I see things the opposite way; you don't have to subscribe to everyone's blog. Proficiency comes with practice, and that inevitably means writing lower quality content, until you write better. Writing can be therapeutic. Sorting ideas and concerns to fit publication can give you another perspective. Acting on ideas can help memory. There are a ton of good reasons to write (to the void), so please write!

Please, anyone reading the parent comment: do not listen to grumpy gatekeepers like this person. Please write, and write as much as you want. It is I, as the reader, who will decide if I will read it. Nobody (except alanfranz and his peers, who you can ignore) will be bothered by you publishing something on your own blog.

Disagree 100%.

You sound like you are someone who values high quality writing. You want to read good stuff.

If you want people to write good stuff for you to read, you should encourage them to practice!

It costs you very little to skip past content that you don't think is worthy of your time. But if you discourage people from writing that, they'll never get enough practice in to level up to the point where you DO appreciate what they have written.

One thing the internet doesn't have is a space shortage. what it DOES have is plenty of mechanisms to help you find recommendations for good stuff to read.

We'll agree on disagreeing on the topic.

I didn't want to discourage anybody, but admittedly, re-reading my content could seem like that. Mine is not a "please write less" to the author.

I'm saying "don't value quantity over quality", which is one of the points that the author highlights in his opening.

My opinion is that you can practice at writing long-form, high-effort content. Maybe the outcome is not what you expect to be, that's not problem; you put the relevant time and effort at it, and you'll improve.

But I really doubt that firing a lot a lot of unresearched, unsubstantiated tweets will ever let anybody write a good article or book.

Practice without feedback is of little use, at least for certain types of writing.

I tend to write excessively loquacious wandering diatribes with meandering sentences that bounce my readers around with so many twists that they get a concussion and I fail to communicate.

Usually, I do notice when I am at it. But only because it was pointed out so often in college, and by my friends.

Online, I only sometimes realize the replies that seem incoherent are actually coherent - and replying to what I actually said, or reasonably could be interpreted to have said, rather than what I thought I said.

Besides that experience, and the very rare "well written!" or similar, I get no feedback about my writing online.

If you think people good at things (like writing) get good at those things without producing an insane amount of low quality content, you need to update your model of the world.

The problem is not output quality per se; I understand that people don't get good at writing without writing. If somebody writes an article which doesn't sound good, or isn't perfect, that's life. I've written plenty of such articles.

But every time I put an article on my blog, at least I try doing some research and check that what I write is at least reasonably correct and can make sort of sense to the reader.

But, we should put more emphasis on "proper" writing. Not quantity above quality.

Why do you assume that writing is made for other people? Or even to be read?