I must be missing something here. Weblogs are definitely NOT professional-for-profit endeavors, right? So exactly what does this imply?
IMHO it means everything you post has a personal slant. Code of conduct? None needed. Okay, since this weblog is part of dotnetweblogs.com you may have some rules, but that's about it. If you want to plug your latest book, software release or MP3 you have every right to.
Trust me, if you end up just talking sales pitches, the traffic to your weblog will fall off dramatically.
I subscibed to your RSS feed weeks ago and will continue to. I read Joel's too. WHen you posted about his last rant I basically skipped over it because I already knew about it. Just like any other reader is able to.
Keep blogging like you have been. You're doing a great job.
Hey Dave.
Thanks for the positive feedback :).
However, I still think there should be such a thing as an code of conduct , even an unspoken one (Which I think most of us adhere to anyway).
I know that when I read (developer) blogs I like to know that they are "authentic" and without hidden agendas.
I want it all on the table. If i ever discover that someone is "working" me about something I'm reading, I'll never go back.
A good example would be those semi-news articles in the papers that are actually ads that look like articles.
You really have to look closely to find out if what you're reading is legit. That toally annoys me.
I don't want that happening to me in BlogLand.
I agree with most of what you're saying, Roy, and I think you've got a great site that usually adds a ton of value to my reading for the day. Dave makes an excellent point as well that blogs by definition are a reflection of your own ideas and opinions.
"I only recommend books I would buy myself, hence I feel I lose no credibility when I get commissions from books I refer to"
A statement like that, though, isn't in keeping with the spirit of personal expression though. If you were recommending a paper, application, MP3 or book that you'd actually bought/read/used, and were offering insight into its value and application that would be one thing. If you haven't, though, then cross posting something like Joel's recommendation isn't adding much value to anyone other than changing the affiliate ID in the link.
I realize I'm free to skip over it...but with the flurry of posts recently about how to handle signal-to-noise in arenas like this, I think it's something to try and keep top of mind when making a fresh post.
Keep up the great work...and if the statement I quoted was simply misstated and you have read the work then feel free to ignore this mini-rant :)
I agree with Dave. Blogs are about people expressing themselves and there's no way to formulate guidelines to constrain such free expression.
What would composing a Code of Conduct accomplish? I'll read the blogs I'm interested in because of the content, not because of any particular association with a Code of Conduct.
On the other hand, your desire to formulate such a Code is a very legitimate aspect of your own personal expression... ;) I'm sure, sooner or later, someone will write one. And someone else will write another. And someone will try to organize all bloggers into an empire. And all of this will be part of the nature of people expressing themselves...
...and it will all be fun to watch!
Putting affiliate links in your posts is kind of cheezy if you ask me. I don't mind if you get a few bucks if I like the book, but I would bypass it all together, simply because of the potential for someone misunderstanding my intentions. Remember, connotation is just as important as denotation, if not more.
I agree with most things said here.
I have no problems putting affiliate codes on Amazon on weblogs, and when making personal recommendations that's more than fine. It's not like you're making a significant amount of money even if a lot do buy it, and more often than not it's just going to go to yet another book you can review, in which case you're again helping the community by providing another opinion before I/we go out and buy it ourselves.
That being said - did you actually read Paper Prototyping? :)
Tim: No I havn't read it, But as I said - I wouldn;t have recommended it if I would not have wanted this book on my bookshelf.
Still, I'm trying not to cross the thin line of credibility here. Perhaps from now on I'll think more before I put referrer links in a post. Maybe that will even give more credibility to my book recommendations..?
I'm saying "perhaps" here because maybe I won't be able to live up to my promise on this one. If I see something I like, I feel a need to post about it. And while I'm alaredy posting about an amazon book, why not put a referrer link on it?
Oh well, My head is starting to spin about this whole issue.
Maybe I shouldn;t be this concerend with what everyone else thinks about me?
I find that almost impossible to do...
Roy, it sounds like you DO have an implicit code. Believe me, it shines through. No need to be explicit for just that reason. As you said yourself, if you feel that hidden agenda shining through on someone's weblog you - and many more like you - will simply never come back. That is exactly the point of my initial comment.
Now, for me there is something implicit also. My lack of a URL due to a lack of a weblog. What this results in is my comment name lacks that 'link' flavor. DO I sometimes wonder if that hurts me? That people wonder about my hidden agenda? Certainly. Unfortunately I learned a while back that I lack the discipline and subject focus to really commit to a weblog. But you see, just like you, I also am concerned with what everyone else thinks of me!