I'm writing this to get some clarification on the scope of the Austin-Blogger's meta-blog. I do this because I found myself in a quandary on whether to ping the meta-blog on my previous blog entry from today. In the end I decided not to as there was no real Austin content-- even though in some ways I thought it fit in well within the context of some of the recent Austin blogs about Howard Dean's recent visit. After all, deciding our next president clearly affects all those living in Austin (and, of course, everywhere else).

Perhaps some convention like adding "NAC" (No Austin Content) to the title line might be fitting here. Though, this doesn't seem completely ideal as though it would help Austin-Blogger users, it would also come across as confusing to everyone else: e.g. "Wesley Clark Follow-up...googlewashed (NAC)". Thoughts? What is appropriate for pinging the meta-blog on related topics to original Austin-themed entries?

By Gary at 07:53 PM in | Comments (7)  

The best place to ask this stuff may be the mailing list. That way you can speak directly to the Austin-Bloggers folks.

Since that article didn't seem to have a connection to Austin, I think you did the right thing by not submitting it. For instance, the Dean stuff that's been posted so far has all related to his recent trip to the city.

Posted by: Chip at June 15, 2003 10:39 PM

Right, but I think what I was trying to get at is how one might carry on a discussion topic related to someone else's Austin related topic. I guess it truly belongs on some political meta-blog somewhere (do these exist?), but what of trying to stimulate a conversation with others because you are interested in knowing the opinions of others that live in your area? In that regard it is Austin related.

Posted by: Gary at June 16, 2003 12:11 AM

Also, I'm not sold on using the mailing list. If we are all bloggers, why not eat our own dog food and use the medium for discussion? Mmm, corporate speak.

Posted by: Gary at June 16, 2003 12:20 AM

Another way that you could follow-up on another posting with your blog would be to Track-Back the original Howard Dean postings. That way the author and readers are aware of the entry, but it's not on a site that emphasizes local issues. I'm not sure you're using MT, but I thought I'd throw that out there.

Posted by: chris mcconnell at June 16, 2003 09:12 AM

I have a somewhat loose definition of "Austin-related." For example, I entered a post I'd written on how Texas ranks among the 50 states on major issues impacting citizens. It's not directly linked to Austin in the strictest sense. However, as someone who has worked for a public health agency here, I felt it important to raise people's awareness of how dire the situation is. That was a judgment call of mine; others would probably assert that it doesn't belong on the meta-blog.

Posted by: Kathryn at June 16, 2003 10:11 AM

I agree with Chip. The Austin blog should focus on topics that relate to Austin--once you open the doors to other purposes, you lose the point. And though I think you'd get a better response on the mailing list, I think posting your question on the Austin blog was OK. But what I'd like to see is comments for posts on the Austin meta-blog.

Posted by: omit at June 16, 2003 10:14 AM

I think there should be SOME Austin connection. It doesn't have to be completely connected but it should be relevant enough for an Austin reader.

For instance on my blog (www.jmbzine.com) I do write about Austin stuff sometimes and manually post to Austinbloggers when I do so, but most of my stuff has nothing to do with Austin (I live in Oklahoma now.) so obviously that stuff doesn't get posted.

Posted by: J.M. Branum at June 17, 2003 10:47 PM