people talking to each other.
On Trolls: One of the most essential rules of blogging is “Don't feed the trolls.” This is also the least applied rule in blogging. Everyone talks about ignoring them, yet no one can resist their annoying allure. Don't waste too much time trying to fight it. After a few years, most of them grow bored and leave on their own.
On the TTLB Ecosystem -- I spent a year attempting to rise to the level of Mortal Human in the TTLB Ecosystem. Traversing the stages from Insignificant Microbes to Flippery Fish to Large Mammal, I checked the page daily and longed for the glorious age when I would reach the upper echelons. Currently I'm ranked at #25. From this lofty perch I can now share with you what such an honor means:
Absolutely nothing.
No, actually, that's not quite true. What it means is that lots and lots of people link to my blog. I'm flattered beyond words that so many people would consider me worthy of inclusion on their blogrolls. I'm not sure why they do so, but I appreciate it nonetheless.
But aside from instilling a sense of gratitude, being a Mortal Human has no effect on my life. It hasn't increased my site traffic. It hasn't increased my ad revenue. It hasn't made my blog more popular, or more interesting, or more worthy. In fact, it's much like getting to the end of a game of Monopoly. You realize the thrill was in the striving and the acquiring and once you have a big pile of (fake) money and nothing to do but collect rents, it's not so much fun anymore
On Writing: You think trying to slog through my book-length post is painful? Try writing them. The writing part never gets easier. Fortunately, it doesn't get harder either.
On Quality: I suspect that most people who read my blog regularly find my posts to be wildly inconsistent, finding every third or fourth (or perhaps ninth or tenth) as being above-average and worthy of attention. I don't think this is an unreasonable expectation. After all, a baseball player who has a batting average of .400 -- 4 hits for every 10 times at bat - is considered to be an exceptional hitter. Similarly, a blogger who writes daily and has 4 quality posts out of every 10 entries could also be considered to be doing rather well. Of course, I'm nowhere near blogging .400. I'm in a bit of a lull and my average has dropped to about .220. But averaged over the past three years I do think I've managed to stay above the blogging equivalent of the Mendoza Line.
On Self-Plagiarism: Never steal someone else's work and try to pass it off as your own. But there is nothing wrong with plagiarizing yourself. Most writing is full of trite clichés so there's no need to reinvent the wheel. If you've written something clever, profound, or simply usable, feel free to utilize material you've already written. Chances are that no one read it the first time anyway. (Note: At least a third of this post was cribbed from earlier work. When it comes to recycling material, I definitely practice what I preach.)
On Ambition: If I were to be so bold as to confess my most grand dream, I would admit that I aspire to be a Malcolm Gladwell-style public intellectual. Unfortunately, my dream is hindered by a realistic awareness of my limitations. For starters, while I have a passable intellect, I'm not an intellectual. My CV is only noteworthy for being completely lacking in advanced degrees, publications, tenured posts, and other relevant credentials. My writing ability, while suitably workmanlike, is also more befitting a copywriter than a rising media guru. I am, in other words, completely unsuited to my ambition.
Ordinarily this would be the end of the story. Blogging, though, opens doors that would otherwise be closed to my ambitions. Just as talent-impaired vocalists find solace in singing karaoke, I've been able to find comfort in the pleasures of blogging. I'm able to write about ideas that interest me. I have the opportunity to engage with first-rate thinkers. And, on rare occasions, I'm able to express my opinion in a venue that exceeds my own blog. I may not ever become a public intellectual. But at least blogging allows me to pretend.
On Networking: Three years ago my network of friends and acquaintances included my neighbors, high school buddies, and my fellow Marines. Now, I have regular contact with pastors, professors, lawyers, doctors, journalists, engineers, editors, stay-at-home parents, scientists, theologians. I've even landed my last two jobs because the people hiring had read my blog. The single greatest joy I've gained from this experience has been the people I've met. Everything else pales in comparison to the relationships I've developed because of blogging.
On Not Believing Your Own Press Clippings -- On the eve of New Year's Eve 2003, Hugh Hewitt made the following prediction for National Review Online:
The Evangelical Outpost and Powerline become the must-read blogs of '04.
