The 4-Paragraph Rule
Because of time limitations, I cannot include every post. The hours just don't exist within my present weeks. So I first instituted the 3-paragraph rule and then the 4-paragraph rule to weed out shorter posts and reduce my workload. The rules say "four fleshed-out paragraphs of original text". This means that a post which has one paragraph of introduction followed by three paragraphs of quoted material from another source will not be included. "Fleshed out" means that a paragraph consists of more than just one sentence.
Personal Content Rule
The rules also say "of a non-personal subject". This rule reflects the fact that most blogs are entirely diaries chronicling the daily lives of everyday people like you and me. Such blogs are almost invariably low-traffic blogs for a reason. Although your cats are cute and I'm glad that you enjoyed your vacation and the yes, the implants turned out very nicely indeed, but outside of your family and circle of close friends, no one cares. One reason why I do not write about myself is because although my life is fascinating to me, I would not be so presumptuous to think that it is anything but tedious to anyone else. By all means, write about whatever you want. But I don't see that the larger Methoblogging community will be interested in purely personal affairs of individuals. Exception: if you have had a major life crisis, like a death in the family, crippling injury, or marriage, I will link to you in order to summon prayers.
The Blogrolling Rule
By the standards of blogging etiquette, if a blogger requests that another blogger link to him/her/Gavin, the first blogger should first blogroll that second blogger. Refusing to maintain a blogroll of any kind is arrogant and/or stupid. It demonstrates either a total ignorance of blogging etiquette or an overvaluation of one's own self-worth. Along these lines, those who wish to gain the advantages of the Methoblogging community must formally affiliate with the Methoblogging community. If a blogger wishes to be listed in the MBWR, s/he must list at least five members of the Methodist Blogroll (the closest thing we have to a membership roster) in his blogroll. These five do not necessarily need to include me. But you must list at least five members. I will brook no freeloaders.
The Wesleyan Rule
As stated, the MBWR is open to anyone who "self-identifies as theologically Wesleyan." This means that ordained Presbyterian pastors need not apply, nor Unitarians, nor Wiccans. Despite objections from all three of these perspectives, I feel a need to hold fast to this rule in order to preserve our community identity.
Related to this issue are some concerns that I am including certain Methoblogophere members whom others consider heretical. But I do not intend to make the MBWR the site of a heresy trial.
The Coherency Rule
This is not an actual stated rule, but on rare occasions, Methobloggers will compose posts that I cannot make any sense of. If I cannot discern the central theme of one of your posts within 15 seconds, I skip it. Sorry, I don't mean to be rude, but I run through the MBWR at full speed in order to complete it in under 6 hours (at present).
The Grey Area: Applied Ministry Posts
Okay, here's a grey area of subject matter that I sometimes link to, and sometimes not. Many people write lengthy (4+ graphs) posts about the latest thing going on at their churches -- mission trips, 30-hour famines, etc. I'm never really sure what to do with these posts, as they are sort of personal blogging (of little interest to those outside of your church), but really what ministry (and hence Methoblogging) is supposed to be about. I have no true rule about these posts. I skipped one from Richard Heyduck last week, and he e-mailed me and requested that I add it. I did so. Again, I have no concrete idea of what to do with this subject matter as a criterion for inclusion. Your thoughts and suggestions are welcome.
The Loophole
Would you still like for me to link to your picture of your adorable, half-bald, incontinent kittycat? Do you have a post that is under 4-paragraphs that you really like? E-mail me and request that I link to it. I will do so without fail.
Another option is to persuade someone in the UMC hierarchy to pay me part-time to do this, and I will gladly do so. Shoot, I'd even do it at another site. I love the MBWR and this wonderful, loving, feuding community that we have and I plan to continue it as long as I can.
UPDATE: I would like to add one thing. This is the woman responsible for making the MBWR happen:
That's my wife, Katherine. She financially supports us both during seminary. Without her, the MBWR stops.
19 comments:
Sorry to cause a problem. All you had to do was say that my posts of the week weren't up to standard. My blogging has been pretty light lately - nothing stupendous. Hopefully soon I'll have something for you WORTHY of inclusion.
Thanks for doing all the hard wor. I don't know where you get the time.
Allow me to join the list of all those who thank you for the hard work - it is a true service to us all.
Hey, now, what I am supposed to do! Your blogging is fine. And I've always included your great essays on church growth and whatnot. I've pegged you as Best of the Methodist Blogosphere from time to time. Your last post fell into a domain not usually included. I can change that. I asked for input.
It's not a matter of quality. It's about relevance.
What standards for inclusion would you write?
Thanks to Catherine and you.
All the Best,
Paul
Richard H and John,
Go to neutral corners and have some of Katherine's pie.
John and Katherine,
Thanks for making the MBWR happen every week!
I'm not tryign to fight with John at all - though I can see that some might think I am. I think his standards are just fine: cleary articulated and fair to all of us. Though I have a weakness for sarcasm, my first comment on this post was not sarcastic in the least. I was trying to say somethig like, "Hey, I'm an adult. I can handle being told that my work doesn't fit certain parameters on some occasions, without any animosity or hard feelings at all."
Even if John decided he wouldn't include my posts in the round-up because I was a raging heretic or he thought I was ugly, I wouldn't get upset. It's just not my style. (If it helps at all, I'm an INTP.)
John, you're doing a fine job - a service to us all. Never take anything I say to be a contradiction of that sentiment.
I appreciate the work you do as well. I would not have the patience to weed through all the posts that you do.
Richard, you're not ugly at all. You're as cute as a button.
John, the MBWR rules are fine - clearly stated, fair, and helpful. Now, if you would just start up a weekly Fluffly Pet Video Roundup, I think all of the bases would be covered.
And Katherine, thanks for everything you do. (And that pie looks fantastic!)
There is a weekly blog roundup called the Friday Ark which is all about petblogging.
Hey I once accidentally identified with Wesleyan theology, how do I get in on this action? ;)
I want a picture of you baptizing a baby, and then I'll include you.
Or alternately, I want a picture of you at a potluck, and then I'll know for sure that you're Wesleyan.
HEY! Most EVERY picture of me is from a potluck...
Was that you, Ed? Face down in the crockpot? I couldn't tell.
What Andy said.
John, have you given any thought to asking Katherine to do some pie blogging? I'd go for that in a minute :)
Thanks again for the stamina (and patience) to keep up the MBWR.
Wayne
Me too Thaknk you John, and thank you Catherine- you do a great job
Katherine thanks for letting John perform this service; We are grateful.
By the way John, how much of these posts do you read? Ever read all of one? Ever read one you disagree with and make it "the best"? Or do you just skim all of them?
I ask because I almost challenged your views on Constantinianism specifically at my blog. And I certainly did that with all of last weeks posts with the letter I wrote to my congregation about patriotism in the church.
I ususally just skim. And yes, I often award BTOMB to people I disagree with, particularly very good liberal writers like Joel Thomas and Andy Bryan.
I often award BOTM for people who come up with inventive analogies, like Keith McIlwain's Atkins Diet thing.
I ask all of you to point out any biases that you may find in the way that I do the MBWR. Other perspectives can help point out my ideological blind spots.
I don't think that you challenged my views on patriotism in the church. I'm opposed to flags in the church.
lovely to see a picture of the woman behind all this :)
Blessed thanksgiving to you both!
Post a Comment