anyway.

I'd say keep doing both. If it's more weighty, put it here maybe? It's easy to miss stuff in all the noise on G+, whereas I've got this in my feed reader so will unlikely miss it.

Both is a good idea—seconding the comment about "noise"; I only just subscribed to this, and it's nice to get notifiers about this.

Though G+ is also very good for making random small light posts. However, I don't really make a habit of visiting people's pages; I just check my stream.

I'm another RSS follower.  I'd prefer to see posts here, but I don't mind if G+ has them as well.  But if you prefer making G+ your primary site, I'd be just about as happy if you posted links to individual G+ posts from here.  You could do so for each post, or perhaps an occasional "Here are my recent G+ posts you might care about!"

Alan: Ah, good idea, thanks!

I read both G+ and lumpley.com (via RSS), in theory. In practice, G+ generates so much material I hardly read a fraction of it. I prefer it if i can see stuff via RSS.

I like Alan's suggestion, but am more likely to click through to a G+ post if I can see what it's about e.g. if there's a summary on the RSS feed.

I find easier to read your posts on the blog than on G+. So option "b" is best for me.
And you can also post links on G+ to this blog !

(a) You wish I would bring my blogging and stuff back here where it belongs, screw G+.

Because you asked. :-)

To be fair, I have nothing against G+, and Alan's suggestion would probably work fine. It does mean that comments are not as readily available, which is sad. But it could be a reasonable way of meeting all our needs.

You know, with the free content that you're providing us. :-D

I follow you via RSS, so if you do only G+, I won't see your stuff as easily.

For discussions, I'm fine with G+.

For announcements of import, post it here and on G+ so I have a better chance of seeing it.

Personally, I don't mind if you keep your real blogging stuff, like news and such, on G+. But I would prefer that you use this site to post stuff about design and making RPGs. It is just that a lot o that stuff is already here, and I think it is nice to have it all in one place.

Definitely voting for b.

I'm perfectly happy reading it over on G+

C) G+ is fine.  Though both would make sure it hit my RSS reader as well...

Option b—I'm on G+, and occasionally read things there, but I primarily read via RSS and would prefer to keep it that way

Seconding javabard.

(B) - I don't have a G+ account and I was actually wondering why you hadn't been updating lately.

Another RSS reader here; I don't use G+ and had no idea you were posting prolifically over there.  Option B for me.

I'm an RSS person—option (a).  Thanks for asking!

I feel like the best thing to do is blog at your own place, but then share a link to your posts on G+. It makes it easy for people to reshare via G+, and if they want to +1 or have a conversation over there then there's no harm, and if they want to come over here and comment they can, and you have control of your content that is not subject to the whim of the corporate lords. G+ is great for keeping up with what's new, but it is way the hell hard to find an old post back on G+.

I follow you on G+, but I find it's pretty easy to miss posts if I'm not crazy vigilant. I am another RSS user, so I'm sure to catch everything if it's here.

That said, I'm much more likely to participate in discussions over on G+.

I guess I'm a "B".

For RPG design I'd like to answer (a): it's easier to reference to people who're not on G+, easier to search for, harder to miss (RSS), marginalia rule and indeed lumpley.com is not subject to the whim of Google (suppose they scratch G+, like they're about to do with their RSS reader).

Screw G+. Blog here so that I don't have to hunt down two comment streams. In addition, if you post here, I'll read it (or at least see it). If you post on G+, who knows? G+ is a flood of information.

Another RSS user and another vote for b here.

However, it's not only about the mode of initial delivery (RSS vs. G+) but I also have the feeling that your blog/website is a much better place to look up older conversations than G+.

My immediate reaction = A.
In retrospective, I don't actually mind B, of course.
I also use feeds to get notified of new posts. I'm not a G+ user, deliberately (up to now, I was able to stand by that choice).

Hi.

I personally try to follow you both on G+ and on blog. On G+ there were some posts about designing Pilgrim of Doom and I'd like to read them again (but it is much harder to find them on G+) - for example one about designing nano-game. I don't mind, if there were more one-time posts, like "I'm making playtests now" or one-liners. (B)

(b) too.
But I'd like to highlight what Christoph said. A blog article is more perennial.

