Blogging Just Like Fishing

Have you ever been on holiday with your family or friends to a place that has a lake that is wide enough. Usually, if we're on vacation to a place that has a lake, maybe you will prepare a fishing pole for fishing in the lake. But what you think if it turns out the bait you are using does not quite attract the attention of fish, of course, you need to be patient to get the attention of the fish so the fish will eat your bait.

Fishing in the evening at parde island

Fishing is no different as it does when you are blogging. Blogging requires patience pretty well, so you can not easily give up blogging. I use metaphor to relate the blog with fishing, fish similar to visitors who came to your blog, whereas the bait is an article you created, and you are the author of an innovative blog that is always waiting for your article (your bait) many of which came and read it.

Actually, the process of attracting visitors is very simple, which is located on the quality of your article (your bait). How can the fish came and take your bait, not just to him. Because if the fish (visitors) just went to your bait is just the same as your articles are indexed in search engines, only seen by visitors but does not attract visitors to click on links directed to your blog. Whereas, if you can make the fish attracted to feed you and eat your bait, then it is similar to those in the search engine click on the link directed to your blog.

It is not easy to compete in search engines, but first sequence on the search engines are not always good. Rankings is not so very important, because the king is the content of your own. Maybe you make a simple article, but the title you use for your article is very interesting and in accordance with the wishes of visitors. So, visitors will be visiting your blog. Everyone needs to specify a topic for an article (type bait) in accordance with the wishes of the reader, you are not a magician (mentalist) who could read the thoughts of everyone. But we can use our analysis to compare the article's more attention, usually articles (bait) is good is the type of article (bait type) that is consistent with the wishes of the reader. Tertuis unique articles that can appeal to the reader to read each sentence of the article.

There are some extracts from an article I wrote above (maybe you already know it), that is:

1. Selection of article topics or in terms of fishing you have to choose the right bait. Selection of discussion topics is very important, so you can know which topics are most in demand by readers and are not interested.

2. Patience when optimizing visitors hooked to our blog, or in terms of fishing we have to patiently await the fish we hook. Patience is the main concern when you want to build a blog from start to success.

3. Trying to analyze the situation. You should be able to analyze what the article most in demand by readers. No matter when you are fishing, you must select the right bait to fish more easily provoked.

Star Trek just isn't as expansive as Star Wars, according to Robot Chicken

I kind of like Robot Chicken.  It seems incredibly self-indulgent, a bunch of nerds making a bunch of nerdy sketches that only other nerds would get, but it has its moments every so often.  Plus the use of action figures adds a certain charm to it.

I think, however, that their Star Wars specials take things too far.  The whole episode felt less like an attempt at sketch humour, and more like a bunch of pals snarking and commenting on their favourite movies.  Family Guy did the same thing, and I can't fathom how these things are getting releases. However, Family Guy attempted to do the same thing with Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan, but Paramount shot that down. Apparently, Robot Chicken aren't even interested in doing something on not just TWoK, but Trek in general. Their explanation is somewhat bizarre.

The reason there'll never be a Robot Chicken Star Trek
You just don't see as much intensive spoofing of Star Trek. There aren't as many Trek in-jokes in popular culture, and you don't see it referenced as often as Star Wars. We asked Senreich why he thought that was. He responds:

It's not as deep and expansive of a universe, whereas Star Wars as a universe -- there's so many worlds and planets and different creatures that are roaming around. You know, it's different species interacting with different species. Star Trek was the character of the week, if you will. It wasn't until later that you had them interacting in the political spectrum, with all the different races and beings at the same time. It's really just the crew that you're following, and those are the only ones you know the stories of. How much do you know about those other [characters] and races? Very little.
In Star Wars, you're passing an alien on the street, and you're like, "What's that guy's story? He looks really cool." You just wonder where they're all going and what's happening. And you walk into that Cantina, that bar, and they're all just hanging out and having their own stories. They go to some guy who's a giant, like, muppet, and he doesn't speak English but they understand him perfectly. It's just embedded And everybody just goes with it. You never just question that.

I... just... I... Is he serious?!?

