Just wanted to say: thank you for making and maintaining this. I’m sorry that so many of the initial comments on this HN post are from one person complaining that their submissions didn’t get accepted. That’s the thing with the personal web: it’s personal! It’s what that person wants, which happens to be the thing that makes it great. If you don’t like it, the rest of the internet is still there.

I’ve always enjoyed your curation, especially in the music department. Thanks so much!

> removing the suggestions form entirely, because it results in exactly this level of expectation

I think the expectation is less about the suggestions form and more because of the tagline "a place to find good blogs that interest you". If the tagline was clearer that these were hand curated, then I think no one would care about the process you currently have.

>> Another problem is that I like to add a variety of sites so that people following what’s recently added don’t get swamped by loads of blogs on one topic. And last time the site got on HN the suggestions (not “submissions”) were swamped with mostly men with rarely-updated blogs about computers.

Essentially my trouble with every "share your blog" type thing that appears on HN. Some of the blogs do show some interest outside computers, but those posts are quickly swamped by more computer touching.

I appreciate the curation in favor of diversity of interest here.

edit: You can see it in a lot of the suggested alternatives elsewhere. I think it's hard for someone to really get it if computer touching is their life. Curation like this is vital to avoid regression to the mean.

fyi, I just signed up and the confirmation email went to my spam folder (Gmail).

FTW!!!

There should be a feed of “Recently added blogs” linked right on the home page!

Oh, hang on, what’s that I see on the home page?

> So what? This website is just some man's collection of blogs, not a government registry funded by tax money. It does not seem to even take public donations. Why shouldn't its maintainer be allowed to exercise personal judgement in his curation efforts?

Unnecessarily aggressive response from you given that you are addressing positions I never actually took. Of course the maintainer is entitled to exercise personal judgement about what gets included. When did I say anything othrwise?

What I am saying is that, as a user, it is frustrating to spend time putting together submissions and then hear absolutely nothing back. I am not demanding special treatment, just a basic acknowledgement or a brief explanation when something is rejected. Expecting that level of courtesy when you interact with a project does not strike me as unreasonable. If that is considered entitlement, then yes, I suppose I do expect basic courtesy from people I engage with.

All I am asking is whether anyone might be interested in building something more community-ish, where decisions do not rest entirely with one individual. If someone creates that, I am happy to support it with my time and contributions. That is the only point I am making.

> You either trust it or you don't.

don't see why it has to be this way. It doesn't take much to tell us what the review process is like and what gets added and what does not. If I know in advance that the blogs I submit are outside their scope, then I won't waste time submitting them.

I also don't see why there can't be an open directory of websites where the community makes decisions about what to add instead of leaving it to a single individual.