Here's another crowd-sourcing post, but this time non-technical, and related to Comments Home itself. I'm not going to put forward any ideas myself, but just offer questions as topics for conversation, because I'm very interested to see what people think, and to see what sorts of conclusions and possible solutions they come up with through the interplay of each other's comments.
One of the great things about this community of commenters to which we belong has always been its inclusiveness, in terms of diversity of thought. There are few sites where you can find hard leftists like Robert Cooke, pragmatic leftists like phx, centrists like MadisonMan, libertarians like Revenant, neocons like me, and hard righties like Methadras, all free-form debating in more-or-less good faith, usually at a very high quality level (where it's not just name-calling and argument-by-assertion). (If I've miscategorized any of you, I apologize and feel free to call me an idiot in the comments). I've learned quite a bit from reading opinions that I don't share, supported rationally by eloquent proponents.
First question: Am I right here -- do we want a diversity of thought, rather than an echo chamber?
Second question: Do we have enough lefties? Because I haven't seen much from them in comments.
Third question: How do we get more leftist and progressive commenters, if we don't have enough?
And a request: If you consider yourself to the left of the average Comments Home commenter*, please reveal yourself as such in the comments to this post, and we'll take a quick survey. We'll sedate you, tag you with a transmitter, and release you back into the wild. Maybe there are dozens of you out there lurking. Maybe you can tell us what we can do to lure you into the conversation.
*(I didn't say "if you consider yourself left of center" here, because I don't think anyone does. Communists and right-wing extremists consider themselves centrists; it seems like an extension of the natural tendency to think of oneself as the center of the universe, not necessarily in an egotistical way, but in the sense that you think your own philosophy must be in the center because it's so perfectly reasonable on every issue.)
446 comments:
1 – 200 of 446 Newer› Newest»I consider myself to the left of the average Comments Home commenter.
I'm going to put this particular transmitter, just this one, on extra tight. And around the base of the scrotum. You'll feel a little pressure, and maybe a swift kick or two.
Am I right here -- do we want a diversity of thought, rather than an echo chamber?
Of course we want a diversity of thought; that is the very meaning of diversity on a blog. However, not every topic should be one in which diversity is paramount. For example, the topics about food, drink, math, poetry, commenter help, etc. aren't diversity- dependent in order to be fun, interesting and amusing. One way to keep this blog healthy, and the commenters friendly with each other is to keep the number politically contentious to a limited number, say one in five, or something like that.
Do we have enough lefties? Because I haven't seen much from them in comments.
Why keep score? Sometimes one person with a clear point of view and the ability to express it is better then twelve with muddled opinions. We seem to be doing okay here.
How do we get more leftist and progressive commenters, if we don't have enough?
The balance here is pretty good the way it is now. Don't try to change it; it will evolve naturally.
Lem, thanks for asking. I don't believe I've ever seen this kind of thinking on any other blog.
LOL @ Pasta's comment!
Pasta, I think you're all a bunch of Commie pinkos, but then I'm pretty sure the John Birch Society was a front for Comintern, so your mileage may vary.
I, for one, don't miss Garbage's daily White House issued talking points or another's self-satisfied claim that he was against all incumbents but he lived in Madison where he probably never ever voted for a Repub. Re economic issues and smaller govt, we are in the fight of our lives and we can't stand by while diverse voices try and complete the destruction of the country.
For instance the other night on Fox News, librul dope Jemu Green claimed the govt is not footing the bill for the Obamaphones. That is the kind of idiocy you get from Garbage and Ritmo. This blog does not need more of that.
The problem is that a good many Lefties will come here with the same intent they had at TOP - to hijack posts and turn things into a screaming match or say something stupid in an attempt to show how witty and sophisticated they are in comparison to all us Lemmings, Althoused or otherwise.
I don't mind guys like Cook or MadMan; whatever else you can say, they are their own man.
As for how many Lefties, maybe they like things the way they are at TOP, I don't know; Cook was at TOP last night when I commented on the Benghazi post. The Ritmos and She Devils, even though he's kept things a bit reined in here, maybe we can live without.
PS I saw tradguy, mccullough, elkh1, LarsPorsena (none of whom can be called Lefties) at TOP, so some of our old stalwarts haven't migrated over.