I echo Yanni and several others—heavyweight stuff makes more sense on the blog, and I'm a dinosaur RSS reader as well, so b), I suppose.

Yup, another RSS-based follower.

b), with a bias towards heavyweight stuff here and a pointer to it from G+

I like the spurts of RPG theory stuff that's happened here over the years; clouds and arrows, occult co-ownership, etc.  This seems like a better venue for that kind of thing, but I'm not sure I can particularly justify that stance—but it's how it feels.  G+ seems lighter, though I'm not sure why that has to be, either.

I don't particularly care; I'll read both places.  I guess it would be easier if there were only one place to watch you, but it's no big.

What do you, Vincent, see as the strengths and weaknesses of the two media for the kind of interactions you've been having?

B. I follow you here and on G+, but the G+ stream can get cluttered.

I read them both. So I don't mind either way.

I tend to agree that the blog as a medium has a more serious tone. When something is a G+ post I kind of assume it is an off the cuff thought. And when you have composed a full blog post that you have a more fully formed idea to talk about.

But those are just my preconceived biases toward the respective media. Do what is easiest for you.

Either a or b as I prefer to read your stuff here. Leaning towards a if that means having all the comments here, and in one place, as well.

(a) or (b) - Not on G+, following your RSS feed here.

I read your public posts both here and in G+, but I see very different effects afterwards:  on G+ there is usually an avalanche of small, very fast posts, of people who want to be among the firts to comment. After a few posts the jokes start, and after a couple of dozen of posts, often less, the initial point is completely lost in a series of some hundreds of posts that, no matter what they say, they really means "I am here too, see?"

It's not strange, it's the usual Social Network Effect. They are made to work like this.

So, for any post that is worth at least some discussions, I would really prefere you posted them here, where the discussion is slower and more focused (and it can be found afterwards: everything you post on G+ is lost forever), and use G+ only to post pictures of your kittens (I am a fan of posting pictures of kittens on G+, I always +1 them, I think it's the ideal kind of post for that kind of social platform)

I also follow via RSS and would not follow to G+, so...my vote is (a).

RSS reader favoring B or more specifically Alan's solution.

I'm on Google+ but never really learned how to follow it in a way that appeals to me (same deal with Twitter).

(a)

This is where I am.

I think of anyway as a more permanent place than G+.  I read both, so it's not like I'm going to miss something by accident, but if I want to _reference_ something, it's a lot easier to remember it and find it if it's here.

I think you should think about what purpose anyway serves for you, and make sure you follow through that purpose as best you can.  If it's an archive of your important gaming thoughts, make sure they get archived here.  If it's a marketing tool, you don't want to miss out on part of your audience that doesn't follow G+.  If it's a mix (I imagine it is)... well, it's a pain in the ass to post the same thing in two places, moderating two conversations, etc.

If it's gotta be one or the other, I say anyway.  If it doesn't, I still say make sure you put the important gaming stuff over here so I can keep track of it better.

A, because to me G+ just seems like "doing the internet wrong."*  Of course, I feel that way about Facebbok too, so clearly many people disagree.  B is not a terrible solution.

* What's wrong? Just my opinion, of course but - persistence is optimized for machines, not humans.  It encourages a "fire and forget" behaviour from people, but of course the aggregate data and all is still really useful for marketing/machine-purposes.

I'm also a or b - I didn't even realise there was stuff I was missing on G+! I just thought you were in a quiet phase :-)

I agree with the many comments above that say it's easier to find material via RSS than in the noise of G+, but also I should probably make more of aneffort to use G+ regularly.

(a) You wish I would bring my blogging and stuff back here where it belongs, screw G+.

b

a) or b) if possible. I love reading on RSS and am trying to avoid Google plus on principle as I don't like enabling the death of anonymity/pseudonymity.

If your goal is to converse, then for God's sake choose A.

I'd vote for B, if only because it is way easier to reference a post in here than it is on G+.

Alan's idea is cool too.

Please keep putting stuff here. I won't see it otherwise.