In response to a couple of complaints that I have received from fellow poets, I pose the title's question.

What should a credible amount of poems per month be from each poet?

It has to be said that most poets on WOL only manage 2/3 per month, some even less.

I would pose a further question. Is quality affected by volume?

Hi Graham, I do get bored of seeing the same names over and over again. I have over the years taken many breaks from visiting/using this site because from time to time another set of boars arrive. As irritating as same name and inane ramble is, let them have at it.
As for quality vs quantity, it is difficult and ultimately too subjective - I wouldn't want to Police it either! However, it is a shame, as Colin says above, that some real gems of writing get buried in the avalanche, but such is life!
Regards
Michelle

The site was changed some time ago to archive multi-postings (which now appear under the poet's most recent work) as these were seemingly blocking the whole section with one poets work.

Similarly, when new poets register, they often post three or four (sometimes more than that) poems in one go in order to get their work out there, without realizing that only the last one will sit on the blog, thus the others are often unseen.

On the quantity/quality issue, woe betides anyone for pronouncing on the quality of others work, albeit I find that many postings represent "streams of consciousness" writing as opposed to well thought out constructed poems.

Is that good or bad?

I think the current method used to regulate equal space on Poetry Blogs is a good, fair one. This is such an old grind, the flooding of poems from one person, new or otherwise. Too many too soon from a new WOLer is a bad idea to encourage readership, but it doesn't mean the poems aren't good. It just 'looks greedy', or 'hogging the playground'. We are such sensitive types! Readers/other poets need a chance to get to know new poets. And time is usually at a premium. Even one a day can be excessive, but it's tolerable, understanding that the 'new poet on-line' may have many good pieces in reserve.

I do not feel that extended comments/discussions following a given poem are in any way objectionable. If thought has been provoked why cannot it be followed up by anyone interested. If it becomes a two-person dialogue, the discussion affects no one. So - why not. Sometimes the immediacy of a poem stimulates more thought than a question posted on 'Discussions'.

Nobody is forced to read anything. WOL is choice oriented. And I really don't see how such a situation as extended commentary swallows up any one else's work.

IMO, 'stream of consciousness' writing can be vital and thought-provoking, but it takes great sustained talent, and a huge reservoir of vocabulary. I think the best efforts are probably well-structured/disciplined in spite of the 'off-the-cuff' desired effect.

Grahams remarks about `stream of consciousness` stuff.

I would say that much of the prose-poem stuff around is
too much like `one thing just following another` to be
usefully compared with the relevance or intensity of
stream of consciousness.

The novel has been the major literary art form for more than
a hundred years now, and many modern poems strike me as
short, hybrid poeticised-novel imitations (with the typography
fiddled about a bit)

In this `free` world of poetics at least it gets us writing again.
but I do wish that poets would realise that the arranging of
the lines is a help to the reader, and part of what Graham is
talking about in a well thought out constructed poem.

Constructed...good
Fiddled..........bad.

Huw, whilst your comment doesn't really refer to the main sentiment of this thread on this occasion I do agree with you.

Hello Graham,
Good questions.
I think the "most recent blog" arrangement polices adequately the issue you raise as your primary question.
As for the second, my personal take is that I have never been under any illusions that posting less frequently would improve the quality of my shite.

A high-fibre diet and some senna pods should do the trick John. ;)