This may seem a bit cruel once you read Martin's entire post, but he does raise an interesting point of blog etiquette:

What is the etiquette for ending a blog? And not just a cessation of posts either, I mean taking it down completely. If this blog disappears, and all links lead to 404 errors (or even a message from me apologizing), is that some sort of Stalinist re-writing of history? It's not like a million people have linked to this site. I got one link from Instapundit, one from Serenity's Journal, a bunch from Frozen In Montreal, two from Sneakeasy’s, and a couple from Debbye in Toronto. Seriously, in seven months of blogging, that’s it. So no one will be crushed. But do I have some obligation to keep the content online?

Read the entire post. I admit that the thought has occurred to me in a theoretical sense, although I am very happy to be blogging at this stage. I would assume that some sort of valediction would be polite, even if your readership was small, just to let them know you're OK and haven't been hit by a bus. Since Martin is paying for his hosting, cutting off the funding would likely mean his stuff would go off line more or less instantly, while with Typepad, I'm not sure if that would happen or if I would no longer be able to access my blog if I stopped the service.

However, if you read Magyar Blog, you'll see that it is interesting and well-written. My advice would be to continue as long as you have the passion for it. If you feel like you need to go a different direction, create a new blog but keep your old one up in case you feel like returning to it.

And good luck!

UPDATE: Martin clarifies that he's not paying for the hosting, and that the Stalin-style purge would be self-inflicted. I didn't get that the first time around.

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry is