So… are we done?

I know this is the 327th time we’ve asked this question on TGW, but since no one (but me) has posted anything new since last wednesday, are we finally, at long last, creaking to a halt on this site? I considered writing a post as usual, but it seemed a little… futile.


19 responses to “So… are we done?”

  1. Stella says:

    In future eras, digital archaeologists will use the TGW as evidence that the rapture took place around January 24, 2012 and the virtuous bloggers disappeared.

    It’s been a wonderful life. Stella xxx

  2. Rachel says:

    Oh, this breaks my heart. I blame SOPA. Or something.

  3. lane says:

    well, what ever happens, we’ll always have trails…

  4. A White Bear says:

    Wait, what do you mean by done? There’s obviously still an audience and people checking the site. I agree with the discussions in which it seems that if you don’t want to post you shouldn’t feel obliged, but those who want to still may do so. I’m just saying, one needn’t delete the blog or anything.

  5. LP says:

    I don’t think anyone wants to delete the blog, and of course people are welcome to post whenever they like. (It’s also fun to go back and read archived posts, links to which are randomly generated in the right-hand sidebar). But given the lack of interest recently in both posting and commenting, it just doesn’t seem like the old TGW mojo is likely be resurrected again.

    FWIW, I just checked back to our very first post, and it came almost exactly six years ago, on Jan. 23, 2012.

    I really hate to see the site go moribund, but I’m not sure what the alternative is at this point.

  6. deesse says:

    I get the feeling that lifers perceive this matter differently from lurkers. For me, just a voice is enough, and passionate exchange is a nice extra.

  7. Tim says:

    Yay, for lurkers! Please comment more.

    You likely already know what I’m going to say, but I’ll say it anyway: TGW goes through cycles of activity and inactivity. Recent decline in posts does not, to my mind, indicate the site’s imminent demise.

    Now, that isn’t to say that we couldn’t use a little shakeup now and then. Ooh, what about posts from the lurkers? We could have Lurker Thursday or something.

  8. J-Man says:

    While you’re right in acknowledging that the site has been rather quiet lately, I don’t think it’s necessary to declare it dead either. There doesn’t seem to be any harm in letting it be what it’s going to be; besides, I don’t see the difference between declaring it dead – but keeping it open and in its current state, or just “leaving it be” and letting people post when they will. I, for one, was intending on posting something in the near future, on a random day, at some point.

  9. J-Man says:

    p.s. I like the idea of Lurker Thursday!

  10. KS says:

    How would an interested lurker go about submitting something for possible posting? I’d be sad to see the site go moribund as I’ve enjoyed reading it for years. Heck, just this morning I finished listening to all the recent-ish music mixes while running and I thought how cool it is to have such an easy way to fill my ipodicus with new tune-age.

    In all honesty, even as a long time lurker I’ve found it difficult to penetrate the bonds that hold the originators together. One always feels a lurker rather than an insider. What would folks propose to do about that? Or am I the only lurker who feels this way? I am a thin-skinned academic, after all, and I probably need more than the usual amount of affirmation to feel included, or something. But the bonds of friendship ya’ll share is a huge part of what draws me back again and again so it’s by no means a criticism, just an observation.

    I’d say, “Don’t go changin’,” but perhaps a small change is warranted, but it could be more retro-ary than revolutionary. Maybe like in the early days there could be more film, book, and music reviews, as well as recipes and/or descriptions of meals made or vacations taken…just to get folks writing and commenting again. Or sort of a ‘shit i heard that dumbfounded me’ type of social commentary? I rack several of those every week but have no one to share them with. And I’ve made at least a half dozen tortillas since reading DAve’s post about making one several months ago. Even though I don’t know the guy, I think of him every time I slowly soften potato slices in a large quantity of olive oil. Who’d want to give up on a legacy like that, I ask you?

  11. LP says:

    Well, it’s obviously not up to me or anyone else (except possibly Dave) to declare the site dead, so of course, people should continue to post as they are moved to post. AWB, J-Man, I always enjoy your writing and will be delighted if you keep posting. KS, I would also love to see you in the mix, and if Site Master Dave is willing, I’d love to see you get a login and start it up. Same goes for any other lurkers who want to jump in – in my opinion, we ought to throw it open, especially since many of our regular bloggers seem to have wound down.

    Which also is the reason, Tim, why I came to believe this slowdown was different from the others. Based on recent conversations / emails with regular writers, it seems that several have decided to stop posting. I’m pretty close to that point myself, if not already there. So… perhaps the answer is to bring in new writers, if the site is to continue. Or perhaps, as AWB and Tim have argued, the site can / will continue with just spontaneous, non-scheduled posts. I’m a skeptic that TGW will last very long under that model, but hey! I’ve been wrong before.

    Anyway, this past new year’s eve, in the company of a great many TGW’ers, I remember not one conversation about the site. In years past, that would have been unthinkable. Perhaps there’s life in the old blog yet, but the spark definitely seems to have dimmed.

  12. Dave says:

    I think the blog is changing, but I’m not worried about it. I have been exceptionally busy lately, so I haven’t been posting regularly. I do think that if we evolve into less of a scheduled-post blog, the nature of posts will change. We might also develop more comments action. And while the insideriness of this blog has always been a concern, I hope “mere” commenters and readers/lurkers can feel more welcome. I think lively comment sections are the way to make that happen, rather than making everyone a poster.

  13. Fawcett says:

    I’m still here LP! I’ll continue to post once a month (as meager as that is). TGW’s not done yet. Atleast not for me. We’re all just going to have to get used to some days in a row where not much happens. And get used to postings by KS (which by the way, sounds really awesome. I promise to comment. Why’d this proposal take so long? And how come you’re not one of our close friends already? Just move to the NYC or LA already!) 6 years! Long live TGW!

  14. A White Bear says:

    I’m still on tap for tomorrow! It’s all scheduled and ready to go, and features exciting clips of sexual perversity.

  15. E-R-O's Papa says:

    NOOOOOOOO. I saw Lisa’s TGW-is-dead post right after I read that Dooce and her husband have separated. I can’t handle any more intimations of mortality right now, even virtual ones, so carry on.

  16. KS says:

    Sooooooo, back to my question about the process of writing a post…and also, is there someone out there who is patient enough to help with things like embedded links? If not, they can be avoided. Or, I can perhaps figure it out.

    I’m very excited about AWB’s provocative promo for her hump day post. I might even beat Lane to the first comment. Save TGW!

  17. Tim says:

    I just spent an hour reading old posts! I love you, TGW!



  18. Eric Jones says:

    Lurker here. I hope to god TGW doesn’t go poof. The notion makes me sad. Very sad. Best wishes, TGW community. I for one will keep checking back, though I have little to add. (Little to add because you’re all so damn much smarter and more articulate than me–which is why I like to read, but I can’t really help keep the thing going. Oh, and I’m lazy. That’s a problem too.) xoxo

  19. lane says:

    … hmmm, the greatwhatsit went poof years ago…