Perhaps you've heard of Powerline, an obscure little blog that led the way in exposing Dan Rather and the Memogate story, gained the attention - and begrudged admiration - of the major media, and receives an average of 1 million hits a month. Oh, and it was named Blog of the Year by Time magazine. Okay, so Hugh looks like a genius with that pick. And the other one?
Um, not so much. In fact, his selection is reminiscent of another underachieving prediction.
In the 1984 NBA draft, the Houston Rockets took Hakeem Olajuwon with the first pick. The Portland Trailblazers, with the No. 2 selection chose a 7'1" Kentucky center named Sam Bowie. In making the choice they passed over Charles Barkley, John Stockton, and His Airness, Michael Jordan.
Bowie promptly developed bone chips in his left leg and missed most of his second season. Then, after playing in five games the following season, he snapped his right tibia. During his ten season career he earned an average of 10 points per game.
I am Sam Bowie.
The lesson: Don't let praise go to your head. Your blog is only as good as the work you produce.
Year one was when I learned that blogging was a craft and attempted to aquire the skills to be a decent blogger. Year two was my “golden age”, the time when I wrote my most thoughtful and interesting posts. Year three has been mixed, a mostly lackluster period interspersed with a few high points. For my fourth year I need to regain my footing and find a way to climb out of the quagmire of dull writing. I don't want to keep churning out a blog equivalent of Brenda Starr or Prince Valiant -- a feature that nobody reads but which somehow manages to live on in perpetuity.
I would appreciate any constructive criticism you might have. Deconstructive criticism, if you're in to that type of thing, is also welcome. Don't hold back. I can take it. My skin is as thick as my skull.
Feel free to leave a comment or email me at jpcarter[at]evangelicaloutpost.com.
1
Joe,
I wonder if blogs will turn out to be more like race horses or fine wines?
Jason Kranzusch
posted on 10.12.2006 2:08 AM2
I read both Hugh Hewitt and the Instapundit but I came to your site through Hugh.
Ive been reading both you and Powerline for quite some time though. Knowing now that you've only been up and running for three years makes me think that ive been here since close to the beginning, which is a bit of a shock to me. I thought for sure you've been up at least as long as Powerline.
Anyway, keep doing what you are doing, you're good at it and some of us out here really appreciate it. Perhaps we just do not say it often enough.
posted on 10.12.2006 4:49 AM3
Joe:
IMO, the most important criterion for evaluating the value or appropriateness of a blog is this:
Does God use it for building up others and bringing glory to Himself?
EO, like any other blog, does not do both all the time or either all the time. It does, however, do one or the other some of the time and both every once in awhile, and with enough frequency to make your efforts and our reading worthwhile.
I know you know this, but just to remind you: listen to the applause from heaven, not the fickle and ignorant applause down here.
_____________
And now, for something completely different . . .
I liked your analogy re karaoke. I've wondered at times if blogging were not simply an outlet for people not talented enough to write for the local newspaper, but your take is better: blogging is to skilled writing what karaoke is to opera.
In a way, blogging is like those stupid shows that create next month's "new star!" by having people squeal into a microphone for dull television viewers. It's like "Project Runway" for the fingers.
There maybe one or two legitimate writers/singers/models among us, but (sigh) not as many as we think. In fact, whenever I think about the number of talented writers who blog, I am always forced to subtract one: myself. Reality check.
posted on 10.12.2006 7:44 AM4
Hi Joe,
Great post. I'm coming towards the end of my second year of blogging, and I can say that almost none of what happened to you has happened to me!
Especially the free book thing - darn it!
I've been spending a lot of time lately wondering about why I'm doing this for an average of around 21 people a day or so, and planning on doing some new things for the blog at the sametime!
I think we all may have an illness called blogging!!
Keep up the good work, and believe it or not, you are an excellent example to the rest of us God bloggers out here!
Thanks!
posted on 10.12.2006 8:24 AM5
Joe, I came across your post via Andy Jackson's and kept coming back. I really started going through your blog and realized that you have found the cure for someone who has too much time on their hands. Obviously, the pendulum has swung. Anyway, I think the catagorical nature of you post i.e. CPR, Yak shaving, and (apparently) the recycling bin, is what makes your post different. The "drivel" in between is usually interesting enough to keep me from diving into my favorites button and/or falling face down on my key board, that's a rare trait in the blogosphere. Thanks
posted on 10.12.2006 8:44 AM6
Nice. And for the record, I don't read powerline.
