Comments on: Whither Codgerhood?

By: bdunbar

bdunbar — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 21:16:26 +0000

I hadn’t read Rago’s bit until now.

He’s certainly got MY blog pegged, if not yours.

By: Dave

Dave — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:33:23 +0000

heh- I read Speculist 5 times a week. I read WSJ 1.5 times per month. I think the real message is that without Speculist I never would have heard about the WSJ rant…and NO, I’m not interested in a paid subscription to the Speculist If I had to pay I wouldn’t trust it anymore.

A paradox walk into a room…

By: AndrewS

AndrewS — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 11:14:40 +0000

that Google ad bar up top

I must be one of those idiots he talks about, because I don’t see any Google ad bar. I thought maybe it was one of the many anti-ad layers I use, but it doesn’t look like that’s the problem. If I ever see any interesting ads here, be sure I’ll click on ‘em.

So was that “uselessly brief” or “uselessly logorrheic” or possibly both?

By: Michael Anissimov

Michael Anissimov — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 10:59:34 +0000

WSJ is just a collaborative blog that exists on paper, and that you can’t comment on, except in your immediate vicinity. Anyway, everything he is saying is complete nonsense. The real losers will be those that don’t take advantage of blogs, etc.

Speculist readers never click adwords because they probably use the internet so much that they are entirely desensitized to them. On AF, only one in 400 viewers performs a clickthrough. But it’s the transfer of knowledge, not ad revenue, that’s most important, of course!

My favorite line: “humor is cringe-making”.

By: Kent_Geek

Kent_Geek — Thu, 21 Dec 2006 09:27:06 +0000

I know you’re going for humor (or is it irony?), but I don’t think it’s age that makes a codger. Believe me, I’ve been a codger for many years.
So, eventually, we’ll have a society where everyone looks 25, but the older among us will be distinguishable by their sarcastic laughter and thicker wallets.
Sounds good to me.