Modly: format of blogflogs

[pith]

I'll be working on a FAQ overhaul soon (so watch for a post about it), but lately, the formatting of blogflogs has been all over the map. I know I removed my sample from the FAQ, so I'm partially to blame, but with everyone using different styles, it can be difficult to follow. And just so no one's feathers get ruffled—this is not aimed towards any specific member, okay? Like I said, I've noticed several formats, so it's not just a matter of one person.

Until I get the FAQ updated, please format blogflogs like the sample below. Thanks =) If something's unclear or you have questions, let me know.

Entry: (the title of the blog entry)
Link: (link to the DIRECT BLOG ENTRY*)
Spoilers: (if relevant)
* = If you subscribe to the RSS feed on LJ, the link to the direct entry will be near the top of the post as it appears on your f-list. If you read the blog from her page, there is a direct link at the bottom, with the "time stamp"; right-click on the time stamp and select "copy link location" or whatever variant you have.

All longer posts or those containing spoilers need LJ-cuts. (Instructions on LJ-cuts are linked in the FAQ, so there's no excuse for not knowing. If you've tried and it's not working, let me know.)

In your flog, please put Laurell's (or Jon's or Darla's) words in boldface and your own in plain. Don't use coloured text or fancy fonts or intricate formatting. Simple is best. So, as a sample:

Entry: Busy, busy day
Link: http://blog.laurellkhamilton.org/2008/05/busy-busy-day.html

[imaginary LJ-cut]
One friend, who doesn’t really understand me, yet, told me, "If it doesn’t make you happy, do something else." No, my measure for happy at work is when it stops making me nervous, it’s time to do something else. Because the day I stop worrying about how a book will do, and how you guys will receive it, is the day it doesn’t matter to me. When it doesn’t matter, then it’s time to move on. But, my anxiety is right on schedule, so I guess we’re safe. I’ll keep writing, you keep reading, and the cycle of publishing will continue.

Snarkedy snark snark.

Comments

[putana.livejournal.com]

Thanks for making this post Pith! I was going to suggest having some universal format, or one post for all flogs to go or something so things were more together, so yay for doing this :)

[pith]

No worries :) I meant to do it earlier, but I've been lazy (admittedly) and busy and I also thought it was still in the FAQ, but I apparently took it out at some point.

[othellia.livejournal.com]

It doesn't matter if people use Macs instead of Windows. If you click on the time-stamp, you'll get redirected to the page of the individual blog. From there you can just copy the html at the top of the browser page, regardless of what operating system you use. :D

*is a Mac/Firefox user*

[pith]

Thanks :) I remember there being a right-click issue (or something) with Macs at some point, but since I haven't touched one for.... about about 5 years at least, I'm clueless. I'll edit that out of the post, though.

[othellia.livejournal.com]

Nah, it's fine. Macs are great for some things, worse for others. We don't have a right-click, but if we hold down "ctrl" while we click it's like right-clicking. I've memorized so many short cuts and alternatives that it's not funny. Actually, it is because if I try to go on a Windows now all the short cuts keys are in different places, and I fail for about 5 minutes before I give up and do everything the long way.

[morriganscrow.livejournal.com]

*salutes* I read and obey, oh Mighty Mod of Modly Godliness! :)

[longtail.livejournal.com]

*raises hand* I might have missed this, but are there any rules on blog flogs about how many times the same blog can show up and be flogged by different people?

[pith]

There are, and I know I've been slack in enforcing them, so I'll have to both clarify the FAQ and be more diligent.

Ideally, a blog should be flogged when it first appears, or close to it. So if someone flogs today's blog (if there is one; I'm just using today as an example), someone can flog it today, tomorrow, a few days from now. But after it's had its initial flog, people should NOT flog it; they're supposed to reply in the comments to the original flog, UNLESS they're covering a completely different aspect of the blog entry. For example, if said entry had bits about The Foose and bits about Jon, and Flogger #1 only discussed the Foose, I don't mind so much if someone flogs the same entry right away, IF they're only flogging different elements of the same post.

Otherwise, people should wait at least a few weeks. If you're talking long term (e.g., someone reflogging a blog entry from 2006, and comparing it to a 2008 entry), I have no qualms with that.

Did that make sense? My answers tend to be rambly, so I apologize for that. If I wasn't clear, just let me know and I'll try to be more concise.

[longtail.livejournal.com]

Ok, let me test my understanding... ;)

1. You should flog a blog within a week of it's appearance.

2. Flogs are first come first serve. If it's already been posted, everyone else should comment on it, not make a whole new flog post on the same blog.

3. The exception to #2 is if the original flogger only covers part of the blog. Then you can flog what's not mentioned in a seperate post.

4. Re-flogs of post-flogged blogs (damn, that's fun to say!) are ok, but they must be at least several weeks (one month?) old.

5. REALLY old blogs from years ago can be used if they have relavance to a current blog and re-flogged.

Did I get that right?

[pith]

1. Ideally, yes. If two weeks have gone by, no one's touched it, and you want to, have at it. But obviously the fresher it is in our heads, the funnier the snark will be. This is a loose rule, really; the "no repeats" is more important.

2. For the most part, yes. That's why I encourage people to skim the last few entries to the comm to make sure it hasn't been done already. If it's a case where people are literally posting at the same time, I take that into consideration. But if a fair amount of time has passed (weeks, months, etc.) and/or you want to cover a different angle, a new flog is fine.

3. That, and if a large amount of time has passed. For example, with all the Foose-love that's been going on, if Laurell gets a Smart Car in 3 months, and people want to compare her Foose-gushing to her Smart-gushing, that's fine. There are always going to be exceptions. I don't want this to be a dictatorship or anything :)

4. Aye. Even there, it's appreciated if you (and just because I forgot to say it earlier, I'm using "you" in the general sense here) bring something new to the flogging, as opposed to covering the exact same points, but it's not like we mods get together and have flog-reading meetings and judge them or anything.

5. Yes. I won't push the relevance factor too hard, even though it would be nice. And again, it's nice if you can bring something new to the flogging—new insight, compare it to more recent events, etc.

Hope this doesn't all seem too strict or subjective. My goal with the flogging limits simply to keep things fresh. Just like the saying "beating a dead horse", there's no point in flogging the same thing over and over and over.