However, I appreciate those interesting observations just as much now. I simply have come to carefully place each new bit of interesting information into its place. That is to say, I've figured out which medium is best for communicating different types of insights--whether on the blog, in a paper, in a journal, in a conversation, over Twitter, over Google Reader, etc. As a result, I've become better at, or learned the lessons necessary to become better at, hanging onto ideas as I stumble upon them. That, I think is important, for any thoughts we have that others in our position might share -- that are freed from our own personal experience, or merely informed rather than dictated by our personal experience, may be worth sharing.
I think this is especially important because the quality of importance is often conveyed by the current time and situation--and your social circle. It may not be important now to understand what Merrick Garland would rule on certain cases, because we don't estimate he will be nominated. But at the point that he is nominated, it will be crucial. And because of this transience of importance, a quality that often alights on a piece of information briefly, rather than describing its everlasting core. So I think it can be important to pursue these "interesting" thoughts even if they are not important.
At the same time, working for the blog has given me a much more heightened sense of what type of comment is "acceptable" in different social settings. The search for "important" information or "relevant" information is largely a search of the social setting. And thus, in the process, you can often pick up on information that is at least appropriate to mention in a given circle.
