Launching a blog, with or without content?

[ses5909]

I have seen so many times when people say you shouldn't launch a blog until you have 5-10 posts up and then Michael mentioned he did just that on his blog in the introduction post thread (http://www.theblogexperiment.com/blog-forum/showthread.php?t=726). I've never quite agreed with this. I think all of that content is wasted and people just won't see it. I think its great to have that many posts ready to go, but I just don't see the benefit in having them published before you have launched your blog.

What do you think??

[JohnC]

There was a time many deviant art oriented bloggers would launch sites without content. Many of those promising to be on certain topics would simply be visual displays later.

Having five entries minimum offers a first time impression of what to expect. That's just my opinion after having wasted much time backtracking the status of 'promising blogs' through scheduled bookmarking and multi tabbing.

[goldfries]

I'd say have at least 3 or whatever it is you set your options for # of post to be displayed at the front.

Being humans, coming to an empty or 1 post blog immediately doesn't give you that nice an impression.

Arguably, it could draw interest for people to re-visit to explore the potential of the author. :)

[deronsizemore]

hmmm...I started mine without any content (except the first post which was basically a summary of my about page.)

I think it would be wise to have 5 or so articles written and then post them after launch. Maybe post a couple and then promote the crap out of the blog and then post another, etc.

I agree that if you post 10 articles or so that chances are, no one will ever read those as most people don't ever scroll down past the first couple.

[kingjacob]

Im launching 6 city specific blogs this week and the writers have a few articles written already but I dont think you have to have 5 articles before you launch because most blogs dont get traffic until maybe a week so just posting normally from the beginning is enough.

[SarahG]

I would say 1 is enough. Providing you have a recent date on the post and the potential shows through then you'll usually convince anyone to return to see what comes next.

[Michael Martin]

I was a little wary at first as well, because I didn't want to waste time writing posts that no-one would see. A friend convinced me that it was worthwhile though, because you only get one chance at a first impression. I wanted to capture as many of my first-time visitors as possible. Having only one or two articles would have been a bit of a waste.

And I didn't mind writing the articles, because I was in no rush. I had spent nearly 2 months sorting out the design, the niche, the name and everything else. A few more days to get content ready wasn't much of a loss. :)

Some people dive right into blogging, and that's fine. I can understand them starting right away. I just liked to take things a little slower, and it did pay off in the end. Out of all those posts, only one of them hasn't had any comments (And it wasn't a great post anyway. xD )

[sbpoet]

I think *starting* a blog with just one post is fine. But wait for some content before *promoting* it -- that is, listing on directories, pointing to it in forums, and so on.

[Harrison]

Just write the first welcome post and your blog is launched!
I think it is not important to start a blog with or without content. The most important thing is how you maintain and keep posting great content to your blog.