Gonch made a post about posting on his blog and Facebook. Tyler has expressed his frustration how there isn't one place to really do it all in terms of photos, content, link sharing and deep thoughting, er, thinking.
I started syndicating my blog to Facebook (when it works) because I know more people are likely to see it that way that I'd ordinarily share with, and I don't have to explain to them what an RSS feed is. The thing I initially struggled with is that I no longer "own" the comments, because if Facebook goes away or I quit it, I can't take them with me. I'm at peace with that at this point. There's a part of me that would still love to build what Tyler dreams of as the perfect thing to do all of these things, but that's hard with a day job and a baby.
But to Gonch's point, I find Facebook useful for sharing stupid shit, and that stupid shit, while often capturing some moment of pop culture, is different from things I blog about, which are generally deeper and take more thought to get down, and/or read. And of course, I don't see a huge need to publish 50 family vacation photos in a public place either, so FB is good for that. I still own the originals, so that documentation of my life is still just as available to me as ever.
I think in some ways you have to decide what your online identity is really composed of, and what your motivation is. I regularly post content to my blog, Facebook and Vimeo. The blog is reasonably filtered in terms of what I post, but I think it's enough to capture my general state for historical purposes (even if I'm the only one who really cares about it). Vimeo is similarly public. Facebook is simply a stream to keep friends in the loop, and I treat is as such in both directions.
I guess I'm pretty much OK with this arrangement. If something isn't meeting my expectations, honestly I'll write some piece of software that will. I suppose most people don't have that ability.