Aardvark Daily

Please visit the sponsor!

Future directions for Aardvark

As I sit here typing today's column I realise that I've been doing this for about 18 years now.

That's quite a long time.

Assuming (what with holidays etc) I've done this around 4,000 times and since I've been doing two columns a day for much of that -- we're talking at least 6,000 individual columns.

Assume that each column is 500 words and we're talking about three million words. Assume a word averages out at 4.5 characters (including spaces) and suddenly I begin to understand why I've worn out so many keyboards over the years -- this is over thirteen million keystrokes and still doesn't count the "tickety tickety" involved in rounding up the day's news headlines with their links.

Every now and then I stop and think about how I could maintain the level of content while also reducing the wear-and-tear on my keyboard as well as reducing the amount of time required.

These days I spend almost exactly two hours each morning creating what you read here.

(Reaches for calculator...) Wow, this means I've probably spent at least 8,000 hours creating and publishing content on this site. That's getting very close to an entire year -- of non-stop work (ie: 24/7).

At present, I have no intention of stopping my morning ritual -- although I may revisit that decision in 2015 when Aardvark celebrates its 20th year of continuous publication. Wow, is the Net that old already?

However, given that it's the start of a new year, this is probably a good time to cast my net on the waters and invite readers to contribute ideas and suggestions as to how things might be improved.

Bearing in mind that even 2 hours per day already constitutes a fairly significant chunk of time, I'm looking to work smarter, not harder. In fact I really noticed how much more I could cram into a day over the past couple of weeks when I wasn't committed to the keyboard for two hours at the start of each day (although I did miss the routine).

I don't want to be "just another wordpress website" -- there are already many thousands of those and I like to think that one of the things which has kept Aardvark out of the noise-floor is the fact that it is unique - not only from a content perspective but also from a "look and feel". How many other popular websites have as many HTML errors as this one for instance? :-)

So what flavour and type of content are readers looking for?

More science stories/focus? More tech? More "general" discussion? More about politics and the "state of the nation?"

Do people want more "depth" at the expense of a slower publication rate -- ie: perhaps a return to just one more investigative story or more considered opinion-piece rather than two lighter-weight ones each day?

And what about the platform?

I've steered away from "store bought" blogging platforms for reasons already stated -- but is it time to bite the bullet and embrace the extra features and power that some of the better CMS offer -- rather than working with hand-cut code of limited functionality?

These are all good questions and I invite everyone to have their say.

Please visit the sponsor!

Have your say on this...

PERMALINK to this column

Oh, and don't forget today's sci/tech news headlines

Rank This Aardvark Page

Change Font