If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

I just saw that commenter on another blog called this blog “self-indulgent schlok” [sic!]. I think a blog - by construction - is about the blogger’s personal thoughts. By writing this blog I am indulging myself in my personal finance plan/vision and lifestyle. So self-indulgent indeed! How could it be any other way? I am not writing a textbook, I am not in the business of financial planning, nor am I writing a guide on 401k’s. People expecting such can either go to the book store, hire an expert, or read IRS publication 590.

By reading this blog, readers are indulging in ideas about ecology, early retirement, wealth, capitalism, and simple living. I realize that these subjects do not interest everybody. Yet calling it self-indulgent suggests that the commenter is trying to judge the content on behalf of everybody else. He is essentially saying that he is not interested in those subjects and therefore nobody else should be interested either.

Schlock means that something is poorly constructed. I might be self-indulgent but often when an argument is accused of being poor it simply means that it was not understood or put in the right perspective. In order for A to communicate a thought to B, they must have something in common, otherwise it would be impossible to use words to communicate any thoughts on the subject. Thus communication is made much easier when A and B think the same way, think about the same things, and have the same values. Sometimes this is just not the case, especially when the thoughts go against the mainstream.

Thus when the commenter called this site self-indulgent schlock he is snidely saying that since he was unable to understand and appreciate the content, nobody else should like or understand it either. There are probably nicer ways of going about that.

This concludes my self-indulgent schlock on this subject.

Now we return to the regular scheduling.