Dan Bricklin is exasperated that an editor did not understand the importance of his mentioning perma-links and so edited the reference out from an article he wrote for News.com about blogging. I feel your pain, Dan.

So few people understand that perma-links are not just a 'nice' feature for a blog to have, they are a crucial element in what makes a blog a blog. I would go so far as saying that the ability to perma-link to an article is one of the two absolute pre-requisites for defining whether of not a site is a blog or is just a 'blog-like website' (the other feature being articles presented in reverse chronological order).

Without perma-links, it is very difficult for others interested in what you have written to link to it on their own blogs so that they can say what they think: perma-links facilitate discussion and dissemination. Blogs themselves are just one of many web formats. What makes them really interesting is the fact they are part of a social network called the blogosphere... and without perma-links, they ain't part of that network.

So whenever I read someone who really understands what makes it possible for blogs to be a social phenomenon benefiting from network effects rather than just a web format, I am moved to shout "Hallelujah! At last, some one who gets it!"

Back to Big Blog Company