Are there any forms of writing that you feel are inherent to the internet (as in blogs, social diaries, lists)? Do you try and work through these forms? Do you find them valuable?

Personally, I find them fascinating. As a writer, my favorite thing is to refine and condense things to an aphoristic state. I have a food blog on Facebook, for example, where I have tried to distill the form as much as possible, almost making it abstract.

As an editor, too, I enjoy taking up these various forms, mostly because their true potential remains, in most cases, depressingly untapped.

Do you think the internet allows for a better sense of your public (because of social networks, discussion forums, etc.?) or do the few hours of flickering online attention following publication not c

Roger and I had an interesting experience one time in Los Angeles. We had gone out to launch Paper Monument 3, I think it was, and we had a party at Ooga Booga. There was no reading, and things there are really laid back, so at some point, we realized no one was going to introduce us as the editors. Initially, this seemed like a bit of a slight or a waste—we had come all that way!—but we actually ended up enjoying it. People would talk about the journal right in front of us, and we could hear both the good and the bad in a way we haven’t before.

Publishing online does give you more of a sense of your audience, but I’m not sure it’s a better sense. It would be awful to pretend that each click equals some equivalent unit of reading, or that the number of likes really gauges how well-liked something is. I know that’s the direction we’re heading, but for the kinds of things I’m interested in, the audience has a more nebulous, and more lasting, presence.