It took a little while for my blog to spin up. I know that’s not uncommon, I’m just stating fact. In the last three days I’ve gained more followers than in my whole first month, in the last two weeks more new readers than in my first two months. It’s not that there is a line at the door waiting to get in but, as I said, it just took a while for my blog to spin up. Most of my current followers weren’t around for my first few posts.
In the early days I still wrote posts as if I had a large following. And it isn’t like nobody saw these early posts. Since the blog was still new quite a few of my Facebook friends popped in to see what it was all about. In fact, one of my most popular posts, at least from the number of views, came from this era since a few Facebook friends reposted it. The review of my kayak still gets several hits a week. That was one of my very first posts.
Recently a few blogs I follow reposted old articles. I think that’s a good idea. I’m looking through some of my early posts and have picked a couple out to use on those rainy days when my idea well is dry. Yes, I understand that is an awful use of mixed-metaphors, however, neither mixed metaphors nor reposts of old material is the point. I want to talk about revising old posts.
Strangely enough I’ve been seeing some activity on some of my older posts. Unfortunately most of this activity has been on some of my weaker or more out of date posts. Sometimes I’ll see something ancient come up and instantly blush from embarrassment.
One example of an out-of-date article is my 750 Word Challenge post. It has received more views in the last month than in the first 3 months of its existence. It refers back to the first story I posted on this site, Laura’s Eyes. Although I like the story, it is not my best nor my favorite. So over the weekend I went back in and added links to all of my posted 750-word-or-less stories. I didn’t update the actual article, though it was tempting.
I have a question about this. Is it wrong to go back and change old posts? If I see a glaring mistake I might change it, but should I change it just because I think I could make it sound better? Should i change posts because times have changed? new posts have made the old obsolete? If I do change it, should I put a little note at the bottom stating the article has been changed?
I’ve always tended to think of a blog as a type of on-line magazine. It really isn’t, of course. A magazine is a one-way street while a blog is interactive. Once something is printed in a magazine it is set in stone. Is that true for a blog?
A blog is designed for the here and now. When we enter a blog we are immediately greeted with the latest and greatest. Older posts are archives, history. Is changing an older post changing history?
As another example, an older post has recently been viewed a few times. I just reread it and hated the ending. Is it bad to make a more satisfactory ending? Revisionist blogging? Changing the past? Obscuring the blog’s progression?
I’m curious on what all of you think about this.
This picture has nothing at all to do with the post, I was just too busy to draw something new today. Quick self portrait in pencil