BlogTalk 2.0: coopetition and research blogging
Anjo reflects on BlogTalk acceptance list:
Apart from the fact that I'm happy our proposal was accepted, I was totally flabbergasted there are only two accepted proposals with multiple authors (ours, which has three authors; and one other with two authors). All the other 25 proposals accepted have precisely one author. Why is this?
Later: updated list suggests that 8 out of 25 proposals have multiple authors :)
It's really strange and I'm surprised of not noticing it myself (may be because both of my proposals were co-authored :). I share Anjo's why - why it's so different from any academic conference where it's more difficult to find a single-author contribution?
Is it a selfish nature of blogging? Do we simply have a reflection here?
Is it a competitiveness? When everything is out there, "thinking in public", you know, and blogged back and forth, it's pretty difficult to come up with original ideas. Is it something that keeps many of us not sharing with others than ideas are a bit more ripe? Is it some kind of coopetition, collaboration and competition at the same time?
Or is it just simply lack of knowing of others who can add value to our own thinking, lack of not clear ways reaching them or lack of trust that you need for co-writing?
I believe that many of people submitted BlogTalk proposals would benefit from coauthoring. I guess I'm not going to make unrealistic suggestions here... Let's see how the sharing values of blogosphere and conference competitiveness clash and where we go from there :)))
And if you want something related, but different, check Thoughts on Academic Blogging (MSR Breakout Session Notes) or any other links of research blogging.
This post also appears on channel weblog research