Blog post #1,000. What next?October 19th, 2010
I started WDJK back in June, 2007. I realized that, as good as Malt Advocate is, there needs to be a platform between issues to provide you with more timely news and views–something that magazines and books lack.
I also want WDJK to be a way for you to get to know me a little better, and vice versa. I want to be accessible to you, which is one luxury you don’t often get with some of the other full-time whisky writers. If I’m going to dish out constrictive criticism, I should take it too. I think I have, and I’m a better person for it. Relationships are two-way streets, and I would like to believe that’s what we have here.
Your time, and my time, is valuable. When I take the time to post something up here, and when you take the time to visit here, I want it to be worthwhile and meaningful. You might not always be interested in the topics I write about, but I always try to keep the focus on whisky and its impact on us and our lives.
We do have a voice. Because of WDJK posts and your comments, whisky companies have admitted that they’ve changed their policies on how they bottle and sell their whiskies (increasing their whisky to 46%, cask strength and not chill-filtering them, etc.) and how they market their whisky (establishing new company policies against employees “pumping up” their brands through anonymous comments, etc.). We are fighting the good fight, and we are winning.
So, what should be our direction for the next 1,000 posts? I use the word “our” because your comments are as instrumental to WDJK as my posts. What should we focus more on? What would you like to see less of?