By Wag ‘n Bietjie
Broadly speaking I have great admiration for true bloggers with a talent for writing posts that engage the interest of internet users. I do not consider myself to be in this category as I derive much more satisfaction from reading well written posts across a fairly broad spectrum covering technology, poetry, travel, cuisine, photography and many other topics.
I opted to start blogging because of personal circumstance and a desire to focus on something constructive rather than fixating on events in my life that made me feel sad. Self pity is a negative state of mind and I rather choose to look at the positive side of life and experience the creative talents of the many wonderful people in the world.
I have been encouraged by other bloggers to post my own articles and on occasion I will share my thoughts on a topic or event. Primarily however I will be posting reblogs. Take note that bloggers who like any of the articles posted on Wag ‘n Bietjie will in turn be visited and an article(s) from your website be reposted here.
Reblogged articles will be removed at the request of the original author. I respect your right to do so and will comply. When reblogging I post part of the original article giving accreditation to the author and providing a link to his/her website.
Older article on reblogging with comments for and against..
Reexamining the Reblog
The last time we discussed reblogging, your opinions in the comments were mixed: some of you felt that reblogging was a great compliment, and others felt that it was something akin to theft.
[Wag ‘n Bietjie: Theft? Sorry, with no financial gain on my side and by providing a free additional viewing of an article I find authors to be grateful rather than aggrieved.]
We here at The Daily Post love a good etiquette debate, so let’s wade back in, shall we?
Many of you mentioned being bothered by your content appearing on blogs consisting entirely of reblogs, with no apparent connecting theme and no original commentary at all.
[Wag ‘n Bietjie: By reblogging an article I align myself with the views expressed in the post unless otherwise stated. If you disagree engage me with a comment to that effect]
No wonder! It’s true that some of the most famous blogs are essentially carefully curated aggregators, but they are still infused with the blogger’s personality. They have an easily identifiable “About” page, and their links are collected along the lines of the blogger’s specific interests, so it’s obvious these blogs are written by a person. Good curators typically also include at least a few comments on why each post was shared.
[Wag ‘n Bietjie: That is why I only post a portion of the author’s article and provide a link for the visitor to continue reading the original article with all the bells & whistles.]
Blogs consisting of nothing but reblogs without any obvious real person behind them make people feel they’ve been used for spam. But just because these annoying blogs exist doesn’t mean reblogging is all bad!
[Wag ‘n Bietjie: Annoying? Spam? That depends on perception …blogging is about making your views public. How is it a bad thing to have your view (published publicly) displayed at another viewing point? The Internet is a pretty public place with potentially millions of visitors]