Who are you, again?

I see – DrugMonkey, Janet, Pal and Jason are reviving the annual tradition of asking readers to say in the comments who they are. I did this in 2008 bit can’t find if I did it in 2009. The original questions and instructions are:

1) Tell me about you. Who are you? Do you have a background in science? If so, what draws you here as opposed to meatier, more academic fare? And if not, what brought you here and why have you stayed? Let loose with those comments.
2) Tell someone else about this blog and in particular, try and choose someone who’s not a scientist but who you think might be interested in the type of stuff found in this blog. Ever had family members or groups of friends who’ve been giving you strange, pitying looks when you try to wax scientific on them? Send ’em here and let’s see what they say.

But my blog is different – many different topics and only a handful of posts per year really dissecting a scientific study. There is much more about media, science journalism, blogging, social networking, communications, science publishing, Open Access and that kind of stuff. And videos. And I am always surprised how many people (including veteran serious bloggers) really like Clock Quotes! They get comments here and on FriendFeed and Facebook.
So, tell me also what kinds of posts you like here? What makes you keep coming back for more? What would you like me to do more? And also, what do you skip and ignore?


8 responses to “Who are you, again?

  1. In addition to the actual biology stuff, I particularly like the posts on blogging/social media.

  2. Bora, I’m a lifelong student of the humanities who fell in love with science (theoretical physics, neuroscience and natural history were chiefly responsible for ensnaring me) as an adult. At the moment I am what I would call a fledgling science writer, and — as a result of my coming from an entirely different field — have most likely been guilty of committing at least some of the sins of science communication you rail about here. But I recognize both the difficulty and the importance of doing this well, and am working my way through the very steep learning curve as quickly and ably as I can. You and many other scientists who write about the state of science communication are a big help to me in that regard.
    I think I’ve been reading you for only about a month; I can’t remember what link I followed, but it was probably something on Twitter! I skim all your posts, but am especially interested in your roundups of the latest PLoS research papers and, of course, your (sometimes scathing, but always interesting) commentary on science in the media.

  3. I’ve been reading your blog off and on for a very long time (I used to blog over a year ago under ‘panthera studentessa’, if you remember me at all), and I like the fact that your blog is less pure scientific stuff and more about the peripherals of science communication: publishing, blogging, etc. Most of us have wide and varied interests in terms of the hard science that we study, but scientific communication affects us all, and in that respect I think you have a very far-reaching audience.

  4. OMG, ‘panthera studentessa’, of course I remember! You got totally off the radar. Great to reconnect again.

  5. Yep, I had some IRL issues that got in the way of reading/writing blogs for a while. Then once I got everything sorted and (more or less) back to normal, it still took me an unfortunately long time to get back into it. But for better or worse, I am back. 🙂

  6. Been reading this blog since back when it was two different blogs, and I do occasionally comment, though not often enough.
    About myself: Danish IT-consultant with an interest in skepticism, science, politics, communication, social networds, and the religion wars.
    Reason I read this blog: it covers it all.

  7. I’m a scientist, most days anyway. I’m pretty sure I stumbled here early in my introduction to the form. I expect that this was my intro to the, um, enthusiastic variety of Open Science advocate. Your comments certainly got me up to speed.
    I browse back by these days for any titles that catch my eye. Also when there’s any seeerious beesnis afoot with respect to Open Science / Publishing in the news.
    I enjoy your thoughts on your own academic history, the politics of your youth and assorted geopolitical topics.

  8. You know who I am. I come here for the posts on science journalism/blogging/communication etc. I reckon we probably agree more than we disagree but regardless, I always find your essays in this area to be most thought-provoking. And I really appreciate the links to similar pieces on Twitter.
    In terms of what I’d like you to do more, this is of course a personal preference, but I prefer your, er, tighter opinion pieces. Blogs obviously have no space restrictions, but sometimes I think you see that as a challenge rather than a perk 😉