Well, I'm a bit perplexed by this answer. I could take what he says and swap Trek and Wars, and it would make exactly the same impression:

It's not as deep and expansive of a universe, whereas Star Trek as a universe -- there's so many worlds and planets and different creatures that are roaming around. You know, it's different species interacting with different species. Star Wars was the character of the week, if you will. It wasn't until later that you had them interacting in the political spectrum, with all the different races and beings at the same time. It's really just the crew that you're following, and those are the only ones you know the stories of. How much do you know about those other [characters] and races? Very little.
In Star Trek, you're passing an alien on the street, and you're like, "What's that guy's story? He looks really cool." You just wonder where they're all going and what's happening. And you walk into that Ten Forward, that bar, and they're all just hanging out and having their own stories. They go to some guy who's a giant, like, muppet, and he doesn't speak English but they understand him perfectly. It's just embedded And everybody just goes with it. You never just question that.

You could pretty much apply this very argument there against Star Wars.  "Oh, but the expanded universe!" - well if we're including expanded universes into this, we can jolly well include the Trek expanded universe, can't we?

I mean my goodness, I'm a fan of both Trek and Wars, and was for a while a massive Warsie, mostly inspired by a period of being obsessed with Star Wars: Dark Forces 2: Jedi Knight (yes, two colons).  I read up on all the expanded series material.  Similarly, I went through a period of being obsessed with Star Trek.  Right now, my interest in both has atrophied somewhat, but if you asked me which universe was more fleshed out and expansive, I would say Trek.  Easily.

Let's try an experiment: how many major alien species can I name from Trek, without googling or wiki-ing?  Vulcans, Klingons, Romulans, Bajorans, Cardassians, Borg, Ferengi, Trill, Jem'Hadar, Founders, Vorta, Betazoids, Orions, Q, Talaxians, Suliban, Andorians.  I could go onto the more obscure (to the public eye) ones like Bolians, Tholians, Organians, Tellarites, Breen, Tamarians, Benzites, and the really alien ones like Mugato, Excalbian, Sheliak, Horta, V'Ger.  Now Star Wars.  That's easy too: Humans, Ewoks, Wookies, Sand People, Hutts, Jawas, Twi'leks... urm... Yoda's species... Salacious Crumb's people... Admiral Akbar... Droids?  Do Droids count?

OK, wise guy, what about the average guy on the street?  Well, while I think the average joe would know various aliens from Star Wars as "that hammer-headed dude from the Cantina" or "that chick with the head tentacles that the Rancor ate," I can't see them recognizing the species, or knowing anything about their culture.  The only species names I think they might remember would be something outright stated in the film, like Rancor, Hutt or Jawa.  In contrast, if you ask them what a Klingon, Vulcan or Borg is, I think they'd probably have a decent idea of their society and culture.

To be perfectly frank, I think the societies and cultures of Trek are far more fleshed out.  Why?  Because in my opinion, Wars is far more "character of the week," in that the vast majority of the aliens in Wars are the only example of that species in the films.  We know next to nothing about Huttese culture beyond the Mafiosa cartel Jabba rules.  We don't know anything about Admiral Ackbar's people.  We never see another of whatever the hell Salacious Crumb or Yoda or that scaly bounty hunter is.  We barely know anything about even those cultures with significant screentime like the Ewoks.  In contrast, we know an awful lot about the Klingons, Vulcans, Romulans, Borg et al.

Even taking the Clone Wars TV series into account, the various alien races are usually treated as background flavour, with too little time given to the fleshing out of those cultures.  In fact, the vast majority of information on Star Wars' major database comes from the expanded universe - and if we're going to go by extended universes, then we have to count Star Trek's own, which consists of hundreds of novels.  It's a shame, since whenever they do delve into, say, Trandoshan warrior rites, or Wookie society, it's pretty darned interesting.  But just as Star Trek is accused of focusing on the ship's crew, so Star Wars: The Clone Wars often focuses on the regular cast of Jedi Knights, who we already know plenty about from the three prequel films.  That's the whole point of a main cast of characters, after all.

Now, if you're going to argue that the background characters of Star Wars are more interesting, I can't really argue there: who doesn't want to know more about the weird creatures of the Cantina and Jabba's palace?  If you're going to argue that there's more visual variety with the aliens, I won't disagree. But I maintain Mr Senreich's explanation - that it's "not as deep and expansive of a universe" - is a bit nonsensical to me.

I don't particularly care if Robot Chicken does a Star Trek episode.  I just think the reasoning for it is just totally contrary, and I think it would've been better all around for them to just say "well, we're just not as big fans of Star Trek as we are of Star Wars," since that seems pertinently obvious by their attempt at an explanation.

But hey, maybe that's just me.