I honestly think there is coming a shift in blog readership. As Seth Godin is want to say, small is the new big. Right now, the big names are the people who say controverial things on a morbidly regular basis. Inflamatory people with an air of intelligence. They will probably continue to be big names, like Wal-Mart is a big company. But while Powerline and Michelle Malkin may be at the top of "everyone's" list, numbers 2 and 3 will be people who don't post every day, but when they do, they say something they have actually thought about.
And if that isn't the trend, who cares? I certainly don't want to turn myself into a professional media mogul, slavering to the masses. I write because I want to write, because I find myself compelled to think, and thinking, I find that nobody is saying what I'm thinking better than I'm saying it to myself.
Perhaps I could indulge in saying the same things over and over again until I think of something new to add to my list of mantras, but why should I? I haven't got time for that.
Blogging isn't exactly a spiritual discipline, you know.
Also: Is it "instalaunch," as in "successful IPO," or "Instalanch," as in "oops, I yodeled on the wrong mountain"?
posted on 10.12.2006 10:07 AM7
You've gotten two new jobs in the last three years? That's pretty high turnover, even among programmers who are notoriously quick to move on.
I probably knew it. I've been reading you a while, but I read a bunch of other blogs and sometimes things that don't actually hit me just slide by.
I know who it is among the bloggers got a "sexual harassment" reporting, though, so I guess it's good when you don't make my memory threshhold.
Getting in early doesn't mean you get read. My blog will be 4 years old at Christmas. I have a much smaller audience.
I enoy your posts, btw.
posted on 10.12.2006 10:22 AM8
Re: On Guilt,
Are you sure you're not Catholic? ;-)
Good blog, imho, and while I do not always agree, I am usually engaged by something you say. And that is worthwhile.
posted on 10.12.2006 10:26 AM9
suspect that most people who read my blog regularly find my posts to be wildly inconsistent, finding every third or fourth (or perhaps ninth or tenth) as being above-average and worthy of attention.
If your posts follow a random distribution, 50% of them will be below average. If only a third or a fourth (let alone a tenth) actually are above average, that suggests they are very far above average in order to compensate for the overwhelmingly larger number of below-average posts they have to compensate for. (In statistics jargon, you have a heavily right-skewed distribution, in which a long tail of small numbers of high-quality posts balance out a large lump of low-quality posts - your quality mean is to the right of your median and modal values on a distribution chart.)
As for consistency, I think one of the strong points of your blog is the variety of features you pack into it. This means, of course, that each type of post you make is a lesser percentage of your overall posts, and so clunker posts of a given type stand out more as representatives of that type - but they are likely to be interesting to many people just because of what type they are, irrespective of their relative quality within their category. (For instance, I always find the "Yak Shaving" posts interesting even if a particular one is not my all-time favorite.)
Keep up the good work. I think you fully deserve a top-30 ranking and am not surprised to see it.
posted on 10.12.2006 10:44 AM10
Kierkegaard once said that the absolute mark of respect before God was a consciousness of one's own sins. I wonder if this is not true in all of life's endeavors. Your ruthlessly introspective review of of your blogging vocation was both fascinating and revealing. You are something more important than a public intellectual, you are an honest, thinking, humble Christian. Grace and peace
posted on 10.12.2006 11:50 AM11
I'm not sure exactly why I found this to be so funny, but you may have written what may be the single best line ever posted by a blogger:
I’m may not ever become a public intellectual.
I'm quite envious. If I had written it, I'd be using it as my blog's tagline. I'll just keep plugging away, though, and hope I come up with something almost as good.
posted on 10.12.2006 12:17 PM12
°°°°°°On Trolls: One of the most essential rules of blogging is “Don’t feed the trolls.” This is also the least applied rule in blogging. Everyone talks about ignoring them, yet no one can resist their annoying allure. Don’t waste too much time trying to fight it. After a few years, most of them grow bored and leave on their own.
Trolls are underrated resources for a blog. We tend to hit the emotional hot-buttons often more than the initial post by the blog author. This does keep people coming back to the blog again and again, if only to see what that nutzo will say next.
