I think buying your weight in chocolate from the proceeds of blog advertising is a worthwhile pursuit, and one that I would actively encourage.

Obviously I don’t have the necessary figures either, but I just want to warn you not to be too set on Mars Bar (or similar). The family block may be more financially viable, and there are still plenty of good options in this size.

However, the contrast between the lengths you will go to for other projects/analyses, and the obvious lack in this one, leads me to believe that you are not really serious about this project. That disappoints me.

BTW, a good financial adviser would laugh you out of their office at the mere mention of the project, regardless of whether you had completed the research.

You raise some interesting and important questions.

I had selected Mars Bars as canonical representative of a chocolate bar – not top shelf, but not a family block of milk chocolate either.

Unfortunately, that was the end of the rigour in my calculations, as I neither accurately priced the bars nor did I accurately weigh myself.

I fear that any good financial adviser would laugh me out of their office until I finish performing these two basic pieces of research.

p.s. Still waiting for the blog article!

It’s all been downhill from there!

I was so, so disappointed when I saw that. After the first couple paragraphs, I was baiting my breath to get to the end of the article to post a comment saying “it’s all downhill from birth.”

Oh well.

It’s all downhill from birth.

Because, I kind of noticed the same. I was recently going through my posts, and found that lately, the bulk of stuff is just quotations, and of the posts which aren’t, very few are nowadays the sort of musings that I love looking back at, like the various wiki-themed reflections. I think the most recent really good one is the one about URI design from December, four months ago.

I’ve written good stuff in the meantime, sure, but they’re all do-ish articles, not think-ish ones. If that makes any sense. And it feels kind of lame.

I think the culprit was making a feed for the log, because it forced me to have titles, and titled entries work very differently from the more stream-of-consciousness style logging that I used to do. I don’t know if I can explain the difference very well, as it’s sort of subtle: titled articles with permalinks are more like individual units, whereas my previous writing was more of a contiguous, if meandering and somewhat fractured monologue. (Note that length of entry doesn’t come into play at all; the old entries I still like were no shorter than the ones I write now.)

Hmm. Expect to see an edited version of this comment up on my log.