I found this...A young violinist goes to see Itzhak Perlman. He plays his violin for Perlman and asks if he has the talent to be a great violinist. Perlman tells him to give up the violin.
Years later, the young man, now an accountant, runs into Perlman again and asks, "How did you know I didn't have the talent?"
Perlman says, "That's what I tell everyone. If you'd truly wanted to play the violin, you wouldn't have listened to me."
... in an article about why most web journals suck
and it really struck a chord somehow. It's a principle which is applicable to so much. It's quite an interesting article although I don't agree with all the points - I think the writer is too focused on what the reader is getting out of it in some ways. I guess that's relevant if you want readers (which some people do) but I'm generally not bothered.* I guess the trick is to be aware that you may (and probably do) have readers you don't know (so don't post your phone number or anything) but don't worry about it. She also doesn't really mention the community aspects of journalling very much which is one of the things I like about it. On the other hand, it's not clear how old the article is but I'm guessing fairly (it says that in the days the writer started there were about 20 journallers, now there are hundreds :) ) so it must have been pretty different in those days.
*Actually, there is a feedback section at the end where she does acknowledge this, sayingAgain, this advice concerns journals whose authors want their work to be read by more than a few of their friends. You may not care about anyone visiting your page twice, and that's okay. You may have a new approach that fulfills all of your needs but others find less appealing.
which is pretty much the impression I got. I guess you just have to be aware that other people *might* be reading it - you don't have to cater for them, but try to bear in mind that they're there