If you want to lose readers, be nice to them. Nice is boring. If you want them to keep coming back, insult them. It works.
And if you are lucky enough to have attracted the attention of trolls, we can do the insulting for you whilst you can pretend to be above the fray.
I'm a proud troll. I live under a bridge.
posted on 10.12.2006 1:18 PM13
Patrick,
I think it's O.K. to be rude if you're being funny and you don't really mean it. It's also O.K. if you're targeting someone who is being persistently rude himself and is stubbornly declining to be polite.
Otherwise, rudeness is disrespectful and just a lazy way to get attention to your points. The ends don't justify the means, and rudeness is self-defeating to the extent that people just start to tune you out.
So just shut-up, punk.
posted on 10.12.2006 1:41 PM14
Joe,
I am writing this to you in hopes of driving up my site traffic, moving up in the rankings and getting featured in the New York Times.
Just kidding.
If you are Sam Bowie, I am the kid he used to whoop up on in grade school. Still, after six months I can say blogging has been a joy and the best part is I can feel my brain growing a bit thanks to guys like Wade Burleson, Hugh Hewitt, and, actually, you.
When Geoff Baggett and I started our Mission M Possible blog (http://www.missionmpossible.blogspot.com) it was just to get students involved in church planting. I had no idea I would become part of an online community or that checking ten or twelve blogs (including yours) would become as integral to my morning as coffee (hard to imagine). Thanks for sharing your thoughts, yakish ideas, and links with us over the years. Here's to three more years, or thirty!
posted on 10.12.2006 1:58 PM15
Hi Joe,
You are a good man and a very thoughtful writer. I prefer a good man who is a thoughtful writer over a thoughtless intellectual any day. Thank you for sticking with it for three years. I hope you have many more good blogging years.
posted on 10.12.2006 2:07 PM16
Dangit, Rainman stole my line about you actually being Catholic with all that guilt you're carrying around.
You're dead on with your comments on blogs being mentioned in newspapers. My experience has been that it has little or no impact at all. Same goes for magazines. And books (if you count the things that Hugh Hewitt churns out every six months).
Just so you don't feel too sorry for yourself about not meeting expectations and all, I need to remind you of a prediction that a certain blogger made about a certain Minnesota based talk radio show being nationally syndicated. Ahem...
Congrats on three solid years Joe. Keep up the good work and don't let the guilt weigh on you. There are a lot worse things that you could be spending your time on the internet doing. At least that's what I've been told
posted on 10.12.2006 3:07 PM17
Patrick,I think it's O.K. to be rude if you're being funny and you don't really mean it. It's also O.K. if you're targeting someone who is being persistently rude himself and is stubbornly declining to be polite.
Otherwise, rudeness is disrespectful and just a lazy way to get attention to your points. The ends don't justify the means, and rudeness is self-defeating to the extent that people just start to tune you out.
So just shut-up, punk.
Say whatever you like; I still won't go out with you.
posted on 10.12.2006 4:50 PM18
Joe: Who needs anyone or anything to keep you humble when you've got yourself? keep it coming!!! In fact, you are an inspiration to me in that your blog is full of variety. I'm new at blogging and can't help being "varietous", so keep being my idol! thus spoke churchpundit!
posted on 10.12.2006 5:25 PM19
D--m it Patrick, you cut me to the quick :)
I'm actually happily married though, so the going-out would have had to have been Platonic.
posted on 10.12.2006 6:13 PM20
Well Happy 3rd Blogiversary! I just had mine recently too. I think of us old timers as veterans.
I enjoy your blog - it's challenging, informative, and sometimes very funny. What I'd expect from some-one who dresses like a flamboyant Mormon. I related to so much of what you said in this post. Guilt, oy vey! I wish I was as honest as you are about things like those, and feel guilty I'm not...
One of your posts that has always stood out to me was the one on the Kalaam Argument - that was excellent.
When I first read your blog I was too scared to comment. Now I don't feel that way but don't always have time to join the discussion - but I still come read the posts. Thanks for putting in the time.
posted on 10.12.2006 7:03 PM21
Joe, I have enjoyed the blog immensely over the years. It has become, to me at any rate, a must read blog. I enjoy your thoughtfulness and your humor. Keep up the great work!
posted on 10.12.2006 10:25 PM22
The Evangelical Outpost and Powerline become the must-read blogs of '04.
