phil ringnalda

Deane’s almost apologetic reposting of a link ganked from Boing Boing, saying I try not to re-post from Boing Boing too much since most everyone who reads this blog also reads that one, reminded me of something that bothers me off and on: just because “everyone” reads a blog doesn’t mean I do, or she does, or your five most loyal readers do, much less that someone who would leave an interesting comment on your post will have already left it there.

I’m a contrary bastard, and I only read two or three things on almost any “Top 100” or “Top 500” list. Instead, I’m counting on you to read them, filter out the really interesting things, the ones that are interesting to us, and pass them along. (Yes, I know that you are counting on me to do the same, with other feeds, and I’m falling down on the job. So sue me, Firefox 1.5 is going to be a tiny bit better thanks to this hiatus.)

I wish I wasn’t too lazy to do the data crunching and pretty picture drawing, but I’m sure there’s a surprisingly unconnected graph hiding in our subscription data. I’m reasonably sure I’m the only connection between Leigh Dodds and Paul Kidd, but I suspect that there are a whole lot more single paths like that. At least in theory, if not in practice, I say “if it seems interesting, throw it up against your weblog wall, because you just don’t know what’s going to stick.”