Felicia has an interesting post about how to get linked from her website. I don't know that a lot of people use her links because she has gone private. But anyway, the criteria are interesting. Here's what to do or not to do if you want to get linked and probably read by Felicia:
1) I'm not going to link you if you talk politics in a so-called "poker journal," unless it has specifically to do with poker law, or is just a one-time comment.
I notice a lot of George W bashing close to the election, and some more now for the inauguration. I enjoyed these, as it lets me know where most players are coming from. I commented on some, and it doesn't bother me one bit. I don't do it, because I try to keep my content "poker only."
2) I'm probably not going to link you if you don't have me linked in return. Just too much work, nothing personal.
This one is easy, and most people that really care about the world of big-time tournament poker have already done this, whether she links back or not. I think linking just so you get linked back is pretty whorish anyway.
3) I'm not going to link you if you are an Internet-only player (there is nothing wrong with this at all, believe me, some of the best players I know play on the Internet. It just doesn't jive with my journal, which is about live play, and is too much work these days with literally hundreds of Internet-only blogs).
I agree that there are a TON of internet only players and that reading about a live game is a lot more interesting, but whether you play live or not doesn't affect the quality of the writing, which I consider a much more important factor. I'd say that if you've NEVER played live, you need to.
4) I'm not going to link you if you provide tons of Internet hand histories.
I still like reading hand histories, but I understand how they can become tedious. I post them once in a while, but I wouldn't call it tons. Tons would suck. If you are putting them up for information purposes or as an honest inquiry of the quality of your play. If you are just showing off your straight flush, a screenshot is a better idea.
5) I'm not going to link you if I have a feeling that you are an ad-site (this is hard for me to tell sometimes because in my ten years on the Internet I've learned to overlook ads and obvious "pay" sites altogether).
Spam sucks. This goes without saying. I have one ad on my site, but they DID give me a free cruise and offer a ton of comps for players, so I really offer the ad as a service. If you are playing online without any rebate or comp at all, you are the sucker at the table.
6) I'm not going to link you if you go around to other blogs and flame them in their comments and/or in your own blog, unprovoked.
Okay, I am guilty of this. Ironic though, the reason I flamed someone is because of the way she attacks Felicia. I certainly wasn't provoked, but I still feel the post, flaming though it be, is justified.
I don't really care about any of that stuff when I link someone. All I look for is interesting and TIMELY content. I hate reading the first few posts of a really promising blog, and then NOTHING. I've noticed a lot of women in particular start blogging and really set up an interesting premise, followed by NOTHING. I'm sure I'm just remembering selectively and lots of guys do it too.
I get sick of reading about people's fantasy football results. If I gave a fuck I would be in your league. Sports picks are only slightly less annoying, at least there's gambling involved. I usually skip those sections.
The best posts are ones that review something. A poker room, a restaurant in a Casino, whatever. Tell me what it was like and what you liked and disliked about it. I'll read that and appreciate it.
Basically, if it's interesting and talks about poker occasionally, I'll read it.