Twice this week, I've noticed other sites linking to KN@PPSTER, rather than to my campaign URL, when referencing my presidential campaign.
The conventional wisdom is that using a blog as one's web campaign HQ is a really, really bad idea ... but I'm not sure the conventional wisdom is to be trusted.
After all, my main opponent for the LP's 2012 presidential nomination surfed to its 2008 vice-presidential nomination on a web presence that consisted (and still consists) of little more than a poorly presented, badly written blog with some gaudy multi-level-marketing-style ornamentation hung on it. That blog wasn't (and isn't) as pretty (or as popular!) as this one. Of course, there's more to victory than web presence ... but hey, I'm willing to learn from my opponents!
Up sides to making KN@PPSTER my campaign web HQ:
- Installed content of more than 1,000 posts, almost all of them relevant in one way or another to the campaign.
- Per the above, I start out with a significant search engine presence that doesn't have to be built from the ground up.
- Free hosting on a well-tested framework that can handle as much traffic as is thrown at it.
Down sides to making KN@PPSTER my campaign web HQ:
- The usual suspects will complain that I'm being weird and perverse. And they'll be right. I can live with that.
The next post on KN@PPSTER will be a "campaign HQ" post which will thereafter serve as the forwarding/landing spot for my campaign URL(s), with some of the important permanent stuff (social networking links, etc.).