Possible blog disclaimer Aug27 '07

If I was ever inclined to include a blog "disclaimer" here, or anywhere else, it would sound something like Chris Lott's recent post:

This is a blog. That fact means nothing. It is not a peer-reviewed journal, a final archive of my writing, a sponsored publication, (n)or the product of gatekeeping and editing.

... while the ideas and thoughts are often vital and the product of a long gestational period, the writing itself is not. It is essentially as it came from the keyboard: spontaneous, unproofed, unrevised, and corrected afterward only when necessary to address mistakes that grossly effect the intent. Where such changes have been made they are explicitly noted.

Opinions and characterizations of fact here are my own and represent no one else. ... In fact, it's quite possible that by the time you read the words here they won't even represent me. ... If I contradict myself, very well then, I contradict myself. ... Catching me in a contradiction is probably not the result of your steely grasp of logic and it's almost assuredly not a product of hypocrisy. I'm a human being and my blog reflects that humanity.

Could not have said it better.

I often get feedback correcting my unintentional use of contradictions, and I think to myself, "What does it matter? This is just a silly blog. This is not meant to be the 'final word' on anything. That was my 'sudden thought' at that particular moment in time. I'm well past that already."

Much like buying a car, as soon as a blog post is "posted live," it already begins aging (losing relevancy and value). I'm talking about the second it's posted - it's already old.

This is why I feel blog archives are useless. Pick ten of your most relevant, and keep them fresh. (I haven't yet solidified this idea, which is why I still have blog archives here.)

Categories: Blogging

Add Feedback (view all)