[KevinG]

Originally Posted by investorblogger

The problem with your blog is easy to see: your writing is highly emotional, your arguments are self proving, you never cite any statistics. You brush off other comments on your articles with assertions claiming others don't have a position to comment on your articles, yet you fail to provide adequate reason to believe your own point of view.

I'm not required to cite statistics on my "opinion" blog. If you would like to disprove me, that's your job.

I provide plenty of reasons to believe my point of view. You must have only read one article and made an assumption about the entire blog. That's sad.

"I feel" is not a rational argument.

Precisely why that sentence wasn't the argument, it was the sentence before it. The statement "I feel" was only describing how I feel about the problem. Interesting how that works isn't it?

Children used to experience this growth? Where? When? How much? What quality of growth did they have? You need to establish all of this before you go onto claim what you believe is true.

No. That is where you are wrong. I don't have to do anything. If you would like to prove me wrong, then by all means please provide me some evidence of how I am wrong. It is not my job to educate everyone on every fact relating to my articles. I would not be able to provide the necessary content nor would I be able to keep the blog entertaining.

Otherwise you lose your reader, except those who already agree with you totally. But even then, you owe that reader an explanation of sorts, too.

I explain myself very well. If every blog article was 50% explanation and 50% statistics it wouldn't be entertaining. I say what I know to be true and if you have evidence against that it's your job to put up or shut up.

There are lots of examples of this throughout your blog and I think that this is a core reason people are not returning to your blog. You're not engaging them, you're ranting and raving about things that you care about (which is fine, it's part of a blog, but it doesn't entitle you to a readership).

You seem to be wrong as my return numbers are very high. It is new visitors that I'm having a hard time getting.

You must respect your reader, you must engage your reader, you must inform your reader, you must enlighten your reader, ... Otherwise your reader, even those disposed to your political leanings, will simply wander away looking for content that challenges them either on an emotional or an intellectual level.

I do all of those. I tend to believe that you disagree with what I say and that drives you to attack my writing and my blog. Which is fine, it just isn't logical. But that is normal from the type of people who wouldn't agree with what I'm writing. It goes with their territory.

If you look at Steve's articles, you will see how different they are to yours. You will see how he attracts readers of many persuasions to his views, not because they believe him, but because he informs them. He respects his readers by engaging their intellects, he enlightens them, on occasion, too.

His blog is not a political opinion blog, his blog is meant for information. Mine is not meant for information, it is meant for commentary. I educate my readers but the point of the blog isn't to educate, it's to entertain and comment. You are comparing apples to oranges.

So, go study your blog heroes, emulate the things they do well, build your writing skills, then write and rewrite and rewrite until the text shines. At that point, your readership will arrive and respect what you have done.

Or I could just write things you would agree with and you would in turn say, "great blog."

Lol. It isn't hard to see through your type. Trust me.