July 5, 2007

the time of the a-list is dead. thank christ. not a moment too soon.

scoblethis.jpg
From Robert Sco­ble:

One trend that blog­gers don’t want to talk about? A num­ber of my blog­ging friends have seen their traf­fic go down lately. They assume that their rea­ders are off in social net­works. I think they are abso­lu­tely right.

For once I disa­gree with Robert. I DO want to talk about it. Because I actually con­cur with Robert’s the­sis. And I am utterly deligh­ted to do so.
In the past, say, from the late ‘nine­ties until the last six-twelve months or so, Blog­gers’ rea­dership grew IN PROPORTION to the social net­works that were built up around them. Hence the phe­no­me­non of the “A-List”.
But if we’re honest, loo­king back, it was always these cir­cum­ven­ting social net­works that were the really inte­res­ting part of the equa­tion. The actual blog­ger in ques­tion, less so. Even if in our celebrity-worshiping cul­ture, we some­ti­mes for­got that.
Then sud­denly, along comes stuff like Twit­ter and Face­book… et Voila! Sud­denly, social net­works start being suc­cess­fully crea­ted without the “A-Listers” having to act like “Hubs” [or “Human Social Objects”, if you want to get REALLY tech­ni­cal]. Sud­denly, the need for A-listers to arbi­trate “Who the Cool Kids are” [and who they aren’t] is rapidly and thank­fully dimi­nished.
I totally applaud this deve­lop­ment. Wha­te­ver your blog­ging stra­tegy may be, I per­so­nally believe that on ave­rage, you’re far bet­ter off going off to somewhere like Face­book and buil­ding your own social net­work with like-minded folk, based on your own collec­tive inte­rests, your own collec­tive pas­sions and own collec­tive sense of merit, than loi­te­ring around the Blo­gopshere, wai­ting for some rocks­tar like Sco­ble, Arring­ton, Cory etc to link to you… and hoping in vain that the lat­ter will somehow trans­form your life. It won’t. Just ask my blog bud­dies, Kent New­some or Seth Fin­kels­tein, who always have a sharp and and insight­ful word to say on the mat­ter.
The time of the A-List is dead. Thank Christ. Not a moment too soon.
[UPDATE:] Lovely afterthought from Rex Ham­mock:

When you set up a Face­book account, you’re not weigh­ted down with the res­pon­si­bi­lity of being a publisher or wri­ter or pun­dit or wha­te­ver it is that keeps most peo­ple from set­ting up a blog. On Face­book, you’re not a Face­boo­ker — you’re just you. You can con­nect with peo­ple based on something other than lin­king to what that per­son just observed…

[Bonus Link:] An utterly BRILLIANT post for the 4th of July: The afo­re­men­tio­ned Kent Newsome’s “Dec­la­ra­tion of Blog­ging Inde­pen­dance.”. Ha!

38 Responses to “the time of the a-list is dead. thank christ. not a moment too soon.”

  1. Blogebrity says:

    (Moves to the cor­ner, tries to cover up the qui­ve­ring lip.)

  2. Krupo says:

    Addi­tio­nal twist: import your blog RSS feed into Face­book. ;)

  3. Thanks for the link and nice words. Notes:
    0) Small correc­tion — “Seth Fin­kELs­tein”
    1) That’s a correlation/causation fallacy on the face of it
    2) “A num­ber of my blog­ging friends have seen their traf­fic go down lately” — Ask: Who? When? How Much? — before theo­ri­zing.
    3) What stops there from being a Face­book A-list?

  4. Bill Olen says:

    I disa­gree. The long tail idea may be right, selling less and less or more and more, but there will always be block­bus­ters and A-Listers, even if they aren’t as big and don’t last as long. Fad and fashion. But I agree that it’s most per­so­nally satisf­ying to follow your own collec­tive inte­rests, your own collec­tive pas­sions and own collec­tive sense of merit.

  5. Maggie Leber says:

    Another rea­son for traf­fic going down is the inc­rea­sing use of RSS rea­ders. You actually have to say something inte­res­ting to pull a rea­der to the site itself; if you’re just gene­ra­ting noise, the RSS feed will likely show it.

  6. Eric Rice says:

    The A-List doesn’t put them­sel­ves on it, the peo­ple do.
    Do we have a need for heroes? I think we do, and it will exist in every space that peo­ple can exist in.

