The Finch Formerly Known As Gold

11 August 2003

Roll another one

It began, apparently, with this observation from Jeff "Alphecca" Soyer:

I've made it no secret here that I am a link whore and I am trying to "grow" Alphecca. If you are a blogger — please consider adding Alphecca to your blogroll and quickly emailing me so I can do the same for you. It keeps you in my "radar" and I really appreciate it. Don't be shy or stuck-up. All I want is to dominate the world...

But... BUT... If you're one of these silly people who have seperate blogrolls for folks such as, "Always read," "Sometimes read," and "Never read but I'll link to them anyway" then please know that I think that's tacky and especially if I'm appearing in the, "Only read when I'm totally fucking bored" category and I'm not likely to rush any support for you and your blog. If you don't like Alphecca, fine. I can deal with that. But please don't list me as some "also ran" with the implication that you don't give a hoot about me. Because that just insures that I probably won't give a hoot about you either.

I understand his impatience with weird blogroll divisions — I find some of them utterly incomprehensible — but some of them seem eminently justified. Spoons, for instance, divides his up into "Everyday", "Occasionals", and "The Other Side"; not all of us say so, but I suspect most of us have similar divisions in the back of our minds, if not coded into our templates. Of the hundred or so items on my blogroll, maybe twelve or fourteen get read every day, owing to the tedious necessity of having to earn a living, which requires the allocation of a finite (and sometimes, it seems, infinite) number of hours away from the Blogosphere™.

Still, I like my alphabetical arrangement, even if it's a lot more arbitrary than it seems: Dean's World is listed as "Dean", not as "Esmay", but Dr. Weevil duly shows up in the W's. It is indeed a pain in the neck to maintain, especially for someone who keeps changing the name of the blog. (Yes, Mr. Duck, I'm talking to you.) But so far, no one has complained about it, which must be reckoned a Good Thing.

And none of this really addresses Alphecca's subtext, which is "How do I get on the blogroll?" I have no hard-and-fast rules; I used to say "If I read you five times, the fifth time you go on," but there are lots of people I have read more than five times who haven't been added yet. Then there's the curious case of Acidman, whom I dropped when he announced he was going on hiatus — knowing Acidman, I'm sure it was actually a loatus — and forgot to reinstate when he returned.

Of course, if you want to get to the top of my blogroll, you might want to identify yourself as, say, Aardvark A. Aarhus.

Posted at 9:54 PM to Blogorrhea

TrackBack: 8:05 AM, 12 August 2003
» <checkmark> from blogoSFERICS
Tiger has changed his URL, and since he is, after all, a fellow user, I've moved his link into......[read more]

Yes, I always seem to be close to the bottom of the list under all the The Yada-Yada Whatever titled blogs, so maybe I will change my title to Aardvark*: Raggin' & Rantin'. Naw, it was hard enough to get everyone to change my URL on their blogs from to just so that I could comply with the ping requirements from MT that believed everyone should name their main page as index. Thanks for making the change here, C.G.

*Actually, Armadillo would get me higher up that Tiger.

Posted by: Tiger at 10:16 PM on 11 August 2003

Hm. Sounds like Mr. Alphecca would go on my blogroll division labelled "whiners." If I bothered with such divisions.

Posted by: Andrea Harris at 5:12 AM on 12 August 2003

I agree with Andrea. The whole thing seems so silly anyway, along with the hoopla lately over password-protected blogs. Why anyone would bother to categorize their reads in ANY manner other than possibly alphabetical seems to me to be juvenile...who cares if you read a certain blog "occasionally" as compared to "daily" the damn thing and be done with it. And this password-protected thing: I mean, getting a blog implies the entire universe will see it. Advertising on your blog that you are going to have one blog for personal, private issues and another one for announcing the weather forecast seems to defeat the very purpose you began a blog to begin with. And seems to me I'm seeing more private crap lately on the public blog anyway.

I don't know. Maybe I've been teaching junior high too long.

Posted by: vickie at 5:48 AM on 12 August 2003

The reason I categorize, Vickie, is for my own convenience. It makes it easier for me to find the blogs I read most frequently without having to hunt for them in a long list. This is expecially important for those of us who use blogrolling to shuffle our blogrolls so that recently updated blogs are at the top.

Posted by: Spoons at 6:34 AM on 12 August 2003

The only division I use now is "pings" and "doesn't ping." Anyone who's in "doesn't ping" and thinks they belong in "pings" should let me know.

And since I've decided to leave "pings" in order of most recent update, the pingers who update frequently earn in doing so a right to remain high on the list...

Posted by: McGehee at 6:57 AM on 12 August 2003

Spoons - now that I have gone to your site and read why you categorize as you do, meaning your "Other Side" refers to communist liberals, well, I humbly and publicly apologize to you. Makes complete sense to me now :)

Posted by: vickie at 6:59 AM on 12 August 2003

DailyPundit splits off California blogs into a separate section; otherwise, his division is "Blogs Hosted on Blogspot" versus "Blogs Generally Available", which says more about Blogspot than a whole fistful of postings.

Posted by: CGHill at 7:54 AM on 12 August 2003

My links are a random jumble (kind of like my brain). I don't know why I don't really categorize them (other than a seperate section for Oklahoma bloggers), and I really have no idea why I don't have them in alphabetical order.

Darn it, Charles... now I'm going to be obsessing over this all day.

Posted by: Cam at 7:56 AM on 12 August 2003