On blogging

19 Responses to On blogging

1. steffi suhr says:

   19 May 2009 at 17:25

   Nice.
   But: apparently, there are asnoble reasons for communicating science to the public.
   Are asnoble reasons kind of like reasons that only pretend to be noble, but really are a bit half-assed? (or should that be half-ased?)
2. Richard P. Grant says:

   19 May 2009 at 18:36

   Editors. Eh.
3. Nathaniel Marshall says:

   19 May 2009 at 22:49

   (applause)
   Asnoble in the Asetralian. You are my hero.
4. Katie - says:

   20 May 2009 at 00:45

   Re: the link. Congratulations! Apart from the strung-together words, it was a lovely piece.
   Re: the title of this post. Really? Was it supposed to sound mildly racy or have I been working in a male-dominated industry for too long?
5. Richard P. Grant says:

   20 May 2009 at 05:43

   Thanks Katie, Nat. The paper copy does not have strungtogether words, asnoble, ignoble, or otherwise. And Katie, you’ve lost me completely.
6. Nathaniel Marshall says:

   20 May 2009 at 07:04

   Maybe it would be ‘racy if it had been phrased
   “Lab Love Rat the king of science blogs”
7. Richard P. Grant says:

   20 May 2009 at 07:12

   Lab King the Love Rat of science blogs ?
8. Eva Amsen says:

   20 May 2009 at 13:13

   I don’t know why I need to explain this, but Katie is obviously referring to the line “Immodestly points southward”.
   [giggle]
9. Richard P. Grant says:

   20 May 2009 at 13:15

   Ah… that’s a value of ‘title’ I wasn’t aware of.
10. Heather Etchevers says:

    20 May 2009 at 13:38

    I would have been surprised if the double entendre of the one and only sentence in this blog post was unintended. I could also see mistaking it for the title, especially if one was not acquainted with the “On this and that” series.
    Congrats on the plaudits!
11. Richard P. Grant says:

    20 May 2009 at 13:42

    It was unintended, although I don’t expect anyone to believe me now!
12. Heather Etchevers says:

    20 May 2009 at 14:45

    Why deny it, if it’s true? 😉
13. Nathaniel Marshall says:

    20 May 2009 at 21:16

    Richard’s been in Australia too long. You have to point Northward here.
14. Sabbi Lall says:

    20 May 2009 at 22:58

    Congrats- that is a really nice piece.
    Editors. Eh Are so cool. [AUTHOR: Meaning as intended?]
15. Richard P. Grant says:

    21 May 2009 at 05:44

    STET
16. J A Exton says:

    21 May 2009 at 08:43

    Hi there S.I.L. Now that you have forsaken the Land of the Long White Cloud for the Land of the Raised Pinkie, we are relieved to know that one Antipodean pastime i.e. bragging down South still stays with you. Loved the news article, Im basking in reflected glory.
17. Richard Wintle says:

    22 May 2009 at 18:01

    I liked “theeffort”, too. English really doesn’t have enough words in it with two doubled letters in a row. Now Welsh, there’s a language…
    I was interested in the comments about public outreach – we’re obliged to report on public outreach and engagement, as well as things like “social and economic benefits to society” and so forth, for a number of our large-scale funders. Obliged to report, I say, but I’ve not found any obligation to do it (other than the implication that if you’re supposed to report on it, you’re supposed to be doing it), and there don’t seem to be any obvious sanctions for not bothering.
    That said, I enjoy publicizing our science (as do the boss and some others around here), so it’s not onerous for me, anyway.
    [AUTHOR: over word limit, please reduce length of above comment by 90%]
18. Cath Ennis says:

    23 May 2009 at 00:07

    And here’s me thinking Katie was referring to the tag…
19. Richard P. Grant says:

    23 May 2009 at 06:55

    Stop it. You’re making me blush.

Comments are closed.