4 ms·
Committee editing of blog posts is not a way to go. Blogs are good because they have a distinct point of view and voice. Group editing would have the effect o
by Kaizyn 17y ago
Committee editing of blog posts is not a way to go. Blogs are good because they have a distinct point of view and voice. Group editing would have the effect of homogenizing the distinctive voices into something more bland like you find in wikipedia articles.
- yankeeracer73 17y agoI think the intent of the post was to have people review the post at an idea level, not to collaboratively write something.
- nate 17y agoYep, I wasn't imagining this as some kind of lets all get together and write a blog post kind of thing. Really just to get some comments on "does this make sense", "am i dangerously offending anyone here", etc. Just like Paul Graham's essays. Those are still very much his voice, even if his friends and colleagues submit their opinions to him on earlier drafts of it.
- skmurphy 17y agoI think the forum approach is also a good one for the purposes that you envision. I was also trying to suggest that collaborating more deeply also has benefits. It's also good practice for teamwork in startups where you often need to reach a working agreement on document content against a deadline.
- skmurphy 17y agoWikipedia strives for neutral point of view. You don't have to strive for that in a blog post. Try it with someone else who also feels the same passion or has a stake in the outcome and you may see a different effect. My experience has been that collaborative efforts have been helpful in improving structure, adding examples or references I hadn't thought of, strengthening explanations, and in general strengthening the effect or purpose I wrote for. This is distinct in many ways from improving technique, which is also important.