[ad_1]
A number of people commented, with consideration and concern, because I felt unable to post here on Wednesday this week, almost certainly because I had an adverse reaction to two vaccinations on Monday.
Leave aside, for a moment, the good news that this shows that my immune system is working as it should, and let me focus on blogging instead.
John Warren said:
What are you doing, Richard? I didn’t expect that comment to appear, perhaps for days. I couldn’t do what you try to do. Take some rest. Go bird watching, if well enough. Take more time off. You will burn yourself out the way you are going.
Alan Peyton said:
Irrespective of jabs etc…..look at your workload & your work/life balance…the “life” bit needs addressing? – take nowt for granted…reduce your blog output to say 3 or 4 times per week concentrated on getting your ideas into the political domain…
Both viewpoints are interesting.
John’s is right. I have hardly taken a break since March. An invitation from a friend to go bird watching in the next week on the Norfolk coast and maybe some more local reserves arrived in my inbox almost simultaneously with my vaccination. I have decided to take a week off the day jobs. Trips out may fill my time instead. There will, for example, be no Taxing Wealth Report posts next week for this reason. Many of them take a lot of time to prepare. I will have a break from them, as I will also do from other work commitments.
But then there are the current affairs posts. This blog may be unusual in mixing these items, and I am not worried about that. The truth is that these smaller posts are often written or dictated in a few minutes (hence the typos), and I enjoy writing them.
These posts make me think about the day, what is happening, why that might be the case, and what, if anything, might be done about it. This is the almost perpetual narrative of my life. I explore that narrative in writing here. I find it hard not to do these posts because writing them lets me address an issue and then move on. It is almost a release to do them.
Nonetheless, is Alan Peyton right? Would I be better off posting on just one issue a day and push just a few themes somewhat harder?
The readership data suggests not. For example, important as I think it is, the work on taxing wealth is not promoting a lot of additional traffic. It is much more likely that something else is better read on any day. That is normally the case for my policy-related posts. But should I ignore that and the fact that on the days when I post more items, I tend to have significantly higher traffic on the site, with the multiple postings appearing to cross-fertilise interest in others?
I would value your opinions. So, some initial questions on the number of desirable blog posts. You can only pick one of these options:
Loading …Then, some questions on what blog posts you find most interesting:
Loading …And finally, some questions on how to decide whether a post is worth reading in the easiest possible way and some other blog-related questions. You can answer as many times as you like here, and it would be good if you did. Please note answering positively to each option means agreement whilst disagreement or no comment is signified by not answering:
Loading …If anything needs elaboration, please leave a comment.
Finally, thanks for reading. Despite what trolls suggest, no one on earth would write a blog if they wished for their ego to be flattered because that is certainly not what happens, as 17 years of experience have proved to me. A battering of the ego is what you actually get. I do, however, appreciate the fact that there are around 15,000 reads of this blog a day at present, and I do not take them for granted.
[ad_2]
Source link
