please empty your brain below
tut tut.
I didn't choose any of them deliberately, honest.
I suspect that you do to. Only I wouldn't dare say so, now would I?
Excellent categorising Mr G.
I know that 10 is a nice round (well round with a straight thing to one side) number, but think you missed a category ... Blogging mums. I keep finding them when I go searching randomly!!! think they are deffo a sub group on their own. Thank god mine cant switch on a video recorder let alone use a keyboard!! oh god imagine if you were random searching and found your mum's blog. *brick swigs drink and breathes deeply*
In the interests of filial piety (and guilt cos I havent rung mine this week) Im gonna start collecting Mummies that Blog
I do have a blog that would qualify under 7:
http://mediagora.blogspot.com
I think you need a new category for my other recent blog,
http://ragingcow.blogspot.com
And http://gonzoengaged.blogspot.com started out as a 7 and has gradually morphed into a category all its own.
Oh, and yours looks like a 3 to me.
Sorry Kevin, I did notice that your epeus blog wasn't 100\\% computer-oriented (maybe only 90\\%) but it was by far the most techy of the twenty random blogs I clicked on so it went in category 2. I missed your other three blogs, perhaps not surprisingly given my sample size.
I can sense two impending morals to be learnt here, the first being don't try to shoehorn other people into narrow categories when life is far more complex than that and the second being remember that many bloggers, especially those in category 2, have stats tracking on their pages so they're very likely going to discover that they've been linked to, visit my page, disagree with being shoehorned and then post a rebuttal in my comments boxes.
Still, if you want to stick me in category 3, that's your prerogative. Probably means you won't come back to read this reply, I guess...
I'll start you off:
1. One time visitors who say things they'd never say to you in real life (the danger of all e-communication).
2. Weirdoes.
3. Genuinely amusing.
4. Genuinely annoying.
5. Genuinely thought-provoking.
No, scrap all that, yours will be much better, I'm sure.
)This is good too
http://www.antibloggies.com/
Shuffles papers and announces to office that it's time for lunch.
Otherwise you've got me pretty much bang to rights...
I wouldn't get too het up about a few misery guts complaining about this post. I think it's pretty insightful. But then, you didn't accuse my weblog of being a 3. Yet. :o)
You mischaracterized blog [#7], it is not evangelical but theological, and I don't give a whit whether anyone agrees with my positions. I am not, as you wrote, "keen to convince you to share [my] particular interest."
But that doesn't mean they'd not be overjoyously happy if you did 'convert', whether its religious or not (cf. my Man Utd posts, which has probably alienated half the people who read this).
Perhaps 'convince' and 'evangelising' are too strong (I dunno, maybe you were being deliberately miffy?), and there are more non-religious preachers out there than religious, so perhaps your example was a bit atypical, but the type of blog is still valid.
I'll get off my high horse then.
p.s. I'm not normally like this, Elaine will tell you. Sorry, but she started me off...
First I listed the ten categories, then I looked at twenty random blogs to see if I could find one of each.
Sorry David, but in the twenty blogs I looked at, yours was the closest to #7. Not spot on admittedly, but definitely the closest.
I'm quite happy to agree that there's an ocean of difference between "evangelical" and "theological". However, all my comments about Category #7 were written before I found your blog, not adapted to fit what I saw afterwards.
I'm sure Mrs Merton never used to heat her debates like this.
didn't she used to be Sister Mary Immaculate?
Other than, heat water and bathe in the consequences
Interesting list. Frankly, I'm surprised anyone found mine... (G) Blog on!
TridentScan | Privacy Policy