the "ganja platform" is not worthy of sustainable innovations and/or revenue models.. no wonder it had to be dumped..

Nick Denton is smart.. ..but then again small investments are needed for the 'ganja' heads :)-

sidebar : ""Ganga", an alternate spelling of "ganja", a term for cannabis "

I misesd this statement ...

"One of my favorite Gawker blog remains Valleywag, but when you become a regular on a Gawker blog you really notice how unbloglike they are for hiding the person behind the blog. A blog post should be signed with the name of the writer, period."

Why ?

what is the resonating trust factor on certain factiods and infonuggets ?? For whatever reasons the bloger desires, they wish to remain "anon" mode. Is this a reason to doubt quality of information that blog / blogger represents ???

or is just plain frastration that makes us want to get "personal" and know the person and whatever ?? --just asking :)-

It's frustrating 'cause blogs are about personal communication, humans-not-corporations, transparency and so on. Yet Gawker has certain mechanisms in place that oppose some of those values.

And yes, I think if someone stays anonymous their information should receive a lower level of trust online (because of a lack of accountability). Not that that's the case at Valleywag, as the author is still shown somewhere on the navigation, albeit being listed as "editor."

It's really a matter of definition. There's "personal communication", and there's "professional media". Just pick the labels you want to use. Gawker isn't personal communication, it's professional media. Arguing over whether the word "blog" should apply tends not to be productive.

A nastier aspect of this is professional media *simulating* and selling the *image* of personal communication.

There's an English expression relevant to that: "If you can fake sincerity, you've got it made".

Isn't Nick the author for sure ?

http://www.nickdouglas.net/

I do not agree that blogs are being personal per definition. If personal means known by family name, address and whatever. Personal means to me that in blogs you can show off your bias or write nonsens like a real person not like a professional.

Consumerist, one of my favorites does this for instance. The blog equals person dogma is outdated. A blog has a character of it's own, the person or people behind it can change once the character of a blog is established.

Disclosure ;-): I was invited as a commenter an Gawker Media after sending a bug report to The Consumerist.

Wonkette definitely needs a shakeup. Ever since the original author started writing her book the quality of the blog declined. Now with two new authors, it's almost a complete waste of time.

"A blog post should be signed with the name of the writer, period."

there we go making rules for blogs again.

We are all bloggers. We identify with the blogger's name. We tend to like to respond to a certain person not to un unknown entity.

I agree with what Philipp says.

> rules for blogs again.

These rules exist. Things can be more blog-like or less blog-like, I didn't invent that. And not seeing the person clearly who blogs is less blog-like. Do you agree or ...?

"not seeing the person clearly who blogs is less blog-like" – Agreed.

but 2 cent insert here, is regardless of blog/blog-like, but for me the content is king. If I know the person, then becomes a little easier to "trust" the content

If the Searchenginewatch blog would've been edited by the "team" and not by randfish or people with which you can meet and discuss in a pub, or in a forum, would you say that you would've liked/loved/read it the same ?

I think no.

Content has alot to do with drawing people to blogs and forums; but a name adds responsibility for ones comments and to me more credibility. Even in a forum setting you can see how a name can add more force to the post. A post by /pd or by philip carries alot more weight for me than by John Doe.

I just realized I spelled your name wrong philipp; sorry about that :)

No problem!