I must be missing something here. Weblogs are definitely
NOT professional-for-profit endeavors, right? So exactly
what does this imply?
IMHO it means everything you post has a personal slant.
Code of conduct? None needed. Okay, since this weblog is
part of dotnetweblogs.com you may have some rules, but
that's about it. If you want to plug your latest book,
software release or MP3 you have every right to.
Trust me, if you end up just talking sales pitches, the
traffic to your weblog will fall off dramatically.
I subscibed to your RSS feed weeks ago and will continue
to. I read Joel's too. WHen you posted about his last
rant I basically skipped over it because I already knew
about it. Just like any other reader is able to.
Keep blogging like you have been. You're doing a great
job.
Hey Dave.
Thanks for the positive feedback :).
However, I still think there should be such a thing as
an code of conduct , even an unspoken one (Which I think
most of us adhere to anyway).
I know that when I read (developer) blogs I like to know
that they are "authentic" and without
hidden agendas.
I want it all on the table. If i ever discover that
someone is "working" me about
something I'm reading, I'll never go back.
A good example would be those semi-news articles in the
papers that are actually ads that look like articles.
You really have to look closely to find out if what
you're reading is legit. That toally annoys me.
I don't want that happening to me in BlogLand.
I agree with most of what you're saying, Roy, and I
think you've got a great site that usually adds a ton of
value to my reading for the day. Dave makes an excellent
point as well that blogs by definition are a reflection
of your own ideas and opinions.
"I only recommend books I would buy myself,
hence I feel I lose no credibility when I get
commissions from books I refer to"
A statement like that, though, isn't in keeping with the
spirit of personal expression though. If you were
recommending a paper, application, MP3 or book that
you'd actually bought/read/used, and were offering
insight into its value and application that would be one
thing. If you haven't, though, then cross posting
something like Joel's recommendation isn't adding much
value to anyone other than changing the affiliate ID in
the link.
I realize I'm free to skip over it...but with the flurry
of posts recently about how to handle signal-to-noise in
arenas like this, I think it's something to try and keep
top of mind when making a fresh post.
Keep up the great work...and if the statement I quoted
was simply misstated and you have read the work then
feel free to ignore this mini-rant :)
I agree with Dave. Blogs are about people expressing
themselves and there's no way to formulate guidelines to
constrain such free expression.
What would composing a Code of Conduct accomplish? I'll
read the blogs I'm interested in because of the content,
not because of any particular association with a Code of
Conduct.
On the other hand, your desire to formulate such a Code
is a very legitimate aspect of your own personal
expression... ;) I'm sure, sooner or later, someone will
write one. And someone else will write another. And
someone will try to organize all bloggers into an
empire. And all of this will be part of the nature of
people expressing themselves...
...and it will all be fun to watch!
Putting affiliate links in your posts is kind of cheezy
if you ask me. I don't mind if you get a few bucks if I
like the book, but I would bypass it all together,
simply because of the potential for someone
misunderstanding my intentions. Remember, connotation is
just as important as denotation, if not more.
I agree with most things said here.
I have no problems putting affiliate codes on Amazon on
weblogs, and when making personal recommendations that's
more than fine. It's not like you're making a
significant amount of money even if a lot do buy it, and
more often than not it's just going to go to yet another
book you can review, in which case you're again helping
the community by providing another opinion before I/we
go out and buy it ourselves.
That being said - did you actually read Paper
Prototyping? :)
Tim: No I havn't read it, But as I said - I wouldn;t
have recommended it if I would not have wanted this book
on my bookshelf.
Still, I'm trying not to cross the thin line of
credibility here. Perhaps from now on I'll think more
before I put referrer links in a post. Maybe that will
even give more credibility to my book recommendations..?
I'm saying "perhaps" here because
maybe I won't be able to live up to my promise on this
one. If I see something I like, I feel a need to post
about it. And while I'm alaredy posting about an amazon
book, why not put a referrer link on it?
Oh well, My head is starting to spin about this whole
issue.
Maybe I shouldn;t be this concerend with what everyone
else thinks about me?
I find that almost impossible to do...
Roy, it sounds like you DO have an implicit code.
Believe me, it shines through. No need to be explicit
for just that reason. As you said yourself, if you feel
that hidden agenda shining through on someone's weblog
you - and many more like you - will simply never come
back. That is exactly the point of my initial comment.
Now, for me there is something implicit also. My lack of
a URL due to a lack of a weblog. What this results in is
my comment name lacks that 'link' flavor. DO I sometimes
wonder if that hurts me? That people wonder about my
hidden agenda? Certainly. Unfortunately I learned a
while back that I lack the discipline and subject focus
to really commit to a weblog. But you see, just like
you, I also am concerned with what everyone else thinks
of me!