Yeah, that's how I found out about you. I was still wating for you to become as popular as Powerline until last year when I realized 2004 had been over for a while. :) Still, like you said last year you had great stuff. I always assumed that your quantity/quality was down this year because of moves/job changes etc. Blogging was a lower priority. Is that not true?
posted on 10.13.2006 1:36 AM23
Joe, I think you way underestimate yourself. Either that or you’ve set the bar way above what I can even conceive of (which may very well be true). But I want to say, relax, don’t worry...let your gifts manifest as they will.
Regarding recognition – those who deserve it don’t always get it. Recognition is a popularity game. Sure, there are “industry standards” (for judging achievement) but who decides those, anyway? Are they always based on the right kind of quality?
I read something yesterday (can’t remember where or I’d credit it) stating that ideas don’t make or change history; it’s the people who put them into action that do. Well...does this mean that the ones with ideas don’t contribute to history, or that only those who put their own ideas into action make history? (or history that matters, anyway)
I’m not saying that none of the “greats” deserve to be so, quite the opposite. But I also suspect that those who will turn out to be greatest in the kingdom of heaven won’t necessarily be those we might expect, or have even heard of...
Happy Blogiversary, btw, and congrats!
posted on 10.13.2006 9:59 AM24
Joe:
I've been blogging for more than four years now and have been the recipient of about six Instalanches. My posts have also been linked by such "heavier hitters" as Hugh Hewitt, Joe Gandelman, and Ann Althouse. The New York Times linked to my post on the 'Gospel of Judas.' (I've also been honored to have been linked by many of my fellow blog mortals.)
Still, my daily traffic averages about 300 hits a day at present. I've never been given a book because of my blogging. I guess some might what I call slog-blogging.
While I'm grateful for every bit of traffic I receive and for the opportunity to share Christ and some of my thoughts on contemporary life with people, our divergent experiences when it comes to developing an audience have led me to at least one conclusion, Joe: It helps to be good, something you are consistently; something I am some times.
Congratulations not only for three years of work, Joe. Congratulations also for the quality of that work. Even when I disagree with you, you're good.
Blessings in Christ,
Mark Daniels
25
After a few years, most of them grow bored and leave on their own.
But every now and again, I come back to say "hi." :)
posted on 10.13.2006 3:48 PM26
Joe,
I can relate to your quip about the Hewitt quote. Here is what you said about a certain book blogger:
Have you discovered Kevin Holtsberry's blog Collected Miscellany? No? Good. Because when Kevin rises to the status where everyone knows who he is – and, trust me, that will happen -- I want to be able to say, "I found him first!"
To be fair it wasn't really your fault, I just never lived up to the expectations.
I have since soured a great deal on blogging, but you are one of the few blogs I read on a regular basis. Keep up the good work.
posted on 10.13.2006 6:48 PM27
Joe: I can relate to your experience with Hugh Hewitt's prognostication. Here is what you said about a certain blogger:
Have you discovered Kevin Holtsberry's blog Collected Miscellany? No? Good. Because when Kevin rises to the status where everyone knows who he is – and, trust me, that will happen -- I want to be able to say, "I found him first!"
It was no fault of yours of course, I just never lived up to the expectations. :-)
posted on 10.13.2006 6:53 PM28
Joe: Happy 3rd Blogaversary. Three years is a real commitment.
I kept mine up for a year and made the Salon.com list top 10 all-time. So I knew I could blog with the best. But nobody came my way with a book deal and I'm paid to write, so a year's gratis labor was enough of an investment. In that you've stayed with it, and accomplished a measure of success, you are to be congratulated.
Where we differ is that I tried to make my blog a source of information and insight, and you've turned EO into a whirlpool of bizarre speculation based on notions of unfounded wish-fulfillment. The Yak Shaving bits are fun, though. You're good at those.
One last tip for ya, in response to this entry: Don't talk about yourself. As a blog author, remain behind the scenes. The blog should be about the reader. Give the visitor something they can take away. It isn't an ego-fest, it isn't your notoriety or fame or anything about you. It's the reader. It's always the reader.
posted on 10.13.2006 7:48 PM