I am intensely less interested in the hashtag itself than I am interested in the apparent decision to remove it based on a single commenter finding it mildly out of place. Especially given Lisa’s history of standing by what she writes regardless of the amount of negative comments written about it, or at the very least appending her edits at the end of an article in a way that shows the original has been altered.

Please keep current.

But the appeal of blogs is typically the interaction between the author and their audience. The back and forth in the comments section is what usually separates blogs from news sites where the author posts articles and doesn’t care what the audience has to say because the readers are nothing but eyeballs that can be sold to advertisers for a profit.

Again, there is nothing inherently wrong with Lisa ignoring her audience as if this were some random news site, I’m mostly lamenting the fact that she doesn’t interact in the comments the way she used to.

Sometimes she makes unmarked edits to her posts to reflect something written in the comments and sometimes she doesn’t. That’s totally up to her, but it would still be nice to understand her thought process.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fDKDC_IUnOA

But why would she go through the effort to cover her tracks and pretend there was never a hashtag at all? Why not just use a strikethrough like she has in previous edits? Or alternatively, why not leave the hashtag completely intact as a valid stylistic choice?

It would be amazingly if she would answer these questions directly, but I haven’t seen Lisa post directly to her comments section in years.