please empty your brain below

I think it's also partly because blogs like yours, which are very popular, intimidate some commenters slightly.

And...actually, I've completely forgotten what my second point was going to be. I'll get back to you on that.

Yes I agree with Clair, that your blog can be intimidating. Though interesting and informative.You have to make people want to comment. It is all down to how you phrase your blog, ie appearing to ask a question.

I don't understand - I've moved to an RSS reader and I can see and make comments in exactly the same way as if it was a browser.

TC

The other 144 clearly think you are excellent or they would not be reading. Chin up old boy.

Ahem, for 'intimidating' you should realise that when you go off on one of your 'funnies' not everyone will appreciate it. Whilst for the majority of the time your post is really interesting, often with fab photos, curious links and reliable information - and written in great style, you do give in to the temptation to 'play' with your readers. Some people really don't like that - even though they like everything else. Some others, on the other hand, will be intrigued, want to play along etc etc.
I'd tell you more except I'm kneelling on the ground and I can't type very well down here.

I want to moan about all these pop stats again.

You haven't taken account of repeat visitors though have you? Some people will read from different computers/phones etc, so you couldn't if you wanted to.

dg writes: No I haven't, because I can't. But the proportion of repeat visits should at least be pretty much constant over time.

But your last para has it summed it. Blogging IS different these days. It is now entertainment, not community.

And I continue to say, if you want people to click through/have greater access/opportunity to comment, don't feed all of your posts to the RSS.

dg writes: I don't believe that partial RSS feeds 'work', because people very rarely click through to read the whole post. It doesn't pay to be over-protective, because readers start to pass you by.

I prefer "whole feeds", as I'm lazy and like all my blogging in one place. It has to be said, though, that I can comment on some blogs from within FeedReader (such as Gordon Mclean's, Meg Pickard's or, should I feel so inclined, my own) but HaloScan doesn't seem to be supported by FeedReader and I get nastiness. So I have to open up my browser, type in your URL and get to the right page before I can comment. Maybe you'd get more comments if you migrated to another comment system?

Your experience does reflect my own, though. Of course, I'd get more comments at my site if I posted content a little more often and preferably something more interesting than photos of soft toys.

Yes, I've strayed into feedreaderland. And if it means I'm less chatty than before, it also means I can read about five times the number of blogs that I read in 2003. We're still here, DG.

Web 1/2.0 ??

I knew you wouldn't let me down. Of course you had the stats...

I'm old school - no feed reader, all of my blogs get a personal visit from me, and a comment if I feel I can add something that either the blogger or his/her commenters haven't already. (Or I'm having a bad stats day and I'm desperately going round t'internet, drumming up business)

I must be missing something here... I don't see the point of having a blog that's updated daily, without fail, in my RSS feed. I just go to the damned site. Anna at littleredboat? RSS feed, as she's a bit spotty with the updates. DG? Just load up the bookmark in the morning.

I'm no statistician, but I'd say that 0\\% of your readers find your blog by going to www.diamondgeezer.com.

Blogs in general have fewer comments because the conversation gas moved elsewhere. FriendFeed is a great way to merge your multiple sources and let people comment on your blog posts, flickr pics, Twitter tweets, facebook updates all in one place. Very easy to set up if you think it might be of use for you. Off the top of my head (I'm at the airport and can't check easily) I think I'm www.friendfeed.com/bitful if you want to have a look.

You make an interesting point about passivity. I'd like to counter that perhaps as the number of blogs grows, and as the number of blogs people read grows, people feel less inclined to comment as they feel that their point of view has already been represented elsewhere.

Alternately, it could also be a symptom of troll fatigue. The feeling that there is no point making an intelligent observation because you'll be just drowned out by people arguing over trollish comments.

Or lastly, it could be that people are sick of feeding the egos of self important bloggers. I somehow doubt this last case is true. If flickr is anything to go by then then there seems to be an unlimited capacity for people to give hollow praise to those who seek it.

dg writes: No I haven't, because I can't. But the proportion of repeat visits should at least be pretty much constant over time.

I totally disagree. When there were fewer blogs, and no RSS feeds, people undoubtedly re-visited more frequently.

In four years of daily reading I've left about 3 comments. I'm that person in the corner listening to everyone else talking, interested in what they're saying, but not feeling like I have anything useful to add to the conversation. I feel a bit guilty for enjoying the efforts of others without giving anything in return. In the real world I bake for people but there's no equivalent in a comment box. Thanks DG for such an informative and entertaining blog.

