The truth about blogs?

Before I left for France in Feb. I got into a pissing match with one of the original supporters of this blog.  A supporter of blogs in general really, from what I know.

The dispute came from how blogs should be used.  Some how my friend wanted to see Internet support but not constructive criticism.  Let alone anything remotely resembling "investigative journalism" when the "facts" didn't add up.

I'm obviously not done with that topic or the investigative part of looking at gear with a critical eye and calling bs when i see it.

This week I became aware of what most already know I suspect.  Blogs are generally detail oriented!   The details you won't see in published print.   I obviously like climbing and would do more of it and write less if I lived in a place, like Chamonix for  example, where it is "easy" to climb every day.

Living just outside of Seattle, generally has the weather defining when I will climb and where. 

So back to the blog or blogs.  It doesn't really matter what Blog, most go into such detail that it can be over whelming or just plain boring even for me. 

I loosely follow a few blogs.  Generally on climbing or conditions but some on fitness and a few others on things I am interested in from time to time.

As a neighbor who works for REI pointed out.."I tried reading your blog a couple of times (she was interested in the trip to Chamonix) but it was too technical".

Duuuuuuuuuuuhhhhhhhhhhhh ;-)    Most blogs are too technical.  They get into details that no one in their right mind would really care about.   Except for the details we do care about.    Be it your lactic acid threshold or what kind of steel your crampon is made of, how to pull a part a '86, the case capacity of a .416 or the oil cooler requirements of a '95 3.6 conversion.  Did I loose you yet?

You get the idea I suspect.  :-)

No worries, more details, useful or  not, coming on climbing gear asap.