i *really* hate it when pings fail.
which leads me to wonder - how many of you rely on blogrolls to tell you if a blog has actually updated? or do you actually check?
there are some great blogs - like invisible shoebox - that don't seem to ping (so they never show as "recently updated"). would be a shame if people pay less attention to them because of a reliance on automation (probably an accurate measure of the cultural effect of computing somewhere in there) ...
[EDIT: comments closed because of spam]
Posted by Jason at August 1, 2003 4:48 PM | TrackBackI rely on blogroll when busy, check when less busy -- probably check all of 'em every week and a half or so.
Posted by: vika at August 2, 2003 9:39 AM | Permalink to CommentMaybe alter the mt.cfg file so that we don't get timeout errors when pinging the "central office" that lets others know when we've updated.
http://www.otal.umd.edu/~mgk/blog/archives/000036.html#19
Glad to know that blogs get checked despite blogroller, but I do find it interesting that the ability to ping (something blogger doesn't have, I don't think?) does create a hierarchy among blogs.
George, I'll look to update mt.cfg...
Posted by: Jason at August 4, 2003 8:42 AM | Permalink to CommentLooks like you fixed it! Nicely done.
Posted by: George at August 5, 2003 9:01 AM | Permalink to CommentYep, changing text files is tough work :)
But yes, I *think* it might be better... please let me know if you still timeout as much as you did before.
Posted by: Jason at August 5, 2003 9:42 AM | Permalink to Comment