Also because as we read and lurk more, we get a better feel for your style and are now probably less likely (than when we first joined) to spit on our hands and set to with the keyboard. We're more likley just to say (mentally at least) "Oh! dear, there he goes again. Banging on about poor BoJo. Can't be ar*ed to have yet another go at the bloke. After all it's his Blog, let him make a fool of himself, he's quite capable of doing that". At which point we blog off somewhere else or carry on reading it to the (bitter) end.



"When there were fewer blogs, and no RSS feeds, people undoubtedly re-visited more frequently."

Not necessarily. Before I used RSS I found it hard to keep track of blogs, and regularly missed posts. Now I never miss a single post of my favourite bloggers, so am a more, not less, regular reader. And I still click through and comment on things where I feel like saying something.

The other point is now that I read more blogs (thanks to RSS), I think my total commenting is about the same as before, but spread out across more blogs. So I'm not more passive, but it means fewer comments on each blog I read.

I almost never comment on non-wordpress blogs, they are just so much more of a pain to fill the boxes in for the URL and name, etc. Obviously I made an exception here to point that out!

When I read under 10 blogs a day, yeah, it was easy enough to just read them on a visit.. but, now its up to around 40, a reader is SO much easier for me.. Also, I use multiple computers (and no, I don't want to use google bookmarks *l*), so just popping to one site (handily linked from my email as I use google reader) to read them all is SO much easier.

If I feel I want to comment.. I click through. I just don't often want to comment!

Meanwhile, commenting (and other associated interactivity) on "new" Facebook is going through the roof. I'm not saying that's necessarily a good thing, but it's definitely a Thing. As Luca says, some of the conversations are moving elsewhere.

You're also quite right about RSS promoting passivity. Because of RSS, I follow more blogs than I used to - but I'm usually cramming so many in that I'm less likely to pause and click through.

And what devilish trickery are you up to with those diamondgeezer.com links, eh?

P.S. I strongly disagree with Bina. I love it when you go all weird...

Surely the way to maintain comments is to bring up porridge on a regular basis. Not literally obviously.

As a long time lurker my suggestions would be: a) lots of people like what they read on your blog and agree, so no need to comment (and as mentioned, you don't often shamelessly trawl for comments by asking questions); and b) have you considered that as blog readership expands, you're getting additional types of readers? In the old days it might have been the hardcore 'community' people who were there to interact - and they're probably still there. But a lot of the new readers will be (like me) less confident, shyer and more read-and-reflect types who are happy to absorb what's on offer without putting their oar in. If you had a way of assessing how much your blog is talked about or used by readers in daily life, you would probably get very high ratings - without you I wouldn't have spent the middle two weekends in September doing the Thames Festival and Open House for the last few years, and I wouldn't have visited/known about tons of fascinating places, let alone going about with a big smile on my face when the spoofs are on. So I don't think the silent readers are just here for 'entertainment' - you have a big impact on our lives DG, but like all the most important things, you just can't measure it that easily...

Here's one for you, DG. Some great pictures of Soho in the 50's and 60's at the Photographers Gallery on Great Newport Street. Highly recommended.
http://www.photonet.org.uk/index...ex.php?
pxid=944


Maybe in the early days of a blog, people like to get a word in, but if they are returning visitors there is less and less to say that they haven't already said in so many words. So the habitual readers may stop commenting. And that may apply across all blogs, so that people who have been reading blogs for years have less and less to say. With less and less newbies appearing, the number of eager commenters around diminishes. But the main thing is probably dilution by transfer to other forums, especially Facebook, MySpace and Bebo. Small clusters of people who used to read and comment on each others blogs, may now be in the friend lists on Facebook and so no longer posting "to the world" - which was always only theoretical, as only the same group ever read anything. People have become resigned to the fact that they will share messages with a select few people that they come into contact with online, in a more controlled way on Facebook (say). Not only that, but they may prefer to have this level of isolation, whereby people can be admitted into a lagoon where the climate is how we want it, and horrible sharks and other nasty surprises can be kept out.

I have to say I am intimidated by the comentator's themselves, especially when it's quite clear that they know each other. It feels a bit cliquey sometimes...plus I'm not clever or witty.

Well, I say!

If blog readers get too passive, it turns into TV.

Essentially that's the basic problem I think. People take the blogging for granted, forgetting that the medium works both ways with a feedback loop of comments.

But then some of my favorite bloggers continue their valiant blogging despite the fact that the often only recieve 1 comment every two weeks.

Ah, Mike, read my comment again. I did not express my personal opinion about DG's 'funnies' - just an observation. I observed scaryduck was a little put out by the green week, even bluewitch had a moment of doubt. Going 'funny/weird' does carry a certain amount of risk - DG should not care too much, it's his blog he can do what he likes with it.
Now not on my knees. Can type but not express ideas fluently. Too much lunch I think.

