Now I started to write a long rambling comment but it looks like most of the previous commenters share the same sentiment that I do.

In summary, Felix, don’t change your tone. You strike a great balance that not necessarily everyone will follow, but the people that cannot follow are probably not browsing the web for financial blogs anyway.

I think there’s a very important role to be played by specialist bloggers/journalists writing about niche areas in terms that only people involved in finance can easily follow. As we’ve seen over the last few years, there are plenty of parts of finance that were black boxes to most people in the industry. It’s hugely important that non-specialists grapple with these black boxes, and they’re not going to be happy about having to wade through descriptions of a basis point or a currency swap in every post/article.

All that said, if you are writing for a general audience, then of course you should write in language the vast majority of your audience will understand. That’s journalism 101.

But Felix, never forget: Mankiw turned off comments on his blog — and not coincidentally his blog is grotesquely useless, except as an indicator of the Rethuglican lying (talking) point of the day.

Mainstream media (WaPo, CNBC) is far too slanted to be of any use other than lining the bottom of my parrot’s cage.

Great blogs, like yours, are what keeps my head from exploding on a daily basis.

I agree with Don: sites that allow free exchange are infinitely preferable to those that don’t or that seem to consist of 5 people hanging out at a coffee shop THEY OWN. Sheesh, that is annoying.

What annoys me even more than only understanding 40% of what a blogger says (take Zero Hedge, who I love but need to to treat like something written in French–gist only) is when cool New York new media types (which I am assuming the folks at AWL are) assume that anyone knows who the hell they are or care–and what’s with these guys’ names? What planet are they from?

Besides, blogging about finance arcana can be fun. Where else could we watch you and John Carney go head to head in a mud wrestling match over the Community Reinvestment Act, for pete’s sake? Besides, we have the best draw: after sex, everybody likes to talk about money.

How would this work? If more people understand what you’re saying, then you might well get more people commenting on these matters, and better insights. I comment under the assumptions that I’m showing my appreciation for the blogger, trying to keep him/her going, and that average citizens can engage in economic questions that concern the country and world. I’d like more people to comment, if done civilly and sincerely.

In fact, I now tend to read blogs only if they allow commenting, or don’t delete the comments if they don’t like them. My feeling is that a blog should foster a sense of community and fealty, and that the comments help the blogger understand what their audience is interested in, and allows for a kind of mutual learning process. I think that, if asked, Buiter will concede that many of his latest ideas were originally mine, and that he can’t possibly repay his intellectual debt to me.

By the way, when I read the word “awl”, I immediately think of Custer’s ears being pierced with one at the Little Big Horn. Consequently, I find that blog disconcerting, even though I’m not a fan of Custer. I’d like to suggest that they change the name of the blog to “The Tool”. That name can have certain negative associations as well, but it’s easier to spell and more amusing.

You only need a passing knowledge to re-furbish extant expertise (lots of bloggers do this). But to really be plain requires rounding off the rough edges knowingly; you can instantly recognize a blogger who is ignorantly imprecise compared to a writer who is knowingly imprecise.

Because none of the theory applies in practice, communicating finance is largely about speaking to the imprecisions. The few who can do that have large opportunitity costs, why would they blog; e.g., why would Pablo Triano blog often, it’s too expensive. Or, Janet Tavakoli, she loses money writing a book.