I still remember seeing your rise and wondering "who is this commenting on everyone's articles?" It seems to be working!
What I've realized is there are a few different types of articles that have very different "success" measurements:
Feed articles: what most people think they want to write when they start writing, show up in the feed, get a bunch of views and some engagement, then it all stops and you're on to the next post (after all, these are the articles they're reading and are inspired to start writing by)
Google-able articles: these do not "succeed" if you measure them like a feed article. They never "go viral"; instead they get a small drip of traffic for long periods of time.
Personal articulations: articles that aren't findable or clickable, but when a colleague asks "how do you feel about testing?" Or whatever else, I send them a link and say "this". A long-form, well-researched argument of my findings and experience to date.
I decided I don't want to write feed articles: I'm terrible at them, dislike reading them, and don't mind missing the "popularity" they bring. So I stopped measuring my "success" by feed article standards and I'm much happier. I have a few Google-able articles that I'm incredibly proud of their success (consistently first page for several search terms) and I have a litany of personal articulations that I've shared with colleagues and has been helpful in my professional communication.
Accessibility First DevRel. I focus on ensuring content created, events held and company assets are as accessible as possible, for as many people as possible.
I really like this categorisation! I am going to steal it, adapt it and add to it I like it that much!
I like the "google-able" articles, what us old dogs call SEO'd articles 😉
But being serious for a second, articles that rank well for popular terms are, in my opinion, the best articles overall, especially "evergreen" articles that just feed consistent engagement over months and years. They are what we should hope to have at least 25% of our articles be one day.
You certainly should be proud of any article that fits into this category and ranks well for key terms, it takes skill and effort and I certainly applaud it! ❤
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I still remember seeing your rise and wondering "who is this commenting on everyone's articles?" It seems to be working!
What I've realized is there are a few different types of articles that have very different "success" measurements:
I decided I don't want to write feed articles: I'm terrible at them, dislike reading them, and don't mind missing the "popularity" they bring. So I stopped measuring my "success" by feed article standards and I'm much happier. I have a few Google-able articles that I'm incredibly proud of their success (consistently first page for several search terms) and I have a litany of personal articulations that I've shared with colleagues and has been helpful in my professional communication.
I really like this categorisation! I am going to steal it, adapt it and add to it I like it that much!
I like the "google-able" articles, what us old dogs call SEO'd articles 😉
But being serious for a second, articles that rank well for popular terms are, in my opinion, the best articles overall, especially "evergreen" articles that just feed consistent engagement over months and years. They are what we should hope to have at least 25% of our articles be one day.
You certainly should be proud of any article that fits into this category and ranks well for key terms, it takes skill and effort and I certainly applaud it! ❤