Blogging infrequently is a feature, not a bug
To which I say: hogwash and codswollop. That’s oldthink.
In the old days, web pages were supposed to be updated frequently so that when people visited they would see new content: if they saw no change they’d stop bothering to come back. But now that subscriptions are well established, people have new blog entries delivered to them, either through a feed reader if they use one (I use Google Reader) or via email. The reason to post daily is gone.
Instead, there is now an advantage to posting less often: in this age of information overload, less is more. I subscribe to over 200 blogs and I can’t possibly keep up with them all. But I can keep up with those that don’t have too much volume, and those are the ones I tend to make sure I read.
Other people who read many blogs can keep up with everything (I’ve never figured out how), but I don’t think they’re typical of the general population. Over time they will become less and less representative of blog-readers.
Back to “less is more”. Because my time is limited, I’d rather have quality than quantity. And anything filler-like lowers my interest. If your blog is about a particular topic, I don’t want to see too much that’s extraneous. That includes your personal life (unless of course that is the actual topic of your blog). I don’t have time to waste reading about what music you’re listening to right now, or that you’ll have to drive into the city today. Well, not too often: the occasional self-disclosure can help the reader feel connected to you, but too much is just vanity.
So (a) I don’t want blog entries to be padded with a lot of irrelevant stuff, and (b) I don’t want entries to be written just to meet a “publication schedule”. Post when you have something to say, and not when you don’t. Your quality will be higher as a result, and I believe more of your readers will stick with you (rather than unsubscribing to reduce their overload). And neither of us will waste our precious time.