I agree with all of what Misspiggy said. And also Gina. There have been occasions when I've even gone right up to the point of spending time thinking and then typing up a comment and just about to hit the "publish" button, but then backed out at the last second and hit the "close window" button instead: and all because I felt that my comment wasn't as witty or as clever as previous ones. I've always been more confident about leaving a comment when I'm one of the first to do so in the morning, otherwise I often don't have anything to add.

I agree with Gina. I've been reading your blog for awhile and felt the need to comment (in a lighthearted manner) for the first time last week. Then someone else came along and questionned the intelligence of your readers/commenters. Once upon a time I would have told them where to go but now I don't care. It's a virtual world not a real world.

Personally I would be happy with the readership rather than the amount of people who comment.

I think that your Mayor of Londo post comments might have been truncated by Geof of Geofftec's brilliant post. After reading that I was laughing so hard that I couldn't have typed anything if I had wanted to.

I started reading this blog about four years ago upon the recommendation of someone who had found you through arseblog. At that time I used to catch up with you on Saturday mornings and read a week through. I rarely read the comments, and never commented. Gradually, as I became a more frequent reader, I started reading the comments as a matter of course. I found that your commenters frequently added to the discussion or provided further interesting links. I enjoyed the posts and the comments for at least two years before I felt that I had something to add. I think that diamondgeezer was only the second blog that I ever commented on (I read about ten individual blogs each week, down from a high of about twenty). The commenters have sent me off in many different and interesting directions. Clicking "homepage" has directed me to, amongst others, a little blue car, ambulance calls, London transport and(yes) kittens. Lots and lots of kittens. It was and is a fascinating journey.

Mike and F Moon have mentioned that facebook and the like may be taking over from some blogging, but they are aimed at a closed circle of friends rather than a global community. For what it's worth the facebook Diamond Geezer Readers Network group has been up for about fifteen months. In that time the membership has varied *clicks over* but currently sits at 45, some of whom I recognize by name as regular commenters here. There are over 70 discussion topics and about a dozen photos/videos up but the wall has only attracted 9 comments over that period -- likely because we all read you here.

You provide two methods of contacting yourself on your sidebar -- email and twitter. I'm curious whether people have increasingly over time chosen to converse with you directly rather than using the Haloscan comments to address the entire community?

I think you just wanted more comments for this post. .

DG - What about length of comments?

i.e. 30 people could all just jump on board by saying "Yes, I agree!", or "No, I don't" - but look at today's comments here... You've evoked quite a passionate debate about the pros and cons of comments. What would be fascinating (and beyond even your statistical powers, i'm sure) would have been to have had a word or character counts and see which post(s) generated most wordage.

Hell, I know that this is probably the longest non-smartass comment I've ever left on your site.

Like Jag I often write a comment, preview it and then decide that really it isn't worth publishing. I wonder how many comments you nearly get.

Unlike Jag it is often someone else's comment that prompts me to add mine which is why my comments often appear later in the day.

And of course there are the times I make a comment, realise myself the faux-pas I made or have it pointed out to me and really, really wish I hadn't have made it.

Following Pedantic....there's also the times when one sits at the computer staring into space with the comments box open thinking....thinking...thinking...Nah can't be arsed.

Hehe, yes Bina you're spot on, quite often I've been moved by a DG posting to excitedly open the comments box and speedily scroll right down to the bottom (skipping all the previous comments) ready to "empty my brain" in response to the posting - and then go completely blank! So glad that I'm not the only one to get "commenters block". It's more frustrating than staring at a blank Powerpoint slide at work!

(Hey: we're having a conversation in a comments box. Has today's posting evoked a little sense of community here? ... )

One last stab before I go out to my 12 steps meeting (Blog Commenters Anonymous).

No honest, I'm not addicted honest.

Stupid question if I may? How do you know how many people are reading via RSS Feeds? Thanks.

dg writes: I use Feedburner.

Wow DG, I didn't know you were a statistician! You ought to take a job in one of those firms which send out questionnaires and carry out surveys in the street. I'm sure they'd like you to sift through all the data they gather.

Seriously though, I think it's quite ironic that your blog has (slightly) more readers than it did in 2006, but gets fewer comments. Those people who use RSS clients to read your posts and don't bother coming to the main web page to comment really don't know what they're missing in these little comment boxes. I should know, as I was one of them until earlier this year, and now I'm a frequent commenter.

I wonder if, for the purposes of convienence, there's a way you can incorporate the comments link into the RSS feed? If you could, it would be interesting to see how many people who read the blog through RSS actually then comment, knowing that they won't have to go onto diamondgeezer.blogspot.com to do so.