  7. RKR says:

    Your blog ins­pi­res me because of your indi­vi­dua­lity, as well as your lea­dership. Your links to other peo­ple of indi­vi­dual thought has broa­de­ned my pers­pec­tive on many things.
    In regard to like-minded groups, I think there are loads of good peo­ple who share “like-mindedness” in dif­fe­rent blog com­mu­ni­ties. But for me, I seek out a diver­sity in many (many)areas. There is just so much out there to learn.
    Your blog has been a renais­sance of infor­ma­tion to me. —Thank you!
    PS I never added my url because my attempts at blog­ging are stum­bling sen­ten­ces at best. I am learning.

  8. Rick says:

    Geesh, who cares? You guys think about think about this stuff way too much.

  9. death to the a list? Well in two weeks I have got­ten 2000 friends on face­book and 600 on pownce.

  10. hugh macleod says:

    Oh, I’m sure the need to com­mune with the Sco­blei­zer on a mass scale will still be with us for a long time to come, Robert. And rightly so.
    But there are new things hap­pe­ning on a much sma­ller scale which I am also fin­ding VERY inte­res­ting ;-)

  11. Phil Gomes says:

    my own thoughts on the mat­ter, pos­ted some time ago. perhaps rele­vant here?
    http://www.philgomes.com/blog/2006/02/why-i-hate-a-list-mentality.htm

  12. David Armano says:

    Blog­ging has sti­mu­la­ted my crea­ti­vity and con­nec­ted me to some very inte­res­ting peo­ple who I wouldn’t have had access to without the assis­tance of per­so­nal publishing.
    I know the A-list dis­cus­sion is sig­ni­fi­cant and worth dis­cus­sing vs. igno­ring. But it does some­ti­mes detract from the true bene­fits of being an active par­ti­ci­pant in social media vs. a pas­sive bys­tan­der. To reap these bene­fits — one must par­ti­ci­pate. The good news is that now, there are many other ways to do this vs. blog­ging alone.

  13. Me too, truth be told. Twit­ter is awe­some cause it lets ever­yone lis­ten in on the weir­dest con­ver­sa­tions.
    Oh, and wait until you dis­co­ver Kyte.tv.
    It’s small scale video on a grand scale.

  14. What’s also funny is that this quote actually came from seve­ral blog­gers in my circle who aren’t A lis­ters, but rather B or C lis­ters.
    Those who are really on top of the A list are gai­ning rea­ders. My rea­dership has more than dou­bled in the past year.

  15. Totally with you on this one Hugh. I think you’re on to something.
    Pay no atten­tion to that Big Ego behind the curtain…

  16. Sam Sethi says:

    The A-list is dead the A-List is dead cried chic­ken little. I’ll believe it when I see that TechC­runch Gaping­Void and Sco­blei­zer are no lon­ger on the web but ONLY in Face­book.
    The one way data in loc­ked silo known as Face­book is this years new play­ground. Spock, Jaiku or something will come along and replace it using a com­bi­na­tion of Atom Publishing Pro­to­col and Open­Search but that is another con­ver­sa­tion about dyna­mic aggre­ga­tion.
    What we are seeing is the repla­ce­ment of the blog as the only two way mass medium with mul­ti­ple others.
    In the last six months I have had more friends invi­tes from peo­ple on twit­ter, face­book, lin­ke­din, jaiku, pownce and seve­ral others.
    Robert is spot on in saying that he now has mul­ti­ple ways for his audience/followers to keep upto date.
    There is the full meal 45mins + sco­ble show, the light lunch sco­be­li­zer blog, the quick snacks on his kyte.tv and twit­ter etc.
    The human A(ggregators)-list will live on as they are con­sis­tently pas­sio­nate about this webs­pace.
    The place may change but the peo­ple remain the same for now.

  17. Joe Duck says:

    With all due res­pect to the “A lis­ters” it’s now clear to me they wield power that is not in pro­por­tion to their wis­dom. Due to search rou­ti­nes that value old and abun­dant links.
    This is hazar­dous to the rest of us get­ting high qua­lity, good info.
    Let the revo­lu­tion BEGIN! Start repla­cing A-list blog­gers on your blo­groll with supe­rior but lower lis­ted bloggers.

