Getting replies is valuable information to a blogger, particularly when it is clear that the people replying are actual readers of your blog, not "trolls" . . . people who just drop in to flame you and move on.

It is the responsibility of the blogger to use that information in order to make the blog more interactive and keyed into the interests of one's readers. Although the potential audience of a blog is vast, the actual number is quite small.

Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times tried to do this in a blog last week. Initially, Kristof had posting a blog defending Rev. Jeramiah Wright by pointing out that his incendiary views were shared by close to 30% of the black population. Most the responses he got from the Times' predominantly white readership was quite negative. Some of the responses were "trolls" who weren't interested in engaging his argument, but there was enough thoughtful counterargument that Kristof was moved to make another post.

The first post can be found at www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20...ristof.html
The second post can be found at www.nytimes.com/2008/03/30...ristof.html

see how he used the second blog, not to disavow the first, but to use the critical replies as a launch to another topic, which got its own share of counterargument, and so on.

His concerns are different from your own, but in general the principle is the same. Use the replies you got last Thursday, both positive and negative, to expand/reroute/contact/diversify the mission of your tribe that you first wrote last Tuesday. Make it at least 250 words, please.