Stephen Elliott recommended that his Daily Rumpus subscribers read Bob Lefsetz's emails as well. (And Bob likely said "Wha?" at all the non-music-biz people who signed on.) This post is about what Bob and Stephen really have in common:
(1) Their usually-week-daily  emails are nothing like most things I subscribe to: daily deals, bulletins from people paid to do journalism , announcements of events. They are particularly not like the myriad "thoughtful just-the-right-length community building article with a discounted offer at the end" that professional  bloggers send me all the time. And yet I make time to read Stephen and Bob, while usually ignoring the rest.
(2) They are not skimmable. And that's OK because I *want* to read them, whether I disagree or not. I read their stuff right after "actual emails from people I actually know."
(3) They have been doing what they do (in an evolving way) for a loooong time . As a result they have fascinating conversations with other people in and out of the biz, and they are also musing aloud on subjects such as "how to do what we love, make enough money to survive, and remain authentic." What gives these emails their juice is the COMBINATION of these two elements. They're musing on integrity, and asking their industry/movement connections tough questions about it, and reporting all this to us on a daily basis. Trying to see the pattern from within the fabric, while keeping the shuttle moving back and forth. A combination of content and attitude, with integrity, about integrity.
(4) They don't always name names. Often when they report a conversation they don't say who it was with. People in their world(s) seem to trust them and understand that sometimes Stephen (or Bob) will want to flat out promote something he cares about and other times they will prefer to say nothing, and it's up to them, because these platforms are so SO personal. It's unthinkable that I would get a message, "while Bob is on vacation, SomeJerk will be filling in." Bob will be filing dispatches from the slopes, if he does some thinking there or has an interesting conversation, and if he doesn't, I'll wait. You too Stephen! *air kiss with a worshipful air slap in it*
(5) Both of them do maintain (likely at intense personal cost) some connection with readers, despite the fact that there are thousands of us. Stephen sends out surveys . Bob posts collections of reader replies as follow-ups . (These are only some of the many Bob-mails that don't make it onto the site. Those are why you want to subscribe.) By sharing so much of themselves and inviting us to do the same, both have created a sort of community...to use an oft-abused term...
Taking a break in the numbering for a moment: don't try to copy these guys. It almost certainly wouldn't work for you or me. It works for them because their personal confessional styles combined with being constantly on the move, connecting and questioning, and having the discipline to write the email regularly so they don't get backed up... I'm afraid if I analyze this too precisely I'll jinx it. Maybe these guys could be called "professional bloggers" but they are so SO different from what that term usually means. Maybe because these emails are not how they make money, but instead a gift to the universe. OK, back to the numbered list...
(6) These emails are a new kind of news: actively filtered but not at all pre-digested. They're a new thing. No, I don't know what they are exactly. But I know fun and experimentation when I see them combined in an intoxicating cocktail . I'm actually only writing this today because I got a feeling that Stephen may be about to move on to his next thing and I want to celebrate what he's achieved. Both their emails today were particularly good. But then, they always are.
(7) The last thing these two guys have in common, is a strong underlying theme: there are no short cuts. In the spirit of that , I'm not posting actual excepts here. If you want to get on the journey with them you'll have to risk your own time and attention.
Speaking of which, if you've read to this point, I would like to thank you for your time. (Personal to Stephen or Bob: I am not asking you to link to this; we're taking the burden off you by talking amongst ourselves.)
Wrapping up with two thoughtful codas: Emma McCreary's Tao of Prosperity, and a quote from Suze Orman : "Truth creates money but lies destroy it."
 Stephen calls his an "overly personal email" and he writes one most weekdays. And when he doesn't write one he tells us why. Some of Bob's rants are on his web site, but if you subscribe you sometimes get three and four in a day. Other days none.
 God bless them, may they long have jobs!
 God bless them too; may a thousand business models bloom. But I find myself unable to read most of the things they send me. Um, thinking why: the voice doesn't sound authentic? Especially when it's trying to? See the Cluetrain Manifesto and its spawn.
 Credit to M.G. for popularizing and explaining the concept of the 10,000 hours.
 What makes Stephen's surveys fun is that he's asking questions to which he really wants the answer. A question from someone who really wants to know: there's nothing like it! I can't say which parts of Stephen's rants are the most fun for me. Maybe it's his conviction that there are no geniuses, which he keeps worrying at and challenging (himself more than anyone else).
 After Bob has discussed or even dissed a business model or industry power, his email bag will contain a reply from this person, as well as a bunch of other emails saying "don't use my name" and Bob passes them all along.
 On the left side of this page you might be able to find a link to my article from PerthDAC 2007, published in Leonardo Electronic Almanac, entitled "Where's the Party?" Note to self: write a better one, updated, and also make the old one easier to find.
 And because I am a process junkie. To quote Chris Berendes and Elin Whitney-Smith (you'll find their links on the RIGHT side of this page), "Content is just a crutch for people who can't handle process." Also, I'm not saying that that theme sums up these two men's work or that they don't have lots more to say.
 Quoted in the March issue of Oprah magazine. Thanks to Mary McCartney for turning me on to it, years ago now.