News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:A simple guideline for blogging by edw519 on Sunday October 03, 2010 @10:34AM (#1752765)
Events that tie into the greater scope of those ideas may also be worth sharing and commenting on; however discussing people per se is probably best left to gossip blogs.

Nice thought, but 179 degrees away from natural human tendencies. For the most part, people want to talk about other people, see pictures of other people, and be with other people.

Even here at Hacker News...

Last week, there were 2 or 3 gossip threads with hundreds of upvotes and on the front page for several days (Angelgate, New York vs. Chicago, Facebook). At the same time, there were quite a few excellent threads about useful ideas and techniques that I had to bookmark because they were gone so fast.

There's a difference between what should work and what does work and we're all guilty.

Re:A simple guideline for blogging by acangiano on Sunday October 03, 2010 @10:38AM (#1752770)
I agree 100% with the human tendencies argument, but I feel that the guideline still stands. Your blog may end up being less popular because of it, but I'd argue that its content will be far more valuable to society.
Re:A simple guideline for blogging by alextp on Sunday October 03, 2010 @11:12AM (#1752834)
Dick Lipton's blog ( http://rjlipton.wordpress.com/ )does this as well, and I think this is an essential part of it being as successful as it is. People like being mentioned and like reading about other people, and humanizing ideas goes a long way towards making them interesting.
Re:A simple guideline for blogging by awakeasleep on Sunday October 03, 2010 @11:37AM (#1752869)
We might need some clarification about what we mean by interesting or valuable.

There is the interest that draws pageviews and adds advertising dollars, and I believe there is a different interest that informs you and gives you new things to think about, with less mass appeal but greater utility/value to the reader.

Talk about people or talk hedged in human interest might be at the first end of the spectrum because anyone can have an opinion, and reciting that opinion is the extent to which you interact with the idea.

The other end of the spectrum has a limited, focused appeal because you must have thought about it or have some understanding of the subject before you can participate. Then, your opinion/understanding process is challenged to fit pieces together that might offer contradictions to your beliefs, or require you to form new ones.