I just realized how this whole point/blog thing works...
We are not being judged by the content, but by the sensationalism that our comments make. It is appealing to the survival of the most rediculous, just like how the media decides what to air on TV. Intelligent blogs get no play, while crap that gets people fired up are pushed to the top of the charts.
All one has to do is say something that is blatently annoying, and 50 posts will pop up to bash the moron who wrote it. Or ARE they a moron? Maybe they are just playing the "game" set up by the site!
Either way, the moronic posts like the one I titled "Sex is Fun" that talks about how god dislikes sex, gets high points. Why? Because you CANT read it without thinking "WOW, this person is an Idiot!!!" and you can't help but comment, just to annoy them back! Anyway, this is just a theory I came up with now... but so far it seems to be correct...
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
haha i read that post.
"Goodnight, Goodnight, parting is such sweet sorrow..."
Getting Friends and Family in on it also!? Diabolical! Simply Diabolical. This Guest may be one of them! I don't have the time or resources to play this game! Hahaha! It will cost over $1000 of hours put in just to get the runner up prize!
haha. The only thing to worry about is whether or not you'll be hated then. :)
I find that people love to debate over religion, to all you point seekers. ;)
Yea, I saw that too! Hahaha! The Strategy seems to be working! Muhuhuhuhahahahaa!!!! Just kidding.... Hahaha!
The people who post all the latest headlines and get a bajillion comments get on my nerves more. I can copy and paste too. And add a few extra thoughts.
Yes, the winners should be awarded scholarships based on a composite score composed of a letters-per-word to word ratio, number of grammatical and technical errors, a scholarly review of literary, social, and philosophic merit, and whether the contestant's name begins with an 'M' that is followed by 'ichael Allen Yarbrough.'
Really though, the point is to get people to write and think. I just backspaced over a longish paragraph basically saying that this is anoying, but other alternatives would be more unpleasant (moderation, subjectivity, logistics). In the real world, actual talent eventually gets its justice.
Michael Allen Yarbrough
Hahaha! Good response. My theory is that the 1 - 3 paragraph Blog with One major point, and a couple facts to back it up is the most effective method within the parameters so far. What do you think?
We can't make people do that. We can't force people to recognize what's good, nor could we make them do what we think or even strongly argue is good, not as far as free speech goes, anyways. You can't really make people write what we think they should.
I think you once called yourself a libertarian. A true old style liberal wouldn't suggest that we make rules about what people should write. You need to think about freedom more. I recommend (this is hard, a true intuitive eye for freedom is something that I'm not sure can be communicated with an essay...) I dunno, importanceofphilosophy.com? Some Rand.....? good luck.
Michael Allen Yarbrough
PS. This criticism is made assuming that you meant that all blogs should adhere to the restrictions you outlined.
Ahh, Yes, You assumed Incorrectly! Your P.S. Line Apology is accepted.
Yeah, it's strange that I missed it the first time. You mean that blog posts are most effective in the format you named. I guess I misinterpreted it because it was totally irrelevant and went better with the topic of the thread.
I still doubt that that's right. A skillful blogger could craft an argument in any fashion. It could be mixed with an anecdote, fictionalized, blah blah........ I really need to do schoolwork. word.
Michael Allen Yarbrough
Hahaha! Yea, I need to get to bed! Why is this thing so addictive? GRrrrrr!!
What you say is not all true. I get the point your trying to make...but I've seen blogs that have real content and they got alot of action.