Must add a comment to keep the numbers up !
Your figures re timings of comments is interesting as I am sure your late evening readers, like me ,don't comment as much as the early morning crew because:
- we are probably too late to join in any discussion
- someone else has already said what we are thinking
- we are too tired to react and so just enjoy the read!

What an interesting discussion you have initiated, DG. One thing I really like about the comments box is that we often have no clue as to the age or sex of the commenter, so whatever they say gets a fair hearing unencumbered by the baggage of our subconscious expectations regarding the opinions of men/women, youngsters/oldies.

I have been a reader for years, and used to comment quite often (not necessarily under the same name). I now read a wider selection of blogs, but on a weekly or fortnightly basis -- the only personal blogs in my feed reader are political ones.

I feel your modern posts offer less opportunities for making replies or for adding useful extra information. But it is hard to tell how much is a change in your writing and how much is a loss of feeling of "we are a small bunch of pioneers here helping each other". Obviously being only a weekend reader means that most comment threads are pretty well covered by the time I get there. (I do still comment in various other places.)

Why am I now a weekend reader? I guess pressure of work. But also some of the shine has worn off the concept of blog-style immediate writing. On the other hand the strength and value of the blogosphere has become more obvious.

As one of the (normally) 144,(I think this is about comment 4 in 5 years of readership!!) it comes down to a question posed by your last 2 posts. I'm one of the many on the other side of the world so my post will go up at about 2 am in London, so I am usually "too late" in the cycle to comment.Also I'm not one to post one of those " Oh yes very droll" type comments when you do your "funnies' as they have been called.
Still I like reading your blog and look forward to coming back to England on holidyas one of these years with my DG Tourist Guide printed out and ready!!

Oh Bugger! An hour out, one of us must be on Daylight Saving!

Wot Gina and MissPiggy said - also still rather unnerved about that satirical (I hope) post on advanced commenting skills earlier this year - I just keep thinking every time I comment, I'm probably level 1!

On a more serious note, the number of times I've written a quite detailed comment about some aspect of local interest you've posted about, and decided not to go ahead, because I realise that it's your blog, DG. If I've got that much to say, maybe I should email you or get my own blog (not likely). I only comment on your blog anyway and maybe one or two others. Plus I'm one of those people who likes to sit back and absorb the conversation - like today.

A post like this calls for a comment even if you have nothing to say ....

Though I read all the blogs I track via RSS but I do comment when I feel like, I agree for others it may not be the case, but I don't think that's the main issue. I believe in the past internet user/blog readers where more "early adopter" more willing to interact than others.

I'm hoping that as I start typing this comment something interesting will miraculously appear on the screen.... nope... but how could I not say something!

I purposively did not post on the day because I wanted to see what comments it provoked as I thought there would be more filtering in. My sentiments are those that Great Aunt Annie has written, even though regular posters perhaps reveal something of their personality, just as you do with your blog. But the magic is we don't really know you, the real you, or the other way round. Or the other posters.

I also think your comment box is like an iceberg as so many posts remain unwritten beneath the water. Whether that is because of passivity, intimidation or timing etc, you obviously provoke something in many peoples' thoughts whether you or we get to know about them.

With a post like that I had to leave some sort of comment. I agree with many of the comments above and I'm glad to hear I'm not the only one who types in a comment... and then abandons it.

I know DG has a hatred off RSS readers, so I try to make a point of coming to the blog from the RSS reader, but sadly I was busy the week of the green background adventure so I missed the garish colours.

Still, at least I read about it. If you relied on my coming to visit the page I might not have bothered going back through the older posts. But with the RSS reader they were all there acusingly unread.

I've been reading DG for many years and he never fails to produce something worth reading. I take my hat off to you DG.

I found your blog about a month ago when Dave Hill started his 'London Blog' on the 'Guardian' web-site. He advertised both this 'Diamond Geezer' site and your 'Grid London' gig; when when I checked out the latter, and it obviously led me nowhere I thought, "Tsk, typical Grauniad!" but was impressed with the Geezer site (despite the then dodgy colours...) and I now take a daily look at your page itself.

I have no real commenting philosophy. After I found commenting on newspaper blog-sites a total waste of time, I fell out of the habit of typing in my few pence onto a comments page. Having said that, I like the idea of responding but, being a fairly new blogger myself, it's a habit I've yet to re-develop. As above posters have mentioned - it will depend on the nature of your post: I enjoyed your notes on Rye and the castle, but have nothing constructive to add. This post, being more of a debate, prompted me to write-in. Either way, I wouldn't worry if I were you - you've clearly got a substantial readership and you write great stuff!











TridentScan | Privacy Policy