PREVIOUSLY: « Mighty Neat Diabetes Target  Taking the P »

Sep 18, 2007

Critical Acclaim

Posted in Science at 5:00 pm by David Bradley -- 13 Comments; add your comment

David Bradley Science Writer

A criticism levelled at the Sciencebase blog recently was that the subject matter is too diverse (check out the category list in the menu, to see what they mean) and that I, as blogger-in-chief on this humble site, simply alight on a subject of interest, almost at random (a random list under the heading Posts from the Past can be found in the menu), and fire off a short item about said subject (take you pick). Another reviewer tells me, rather positively I think, that the site is like a one-man New Scientist, and yet another suggests that although some of the posts are a bit long, there are plenty of subjects I don’t cover that I really ought to, and sometimes, perish the thought, I get things inadvertently not quite right…or even wrong!

Well, as they say, you cannot
please
all of
the people all
of the timeyou cannot please all of the people all of the time. However, I’ve been blogging, in one sense or another, on subjects that interest me for almost two decades for dozens of different publications who more often than not come back for more and tell me that their readers are very happy with the words I produce. If the subjects I choose to write about on Sciencebase, my personal blog, are not to everyone’s taste 100% of the time, then, I’m afraid that’s just the nature of blogging.

I read dozens and dozens of blogs, sometimes it seems like thousands, usually via RSS, on a daily basis. I have to admit that not all of those I subscribe to are fascinating, in-depth, and unique 100% of the time. But, they do provide me with insights and inspiration into a wide range of subjects much of the time. Occasionally, they make me as angry as a least one recent commentator feels about Sciencebase.

But, like I say, a blog is personal. I write it for me first off and hope that it entertains or informs others across the blogosphere. Some of the posts are flippant, shallow, puerile even, some are more profound, and some of them reflect additional thoughts and comments from the various scientists I interview for the other publications I write for and link to.

I presume that a few of the more than 2500 regular RSS subscribers served each day, the average 8000-plus daily visitors who kindly turn up at my virtual door, and the many uncounted readers who see syndicated versions of this site on Techdispenser.com and elsewhere, actually quite like my seemingly random choice of subjects, appreciate my efforts at a unique and honest writing style, and find my alleged attempts at a one-man science portal to be, to some degree, informative, useful, and fun. If that sounds pretentious, then be thankful I didn’t use the words stakeholder, leverage, or incentivize.

Newsfeed

13 Comments »

  1. Adam said,

    September 18, 2007 at 5:33 pm

    So what feeds do you subscribe to? I’m always looking to keep sharp. With a synthetic chemistry background, I have totallysynthetic, moleculeoftheday, sceptical chymist, and in the pipeline, among others - as well as some political blogs and the rss feeds of my fav journals and news outlets.


  2. David Bradley said,

    September 18, 2007 at 6:04 pm

    Adam, thanks for asking. I was looking into how to distribute a categorized OPML (package of RSS addresses, basically). I am thinking that maybe Yahoo Pipes will be the way to go. Until I get that organized, check out the Sciencebase links section, a lot of the sites listed there under science/engineering have feeds that are in my Google reader folder.

    I also put out a request to find more science blogs back in March of this year, and included a few links in that. Any emailed blog suggestions I received were added to the site’s links section at the time. The comment on that post from Egon Willighagen also provides a very useful starting point for a few others.

    I am sure other readers have suggestions for science, chemistry and other blogs, feel free to add them to the comments here.

    db


  3. Mitch said,

    September 18, 2007 at 6:15 pm

    Your blog is always a good read. There will always be a cheeky fellow in the audience…

    Mitch


  4. David Bradley said,

    September 18, 2007 at 6:19 pm

    Thanks for the vote of confidence Mitch.

    Adam, it’s worth checking out Mitch’s Chemical Forums, well stocked and up to date, with ton(ne)s of information and links and stuff…

    db


  5. David Bradley said,

    September 18, 2007 at 7:00 pm

    OPML checked by validator.opml.org.Okay, I didn’t need to resort to Yahoo Pipes at all, at least not to demonstrate an OPML file. I exported my subscriptions from Thunderbird and then edited down the OPML with the creatively named and free OPML Editor It’s definitely not complete. I then uploaded it to the Sciencebase server here. This is a very limited list, but hopefully there are a few feeds of interest. Right-click and save this OPML file and open/import into your favourite newsreader to access a selection of my current feeds.

    db


  6. Hsien Lei said,

    September 18, 2007 at 7:20 pm

    You do a great job with Sciencebase, David. Don’t let people get you down. Not too long ago Scott Adams of Dilbert fame wrote that if you don’t have some people who hate your guts, you’ll never succeed. Welcome to success! :)


  7. David Bradley said,

    September 18, 2007 at 7:59 pm

    That’s good to know Hsien…I guess not being paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you either…

    db


  8. Hsien Lei said,

    September 18, 2007 at 8:08 pm

    Of course they’re out to get us! But we’re not going to let the bastards get us down, are we?


  9. David Bradley said,

    September 18, 2007 at 8:21 pm

    Indeed. Family motto - Nil desperandum carborundum illegitimi

    Quite apt for a tough old chemist, don’t you think, given that carborundum is the abrasive and gritty material silicon carbide?


  10. Rich Apodaca said,

    September 19, 2007 at 6:07 am

    Google has pretty much made the term ‘off-topic’ obsolete. Like science itself, nothing is ever completely useless. And feed aggregators make it easy to skip over things not immediately interesting (maybe too easy), making catchy but accurate titles more important than ever before.

    I would only worry if readers _stop_ writing in to complain ;-).


  11. David Bradley said,

    September 19, 2007 at 7:10 am

    Yes, Rich, as the man said, there’s only one thing worse than being talked about…and that’s not being talked about…

    db


  12. Andrew Sun said,

    September 23, 2007 at 4:08 am

    It seems that I’m late for comment on this post…
    Yes, David, I do complain about the diverse topics of your blog! Haha!
    But I believe it’s a good news that people complain something about your blog. When they first read your blog they knew very well that you write for yourself because this is only a blog, so they wouldn’t demand for more than this. However, your blog is so far much better, much more informative than a personal blog that gradually the readers regard the blog as their favorite, and started to demand for more…


  13. Amy Proal said,

    September 25, 2007 at 8:47 am

    You have a fantastic blog. Somebody complained that your posts are
    too diverse and I think they are nuts!

    I also have a science blog
    called Bacteriality.

    Amy


Comments: What are your thoughts on this? Leave a comment

You can use <b>, <i> and add a link or two using <a href="">. All comments are checked for spam before they appear.

Related Science Articles: