On my page, to the left hand side of the screen, you will note that I am a part of the Bibliobloggers community. I am happy to be recognized as such, and very much enjoy the rest of the community. I have learned a little from a lot of the community members, and a lot from a few. I am ranked in the top 50, which is excellent, but it is not the goal of this blog – just a perk.
But, some are unhappy with the ranking system – based on traffic.
James is dissatisfied that I don’t post more biblical studies posts (and wonders why I should even be in the top 50 since I blog more on other stuff) and yet can be considered the ‘top biblioblogger’ of the month. And Brandon laments the fact that the really good bibliobloggers aren’t at the top of the list simply because their very substantive and world changing paradigm shifting posts don’t get enough traffic whilst my lowly and insubstantial rot does.
I do try to maintain a certain rhythm in posting, trying to a wide range of posts in a narrow field. I hope that people find something that they like – even if the don’t like it all. I have my own interests, such as theology and doctrines, and I feel a certain need to sound the clarion call against those that would bring corruption into the Church and fleece people.
On Jim’s post, Those That Maintain the Biblioblogger website, made the following comment:
As some bibliobloggers and their avid readership have clearly recognized, the ranking of biblioblogs based on traffic is primarily a very lighthearted and fun competition intended to provide a little bit of enjoyment for bibliobloggers and their readers in this sometimes all-too-serious field of biblical studies. There is a serious aspect to the Top 50, but, surpisingly enough, it doesn’t involve ranking the top 50 biblioblogs. The Top 50 publicizes biblical studies blogging, makes people aware of the range of biblioblogs out there that they might be interested in reading and interacting with, and hopefully provides some sense of community. Those who imagine that the Top 50 is intended to provide a serious evaluation of the best biblioblogs out there should read the disclaimer in the last paragraph of the Technical Bits page, which has been there since October 2008. As has been pointed out by others, any attempt to evaluate the ‘best’ biblioblogs in qualitative terms each month would be a highly subjective and almost utterly useless endeavor. The Top 50 does not attempt it, and those who imagined we were should get a better grip on reality. We would have thought that there is something inherently and obviously humorous about attempting a ‘Top of the Pops’ ranking of blogs, given the usually fairly serious nature of biblical studies, and if you didn’t get the joke, well… the joke’s on you for treating it so seriously.
That is well said, and for my fellow bibliobloggers, if you simply don’t like the way it’s done, ask to be removed from consideration. Yes, it’s that simple.
June 25th, 2009 8:05 am
in the first sentence ‘not’ should be ‘note’. just fyi. otherwise- very funny stuff!!!!!
June 25th, 2009 9:54 am
Is the “not”/”note” confusion a Freudian slip, meaning you really withdraw yourself from contention? Just kidding . . .
See my comment on Jim’s blog. I think this whole discussion is a bit ridiculous. It’s a hobby, enjoy it. As for me, I’m just trying to crack the top 50–upward mobility is all I’m after.
June 25th, 2009 2:59 pm
Excellent observations.
June 25th, 2009 10:07 am
I agree with you, John. Frankly, if you are blogging just to make numbers, your intentions are less than respectable. Just posted something else on it as well.
June 25th, 2009 3:00 pm
Thanks, Peter.