EZ as an evolver blog network?

The recent kerfuffle at ScienceBlogs has got me thinking about whether Evolver Zone could/should expand to become something of a blog “network” for evolution bloggers who focus on science.  I think it could easily become a more informal collection of blogs — individuals could host their own blogs and have 100% control of design and content, but they could be listed in a tab on the main EZ page, share a common feed or links to individual feeds, etc.  Any thoughts?  Who might be appropriate to invite?


4 comments to EZ as an evolver blog network?

  • A common feed would be a nice feature.

      (Quote)

  • Alternatively, YOU could come join us at Field of Science: http://www.fieldofscience.com  ;-)
    In all seriousness though, we should be careful and not create *too many* networks, especially specialised ones, as that tends to defeat the whole purpose of having them in the first place. Perhaps there’s some optimal size + number of networks that will become obvious in hindsight several internet meltdowns later…
    Some readers on SB commented that the layperson tends to actually like having large-ish mixed networks rather than specialised ones (eg. one specifically for evolution), despite the appeal of the later to specialists. Then there’s some of us who don’t even really use networks, relying on RSS feed for individual blogs instead…
    Just some $0.02 (HST not included) worth of food for thought.

      (Quote)

  • What can the evolver zone offer over existing blog networks? And could it reach a critical enough mass to be relevant as a blogging network?

      (Quote)

  • The caveats of the other commenters are duly noted. But I like the idea of an evolution-focused (even if somewhat liberally focused) network or consortium a lot. And I’m looking for a place right now.

      (Quote)

Leave a Reply

 

 

 

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

*