Mini meta-blog: on blogging frequency

So apparently, blogging every day is making it easier to think of stuff worth blogging about. My current working theory for this phenomenon is statistical. I nearly did actual graphs for this, but decided it would be too much trouble.

Let's assume that the only time you blog is when you have something interesting to blog about. Specifically, and this is important, it's something relatively interesting, in the literal sense that it needs to be interesting relative to everything else that's gone on in the period.

If you drew a graph of "interestingness of events" over time for a period, you'd have a line with a bunch of spikes. Everybody's life, no matter how dull or interesting it is, tends to have a sort of "average interest level". For a very long period, the graph would look almost like a flat line around this average: nothing would be relatively interesting, so it would be hard to think of anything to blog about.

On the other hand, if you blogged every day, your sample size is tiny, so the chance of there being one or two events much more interesting than any other events in the period is, counter-intuitively, much higher. This is because the interest levels are relative, not absolute.

So, the way to think of stuff to blog about is to blog every day. This is my insight for today, which is why immediately after posting this I will probably be blogging again, making it the third time today (unless it takes a long time).

Who knew blogging engendered more blogging? It probably won't last once I get back from holiday and have, you know, stuff to do. But in the meantime, bring on the verbose blog-fest!