Thanks for the comment. And now I see that I did in fact say “1,000 people” when I meant “100 people”–I’m numerate enough to know that 99% and 99.9% are two different things. I believe a typical C&I issue has at least 800 readers over the first few months; while I could make the case that 124 articles have been viewed more than 8,000 times (if you add issue downloads and HTML pageviews–seven issues have been downloaded more than 8,000 times), my ego isn’t quite big enough to regard 8,000 as typical readership.

I’ll keep hoping for comments and keep thinking about the future. I do have one trick up my sleeve that could yield extremely modest revenues, although that’s not the initial reason for it…more on that when it happens. (The initial reason is related to the “real book” I’m currently working on.)

I also believe that you are correct when you say this “I can use the 99:1 rule and say ‘there could be 1,000 people who get something worthwhile out of C&I, but 99% of them won’t bother saying so.’”

I have not been blogging as much lately for a whole raft of reasons. At the same time I am constantly surprised at what people will say to me about what I have written…even though I rarely get comments on my blog posts.

I hope you continue to produce the thoughtful writing which typifies C&I.

The problem with doing what I want to do as a universal rule is that there are lots of things I might want to do; there needs to be some balance between those possibilities and what makes some sense…serves some purpose, yields some reward (financial or otherwise), etc., etc. Thus, the fourth criterion for booklength projects.

If C&I is no longer adding enough value to the field, then it’s no longer worth spending my time on. If doing a web-first (but not blog-post) version would add significant value to the field, it might be worth the (slight) extra effort. That’s the kind of thing I’m trying to feel out, apparently not very well. Which, in turn, suggests that I may be losing my touch as a writer & thinker, at least as regards C&I. (“Hell,” the small interior voice says, “you’re closing in on 66 years old. Why qualify the ‘losing your touch’ comment?”)

This one’s tough. Frankly, if even one LIS instructor told me that they’d used Library 2.0 and “Library 2.0″ and found it of significant value to their class, that would help: that’s the kind of non-financial reward that keeps things going. (Hell, if even one of the “every library must/should blog” folks had recognized the existence of the Public Library and Academic Library blog books, much less said they were beneficial, that would count for something.)

Again, sorry for taking some of my frustrations out on you. You deserve better.

I’d ask you to ignore everything I have said on the matter except this: please do what you love, and what you feel is its own reward. Stop asking other people what you should do. Do what you want to do.