Dan's not so sure that self nomination is the way to do it.
Identifying what makes a blog worthwhile to recommend to others, that is.
This idea is probably way too subjective to push into too deeply. But it ties neatly with a conversation I had with Sue Waters a few weeks back (on twitter, where else?) about what style of blog qualifies as good writing. To paraphrase what we tossed about in less than 140 character comments, we found that we both appreciated very different qualities in the readability of blogs. What I might find artful and clever wordsmithing might be painful reading for another. Step by step instructions with annotated screengrabs and how-to-be-a-great-whatever appeal to some people but have me reaching for the "Mark As Read" button.
Your trash might be my treasure.
Or vice versa.
It can be a bit worrying when bloggers I love to read for their rubber band expertise with words start resolving to become more professional in their writing. Try this quote from my colleague Alex Hayes:
You’ll notice some changes in this blog structure and the way it reads again so here’s hoping this is the end of the spring clean for 2007 and that I can get down to some serious summer business.
Compared to this gem which was a contender for best start to a blog post for 2007 for me:
I love my suit.
It’s the only one I own.
I wear it to weddings, funerals and other important educational meetings.
And the problem with my own blog is that it lacks the focus to document and explore issues and ideas in well thought out detail, but doesn't make the jump to the wondrous language-mangling of an Artichoke or a Ken Rodoff.
It'd be a pretty boring world if we all liked the same stuff. And I suppose liking your own prose and rating it highly is OK in this new form of reflections, connections and objections.
More try-hard phrase turning.