  18. The Bruce says:

    I have been saying that blog­ging in its current for­mat with its ‘fad’ sta­tus will end. What I did not see was the likes of Face­book and MyS­pace repla­cing it.
    But I still see ‘fadism’ in Face­book and all the other gathe­ring posts of its ilk.
    Yes­ter­day Weblog­blog was the in thing. Where is it now? Sur­pas­sed by Face­book. But when will Facebook’s day come to be repla­ced?
    Face­bok will be yesterday’s news soon. FIt is afte­rall just another one of those old and long for­got­ten forums with a new face on it.
    There is little point to ove­rin­te­llec­tua­li­sing this ‘new’ phe­no­me­non. It is old stuff.
    I say carry on blog­ging. Blog­ging at mini­mum allows you stand out as an inv­di­vi­dual, moti­va­tes your crea­tive streams and does not let you fade into obs­cu­rity as part of a crowd of beige fad follo­wers.
    I say “right on” to Bill Olen, Erik Rice and espe­cially to RKR who hope­fully will one­day let us all know the site address. Can’t wait.
    Blog­gers first and fore­most and always!

  19. Clive BIrnie says:

    Sma­ller scale… micro trends… micro brands. The avant garde always migra­tes to the middle freeing space for the next wave of fringe innovation.

  20. Thurs­day, July 5, 2007 - 3.0.019
    Stu­pid Is — As Stu­pid Does — Part XIX
    Remem­ber, in my world there are no stu­pid peo­ple, only human beings — which means that we are each capa­ble of saying and doing some very mar­ve­lous things in addi­tion to some very stu­pid ones. The object is to inc­rease the for­mer at the expense of the lat­ter.
    Hugh Mac­leod seems to think that “The Time of the A-List is Dead” — FAT CHANCE!!!
    Hugh makes some inte­res­ting and per­ti­nent obser­va­tions — and com­ple­tely mis­ses the key ingre­dient in the situa­tion. Hugh wri­tes:
    “In the past, say, from the late ‘nine­ties until the last six-twelve months or so, Blog­gers’ rea­dership grew IN PROPORTION to the social net­works that were built up around them, Hence the phe­no­me­non of the A-List.”
    No, Hugh, the A-List was a result of deve­lo­ping an exc­lu­sio­nary rating system/s; the­re­fore, the A-List will con­ti­nue to sur­vive as long as the rating sys­tems sur­vive.
    The key ele­ment is choice — the rea­ders want choice — and they will gra­vi­tate to the sys­tem that gives it to them in the man­ner they want — THAT, is the true mea­ning of “Social Net­work”. Rating sys­tems are desig­ned to reduce choice.
    Hugh says that he applauds this deve­lop­ment — but fails to advo­cate any kind of correc­tive mea­su­res.
    The fact of the mat­ter is that the Blo­gosphere is loo­sing it’s pro­mi­nence, because of it’s inces­tuous struc­ture. One must recog­nize that a Blog is con­ve­nient for the Blog­ger, at the expense of the rea­der. So, it is only natu­ral that the rea­der will even­tually for­sake the Blo­gosphere for something more con­du­cive to that reader’s needs. 
    It is NOT the A-List that is dead — it is the Blo­gosphere that is dying. We need some good honest dis­cus­sion on the situa­tion and some alter­na­ti­ves; howe­ver, a blog is a damn poor place to have a “good honest dis­cus­sion”.
    Any­body want to talk??
    To be continued… naturally!!
    Doug Sko­glund
    SandS Soft­ware, Inc.
    skoglund@pdmsb.com
    BTW: If you wish to dis­cuss this mat­ter you might check my off-line forums at http://nationalcomputerassociation.com

  21. Oh dear, yet more tools to recom­bine the peo­ple we already know with many we don’t.
    I’m with Armano on this one: skin in the game. In my neigh­borhood on the ‘sphere it was always about con­ver­sa­tions with like-minded indi­vi­duals on dif­fe­rent blogs.
    Online is like off line — the peo­ple who are famous, may act that way. Sur­pri­singly ‚or maybe not, the nice peo­ple are still nice online even though it may take years for them to notice others who are like-minded but not so famous ;-)
    The not so nice peo­ple… well, the tools don’t make much dif­fe­rence there, do they? Same con­ver­sa­tion you had about crea­ti­vity and content.

