I've become very sporadic on my blogging here. I still enjoy it, but I seem stuck in a rut.

Part of it is lack of time, or access to a computer for the period of time it takes to write a post, when I've actually thought of a topic. When I do decide that it's time I do one, I sometimes sit here staring at the screen, wondering what the hell I'm going to write about.

When I first landed here on Game Informer, in May 2010 (has it really been less than a year?), I was looking for a place to put my video game thoughts, because readers of my regular blog didn't really care about video games. I wanted to talk about them, but why bother if nobody cares? So I was looking for an outlet. When I stumbled upon this site, and saw the user blog function here, I was in heaven.

Saint inspired me with his daily blogs, all quality of one sort of another. I figured I could do the same thing.

And I did for a while.

Now I haven't been. And I have a bit of a new problem that's come along with the lack of regular blogging.

When I do blog, is it going to be good? Thought-provoking? Will people read it and say "we've waited a week, or two weeks, for *that*?

A cherished friend of mine wrote about this philosophy on her blog, and it's a post that I encourage everybody to read, especially bloggers. It's kind of long, but it's worth it.

In it, she says:


"I want what I write to make my readers' eyes light up.  I want to paint a picture so strongly evocative with words that you will literally see what I'm describing in your mind's eye.  I want you to smell that freshly cut grass, feel the ache in your heart of a sad moment, experience that moment of standing on an East Tennessee mountainside, breathing in the clean air.  I want whatever concept I'm talking about to leave a permanent impression on your heart.  And this need had me pondering where my priorities should be.  Does every post have to have a wildly, impactful effect?  Or is a more subtle, softly communicated message just as powerful.  The answer is that both have equal, yet different merit.  Success isn't necessarily measured by a tangible yardstick."


I've been wrestling with this type of feeling here on GIO ever since my blog-writing dried up, and it took Dawn to kind of crystallize it in my mind.

Part of this writer's block is that my infrequent blogging is making my mind think that every post I make has to be impactful in some way. It's like "you're not getting the quantity from me, so d*mn it, you're going to get the quality."

But that is almost self-defeating. We can't all write profound and meaningful posts all the time. And if we wait until we do have one ready to go...well, it might be a long wait.

As soon as I wrap my head around all of that, I might be a more regular poster here. I hope to be. I have to admit (maybe it's the narcissist in me) that it's a good feeling when somebody (especially somebody who I really respect, like Saint) says that I've been an inspiration to them. And it drives me to *want* to write more often here.

I just have to get past that roadblock.

So a question to all of you bloggers out there, both regular and infrequent:

1) Do you really think about the frequency that you blog? For regular bloggers, do you feel bad if you miss a day? And for irregular ones, are you fine with just posting when the spirit moves you, like my friend Dawn? Or are you having the same problem I am?

2) While we all should strive to write the best that we can (nobody likes junk), do you find it easy or hard to let a post go out into the wilderness, thinking all along "while it's not great, that post is good enough"?

I'm hoping to have a resolution soon. If my brain will cooperate.