Not so important right now.
I figure we'll do this at least three times. Dungy will go first (by virtue of his emperorship) followed by myself and then Matt. Or you can flip that, all the same to me.
My idea with this is to streamline our process for interacting and it will only work if we all buy into it. Here is my suggestion, what are your thoughts on it?
The format
1. Primary guy picks a topic and a publication date/time and word limit.
2. All three of us post our blog at the appointed date and time, no cheating to see what the others wrote.
3. The aforementioned blogs are read by each of us.
4. There is a two-day window for each of us to pose questions to the others in their respective comment sections.
5. At a specified date and time, with no word limit, we all post our responses to the other two as new blog posts.
6. Comment chaos may ensue.
I feel like this would keep things more focused and by responding on our own blogs we'd be less constricted.
Let me know what you think.
Overall looks pretty rad.
ReplyDeleteA couple of comments:
1. I forego my priviledge of firsies. If Matt or John has a choice topic, let them be the Princeps Senatatus.
2. Should we force step 1 to assume a debate team like format, when proposing a topic. Like, list it in question form, where each writer has to state whether they're taking an "affirmative" or "negative" stance on the topic in question? OR, should we stick closer to what we're doing now, where whatever direction you want to go from the starting point of a topic is up to you?
3. I'm thinking we should skip the Q&A section of the process (steps 4&5), and just say after a predefined period (ex. 48hrs), you may comment. Since our comments are mostly an agressive QandA anyway.
Sounds like an interesting idea. Let's give it a try.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Dungy that steps 4 and 5 seem unnecessary.