  22. The Bruce says:

    Doug,
    As long as I can blog, the blo­gosphere will remain alive for me.
    And if Hugh carries on blg­ging and does not follow through on his threat to quit blog­ging, then blo­gosphere can thrive because he, you, Sco­ble, Doc etc ins­pire us les­ser blog­gers to want to attain a higher level of crea­ti­vity and pen­manship.
    Face­book, MyS­pace and other social net­work sites (my opinion)all fall short on the ins­pi­ra­tio­nal acti­vity for indi­vi­duals. Loads of yummy eye­candy but not loads of stuff to uplift my inte­llec­tual curio­sity or to edu­cate me with.
    And I agree that if the blo­ge­brity scene is allo­wed to fade away it will because we can des­troy a need we crea­ted by not bothe­ring about it any­more.
    Now look what Hugh has crea­ted right here in the com­ments  — a debate. Kinda neat thing to be able to do. Hugh does it good. I can’t get this reac­tion at my site. And I think this would also be lost in the vast back­ground noise that is Face­book or MyS­pace. I dunno. Would it?
    Long live blog­ging.
    Viva blog­gers viva!

  23. I don’t see how the A-list can be dead. Their sphere of influence may shift from one medium to another (slightly) but ever­yone, for the most part, is still trac­king them down, follo­wing them, and hoping to be their “friends.”
    So A-Listers jump on new tech­no­logy like Twit­ter, Pownce, etc. and ever­yone follows, des­pe­rate to get invol­ved, des­pe­rate to be lin­ked in one way or another to them.
    That doesn’t dimi­nish the A-list, it enhan­ces it, even if the con­nec­tions aren’t being made as much through blogs as they are through other tools/social networks.

  24. Peter Ralph says:

    The tech­no­rati A-lists mea­sure influence within the blogsphere to an extent. But they do not mea­sure blog popu­la­rity.
    Here are Alexa ranks for the popu­la­rity of some undis­pu­ted A lis­ters
    seth godin — 46,904
    hugh mcleod — 32,517
    robert sco­ble — 11,648
    and here is the alexa rank for a blog that doesnt even make the C list:
    steve pav­lina — 5,058
    Who is steve pav­lina? I’m not really sure all I know about him is that his blog gets over 2,000,000 hits per day and earns him close to $500,000 per year.
    I doubt he will be aban­do­ning his blog for face­book any time soon.

  25. MisssyM says:

    I couldn’t care less who the A, B, C or Z list are. I read good blogs, I give com­ment on good blogs, I reply to all com­men­ters, I vote for blogs I like irres­pec­tive of how long they’ve been blog­ging or who they are mates with.
    I hate the cli­que men­ta­lity of some blog­gers and the fact that if you’re not known then some peo­ple don’t reply to your com­ments. Isn’t life already too full of that crap– can’t blog­ging be free of it?
    I have my own lovely rea­ders and I don’t care which list they are on. If the A list is dead, then good! Whoe­ver they were in the first place. Let’s kill all lists; let’s just blog!
    Good post btw.

  26. The Bruce says:

    Ben men­tions the down­side of cele­brity — the follo­wers and their expec­ta­tions that can be a drain.
    Peter men­tions the Pav­lina phe­no­me­non (and it is one for sure)and other stats that can drive you mad.
    Sta­tis­tics, sta­tis­tics damn lies.
    I do not how many of you have won­de­red at the metho­do­lo­gies emplo­yed to mea­sure rank, popu­la­rity and the inside of your trou­ser leg. The only cons­tant I have found in all my musing is the tai­lor and his tape.
    All the others dif­fer so now I ignore it as best I can. And I can­not because I am too darn ambi­tious and want to climb the ran­king lad­der. So what to do? What to do? Do I believe Tech­no­rati, Alexa, Goo­gle or Sch­moo­gle?
    Missy gives good com­ment and just wants to blog and that is it.
    Me too but not the give good com­ment bit! But I also want someone to aspire to and herein lies the conum­drum. Kill A-List and aspi­ra­tion plum­mets. Maintain/Revive A-List and aspi­ra­tion rises. More blogs to read and learn things from and so can teach the kids.
    OK I go for the lat­ter.
    Then we need to address social net­works again and so it goes round and round and in the end Zeber­dee tells Flo­rence and Dou­gal it is time for bed and tomo­rrow can be a new day in blo­gosphere for new conversation.

