Is a blog a blog if it doesn’t allow comments? And if it is then is it a blog worth reading?
What say you?
B”H
-
Review Theme of the Month
Booksellers
Feeling Philanthropic?
-
Recent Commentations
My Reading Habits
.On My Desk
Currently Reading
Recently Finished
1) No, it’s not a blog with no comments. It’s just, like, a website.
2) Yes, it is often a site worth reading: take, for instance, Peter Enns’ and Fleming Rutledge’s. It is truly a shame that no discussion can take place around some of their more thought-provoking pieces.
I agree with Esteban on 1 and 2.
I’m a bit less inclined to read blog though that doesn’t have comments unless they are a scholar who I’m particularly interested in (like Greg Boyd).
I also don’t care for comment moderation (beyond deleting flames) either censoring or when the moderator takes forever to approve comments; and people who take forever to respond to comments or who don’t respond at all.
But such is the internet I guess.
Bryan
I definitely agree with #1.
And probably #2 as well, although just out of spite I tend to not read “blogs” that don’t allow comments. James White’s is about the only one without comments that I do read.
Moderation doesn’t really bug me that much and I don’t usually go back and see what comments were left in response to mine. Truth be told, I comment on so many people’s posts that I forget which ones I commented on. WordPress has a nice little feature that keeps track of your comments on other WP blogs though… just another reason to make the move. ;)
There is this one gentleman who purports to be an apologist or in that vein who bent on exposing what he deems as “heresy”. If deletes comments he doesn’t agree with even if they were not character assassinations which he generally does on his blog even if his correct on some views.
I am weary of these types of blogs because if they profess to be Christian they themselves need to hold themselves accountable to the Body to be rebuked if they fall in error. Well, see for yourselves.
http://www.independentconservative.com
1. no it’s not a blog
2. and no it’s often not worth reading. (and deleting any opposing viewpoints is the same as having no comments at all)
Jason,
I checked that blog out — quite honestly, I couldn’t get past the most recent post and its comments. Lord knows I’m no Calvinist, but there’s much better ways to discuss Calvinism than that.
Julie,
Amen to that! :)
Well, if you use the technical definition of a “website where entries are commonly displayed in reverse chronological order”, then yes, it’s a blog.
But it’s not a blog worth reading.
Blog – a term which is shortened from web log, or diary.
So if you use that definition, then I guess such a site is, in fact, a blog. But … who cares? It’s the blog of a self-inflated ego and who wants to read that?
If it’s also a Christian blog, then the author may or may not be holding themselves accountable for their writing. Who knows who is behind the scenes working with the author … so I don’t have so much of a problem with that. I do wonder, though, about someone who wants to put their thoughts out there and not interact with anyone. Seems sorta narcissistic to me.
Jake,
Yeah, but who wants to get technical? ;)
Sonja,
Makes sense to me. :)
I agree Nick,
That’s the general feel I get when reading his posts. A lot of arrogance in the name of exposing false doctrine and “false prophets” as he calls them. I pray the Lord have mercy on him and us all who blasphemes His name in such a spirit of arrogance and high-mindedness.
I was at a blog today, and could not comment. It bugged me, but I’ll still go back because it has good information.
Not a real blog, and probably not worth reading. This is what I said a few months ago.
Peter,
I tend to agree with you and your point (along with Sonja’s above) is important. Not allowing comments is a way of not being held accountable for what we write.
Pingback: Defining and Defending the Blog