This plays with fire that has already singed the Stack Exchange model.

These Stack Exchange sites have enough gaming going on in them without adding even more chances for it.

Many programming blogs have one or two really good posts, but others that stink. What's more, some of the topics discussed in programming blogs are very controversial.

Whether intentionally or not, this means that Code Review as a whole, rather than its individual users or answers, now takes a stance.

While this sort of thing may not fundamentally change who has a stake in this community, it can easily make people feel disenfranchised. The detractors of the Stack Exchange model have enough ammunition already.

Plus, it bothers me to see so much of the internet turned into a popularity contest or a beauty pageant.

Posts are fine. Let the search engine popularity do its thing. Let's not make it quite so much of a "winner take all" sort of thing.

This plays with fire that has already singed the Stack Exchange model.

I think I can summarize this proposal as follows: "Let codereview.stackexchange.com lend its weight behind specific blogs or authors."

Pro:

• Users have a central, trusted list of resources for their language or skill level.
• Sites like https://blog.codinghorror.com, https://rhettinger.wordpress.com/, and http://pythoncodereview.com/ get the extra attention that their contributions to stackoverflow and codereview deserve.
• codereview.stackexchange.com is already used as a teaching tool, and because of this, adding a "curriculum" of sorts makes sense.

Con:

• This will obviate the more natural process of individual users creating lists of resources, which short-circuits some of the community vetting we already have.
• Blogspam
• codereview.stackexchange.com lends its weight behind specific blogs or authors.
• Moderator control and responsibility increases in areas that it should not, like opinionated stacks.
• The stakes go up for those who want to "game the system", so to speak.
• Endorsing a blog wholesale does not account for past or future gaffes or bad advice.
• Choice of which blogs deserve such endorsement is a matter of opinion (maybe keep the list on meta?)

These Stack Exchange sites have enough gaming going on in them without adding even more chances for it.

Many programming blogs have one or two really good posts, but others that stink. 

What's more, some of the topics discussed in programming blogs are very controversial.

Whether intentionally or not, this means that Code Review as a whole, rather than its individual users or answers, now takes a stance.

While this sort of thing may not fundamentally change who has a stake in this community, it can easily make people feel disenfranchised. The detractors of the Stack Exchange model have enough legitimate complaint already.

Posts which list blogs are fine. Let the people decide which lists of blogs have the most value. Making "one list to rule them all" leads to questions of which blogs win and which lose, which does not make sense for the mandate of a no-nonsense Q&A site.

// , This plays with fire that has already singed the stackexchange model.

These stackexchange sites have enough gaming going on in them without adding even more chances for it.

Many programming blogs have one or two really good posts, but others that stink. What's more, some of the topics discussed in programming blogs are very controversial.

Whether intentionally or not, this means that codereview.stackexchange.com as a whole, rather than its individual users or answers, now takes a stance.

While this sort of thing may not fundamentally change who has a stake in this community, it can easily make people feel disenfranchised: https://medium.com/@johnslegers/the-decline-of-stack-overflow-7cb69faa575d#.j256yqupp <<< the detractors of the stackexchange model have enough ammunition already.

Plus, it bothers me to see so much of the internet turned into a popularity contest or a beauty pageant.

Posts are fine. Let the search engine popularity do its thing. Let's not make it quite so much of a "winner take all" sort of thing.

This plays with fire that has already singed the Stack Exchange model.

These Stack Exchange sites have enough gaming going on in them without adding even more chances for it.

Many programming blogs have one or two really good posts, but others that stink. What's more, some of the topics discussed in programming blogs are very controversial.

Whether intentionally or not, this means that Code Review as a whole, rather than its individual users or answers, now takes a stance.

While this sort of thing may not fundamentally change who has a stake in this community, it can easily make people feel disenfranchised. The detractors of the Stack Exchange model have enough ammunition already.

Plus, it bothers me to see so much of the internet turned into a popularity contest or a beauty pageant.

Posts are fine. Let the search engine popularity do its thing. Let's not make it quite so much of a "winner take all" sort of thing.