  27. I agree with you Hugh, that Twit­ter, Jaiku, Pownce, Ning are frac­tu­ring the blo­gosphere, and chan­ging how we trust link and who we follow.
    The con­trast bet­ween slow con­ven­tio­nal blog con­ver­sa­tions and the fast Twit­ter type chan­nels is asto­nishing.
    Twit­ter type tools are more inti­mate, can be more tri­vial, but have great poten­tial for pro­mo­tions and non-commercial hel­ping each other as pals.
    Fast ans­wers to ques­tions, quick sha­ring of links and files (Pownce), and enfor­ced bre­vity of mes­sage: great advan­ta­ges of the New Micro Blog­ging.
    http://twitter.com/vaspers
    http://pownce.com/vaspers

  28. Robert says:

    Hugh,
    Is this the point?
    “…you’re far bet­ter off going off to somewhere like Face­book and buil­ding your own social net­work with like-minded folk, based on your own collec­tive inte­rests, your own collec­tive pas­sions and own collec­tive sense of merit, than loi­te­ring around the Blo­gopshere, wai­ting for some rocks­tar like Sco­ble, Arring­ton, Cory etc to link to you… ”
    I’m giving it a go but I don’t like these large super­mar­ket networks.

  29. Tim Siedell says:

    I unders­tand what you’re saying; that it’s easier than ever to make con­nec­tions, and the reliance on get­ting “vet­ted” has dimi­nished. That’s good.
    But the assump­tion is that we all want to collect friends or create the big­gest pos­si­ble social net­work. I think that’s back­wards thin­king.
    I write to learn, to share, to grow. Would I like more peo­ple to read my blog? Sure. But it’s never been easier for poten­tial rea­ders to find me. I’ll get more rea­ders by crea­ting posts peo­ple want to read.
    You’re right, peo­ple shouldn’t loi­ter around the blo­gosphere wai­ting for something to hap­pen. They should be focu­sed on crea­ting truly exce­llent con­tent. Con­nec­tions will follow. And they’ll be stron­ger and bet­ter as a result.

  30. Anonymous says:

    Blog­ging and the social net­works, such as MyFace & Twit­ter, are struc­tu­red to serve dif­fe­rent pur­po­ses. As Vas­pers says the net­works are great for fast ans­wers to quick ques­tions and gos­sipy tid­bits too. It’s easier to build com­mu­nity on a net­work than a blog plat­form.
    Blogs allow for dee­per explo­ra­tions and con­ver­sa­tions. Why an either or? There is appli­ca­tion for both. Perhaps FB will add blogs a la MyS­pace. What I’d really like is a user friendly dash­board where I can keep track of all my social media tools in one place.
    As for A-listers, peo­ple will gra­vi­tate to those who hold rele­vancy, even if that rele­vancy is a “cool factor.”

  31. Brian Brady says:

    “Who is steve pav­lina? I’m not really sure all I know about him is that his blog gets over 2,000,000 hits per day and earns him close to $500,000 per year.”
    I think I envy Steve. He flies below radar and is raking in cash.

  32. Peter Ralph says:

    I think there may be hun­dreds more like Pav­lina — I stum­bled across his site com­ple­tely by acci­dent. There just is no ran­king of blogs by popou­la­rity avai­la­ble.
    here is another one-person blog that has only been up for 6 months and already gets more traf­fic than sco­ble:
    http://icanhascheezburger.com/

  33. This all kinda reminds me of Terence McKenna’s rant as quo­ted below. Maybe A-List are the new icons ;-)
    Spe­ci­fi­cally reve­lant to Face­book, Twit­ter, et al: “And what is real is you and your friends and your asso­cia­tions, your highs, your orgasms, your hopes, your plans, your fears.”:
    (See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARIG-BQRATs)
    “…catalyst to say what has never been said. To see what has never been seen. To draw, paint, sing, sculpt, dance and act what has never before been done. To push the enve­lope of crea­ti­vity and lan­guage. And what’s really impor­tant is: I call it the ‘felt pre­sence of direct expe­rience’, which is a fancy term which just simply means we have to stop con­su­ming our cul­ture. We have to create cul­ture. Don’t watch TV. Don’t read maga­zi­nes. Don’t even lis­ten to NPR. Create your own roadshow.
    The nexus of space and time, where you are, now, is the most imme­diate sec­tor of your uni­verse. And if you’re worr­ying about Michael Jack­son or Bill Clin­ton or some­body else, then you are disem­po­we­red. You’re giving it all away to icons. Icons which are main­tai­ned by an elec­tro­nic medium so that, you know, you wanna dress like X or have lips like Y or something. This is shit brai­ned, this kind of thin­king.
    That is all cul­tu­ral diver­sion. And what is real is you and your friends and your asso­cia­tions, your highs, your orgasms, your hopes, your plans, your fears. And we are told ‘No’, we’re unim­por­tant, we’re periphe­ral, get a degree, get a job, get a this, get a that — and then you’re a pla­yer. You don’t even want to play that game. You want to rec­laim your mind and get it out of the hands of the cul­tu­ral engi­neers who want to turn you into a half-baked moron con­su­ming all this trash that’s being manu­fac­tu­red out of the bones of a dying world. Where is that at?”

  34. TechBrew.net says:

    No offense, but the notion of an A-list dying is rub­bish. Cele­brity and popu­la­rity are part of human nature, irri­ta­ting or other­wise.
    Time for a car­toon about A-listers who link­bait the demise of the A-list. ;)

  35. Tony C says:

    As an outsi­der to all this A-list, B-list, C-list blog­ging rub­bish the fact that Hugh men­tions it is a timely remin­der that the inter­net is a fic­kle place and long may it remain so.
    That peo­ple even think there is a hie­rarchy of blog­gers, inc­lu­ding peo­ple who should know bet­ter, means con­ven­tio­nal thin­king has taken over and the rot has set in, maybe social net­wor­king sites are the great much nee­ded leveler.

  36. Mark Forman says:

    Peo­ple need their gods and heroes-a basic tenet of human nature. It is also human nature to look at ratings in an envi­ron­ment that is new. Someone coming to the blo­gosphere has much grea­ter chance of hea­ring about a Sco­ble or Sear­les than a lowly For­man.
    Is this fair or accu­rate? What do metrics have to do with fair­ness or accuracy-it’s all crunching num­bers baby. I appre­ciate qua­lity con­tent and being enga­ged.
    The Twitter/Pownce snacks are OK but too much candy rots your teeth and can give you a sto­mach ache. Unfor­tu­na­tely that doesn’t mean blogs are a gua­ran­teed Peter Luger steak din­ner either.
    So what method works? Trial and error is the bit­ter road to true know­ledge and exper­tise. In my expe­rience the most inte­res­ting blog­gers or peo­ple for that mat­ter are the ones with expe­rien­tial know­ledge on the mat­ters of which they speak. The blog space is way to full of vain blog post regur­gi­ta­tion =know­ledge =guru men­ta­lity.
    So being inte­res­ting and enga­ging will always pre­vail, it’s just hard to do and that’s why there is always a hand­ful of “pla­nets” amongst a cons­te­lla­tion of “stars.”

  37. Mark Forman says:

    Peo­ple need their gods and heroes-a basic tenet of human nature. It is also human nature to look at ratings in an envi­ron­ment that is new. Someone coming to the blo­gosphere has much grea­ter chance of hea­ring about a Sco­ble or Sear­les than a lowly For­man.
    Is this fair or accu­rate? What do metrics have to do with fair­ness or accuracy-it’s all crunching num­bers baby. I appre­ciate qua­lity con­tent and being enga­ged.
    The Twitter/Pownce snacks are OK but too much candy rots your teeth and can give you a sto­mach ache. Unfor­tu­na­tely that doesn’t mean blogs are a gua­ran­teed Peter Luger steak din­ner either.
    So what method works? Trial and error is the bit­ter road to true know­ledge and exper­tise. In my expe­rience the most inte­res­ting blog­gers or peo­ple for that mat­ter are the ones with expe­rien­tial know­ledge on the mat­ters of which they speak. The blog space is way to full of vain blog post regur­gi­ta­tion =know­ledge =guru men­ta­lity.
    So being inte­res­ting and enga­ging will always pre­vail, it’s just hard to do and that’s why there is always a hand­ful of “pla­nets” amongst a cons­te­lla­tion of “stars.”

  38. Kristine says:

    You know, I never mana­ged to get my head around that A-list thing. I have blogs I abso­lu­tely love because they’re good and they inte­rest me, but A-list? I don’t really care, that’s cer­tainly not why I’m blog­ging. So, to be honest, this very debate is beyond me, cause why should I care? Yours is one of the blogs I love, and there are plenty of excep­tio­nal must-read blogs out there, but a-list or not is cer­tainly not the criteria