And a request: If you consider yourself to the left of the average Comments Home commenter*, please reveal yourself as such in the comments to this post, and we'll take a quick survey. We'll sedate you, tag you with a transmitter, and release you back into the wild.
Hello...Hello? Someone said I should come here to claim a prize I won? Is there anyone here?
It seems to me that most posts onmthis blog so far have been apolitical. A good mix of that is helpful for establishing comity among people of differing ideologies (comity which is sorely lacking in most of our society.)
But if the goal is to work in more political discussion (hopefully while retaining the fun stuff) my suggestions would be:
-Invite some of the resident lefties you mentioned to be frontpagers, either as guestposters or full time.
-Use posts to draw out lefties by stating your own position on an issue with invitations to debate it.
-A combination of the two suggestions above would be a volley of point-counterpoint posts on a given issue or topic.
-Link to leftwing blogs with decent writers and commenting communities. Any trolls who show up would have to be quickly dealt with. Freeman seems quite good at the internet version of a mother's stink eye (I think it went something like "We don't do that here.") regular commenters would have to be careful to not feed trolls.
Phx asks ...
Hello...Hello? Someone said I should come here to claim a prize I won?
Pastafarian, the contest operator, describes the prize thusly:
I'm going to put this particular transmitter, just this one, on extra tight. And around the base of the scrotum.
So, yes, you are the first winner. Step in to that booth over there...
No really, hey...why you backing up... :-))
Bad Park You!
Oh, one more suggestion I forgot:
Try some posts which invite people to state what they admire about their political opposites, or on what issues they could at least find some agreement.
Bad Park You!
: D
Okay, here goes...my rambling answer to Pasta's questions:
I want Comments Home to succeed and continue as a unique soap box in the park, so to speak, where opinions can differ and commentary not descend into ad hominem Hades. When I've lost my temper I've as guilty of that as anyone. What I'd like to see is a place where coy insult or direct insult and intense personal aspersions are not fired off in the first place. With only an exception or two, that seems subdued somewhat lately, I believe that Lem and the Gang of 10 have achieved this goal.
I've learned quite a bit from reading opinions that I don't share, supported rationally by eloquent proponents.
Definitely the case for me, too, and as I have said previosuly, I have learned things, changed my mind, and benefitted from the comments of a diverse group, many better educated and smarter than me. It is win win. This was my stated position at TOP as well, and in my lasat comment there, posted by the TOP principal herself echoed that sentiment and said I was sorry to see the change. I did not quesiton that principal's right to make that change. Fact is I want Comment Home to succeed and TOP to continue as it will or may.
First question: Am I right here -- do we want a diversity of thought, rather than an echo chamber?
Yes. You are right as far as I am concerned.
Second question: Do we have enough lefties? Because I haven't seen much from them in comments.
Harder to answer. I believe good faith "lefties" will come as time goes on if we can sustain good manners. We need no flame-throwers and personal aspersion hurlers from any dimension, left, right or center. Attacking someone personally, especailly in personal matters, is bad faith becasue it does not address a topic under discussion or is uncalled for on an open thread. There are civil courts for torts if someone feels they have one, take it there. In short, calling some one "mother-fucker" doesn't advance your position, and I should know as I have done it.
Third question: How do we get more leftist and progressive commenters, if we don't have enough?
See the above about reputation and how we can and will acquire it, and how that should be attractive to those who'd otherwise gather in a park somewhere and holler at each other.
And a request: If you consider yourself to the left of the average Comments Home commenter*, please reveal yourself as such in the comments to this post...
I can't address mean averages to determine if I am left or right on a subject, I lean heavily right, but remain a Lockean at heart. I've taken a lefty position at times years ago on TOP where I critized Palin and was roundly chased up the proverbial tree. Some of the criticsm I heard was valid and it did change my mind.
I'm all for hearing those different voices.
It's been very impressive to me to see Ritmo, Shiloh, phx, AReasonable Man, et. all contribute here.
I'm not sure that those on the conservative side would have made the same effort the above group has done to improve the tone at this blog.
One suggestion would be to actually read a comment 'in good faith', and not just blow it off because you know that someone may be to the left or right of you. That would include not using disparaging nicknames.
Lem, thanks for asking. I don't believe I've ever seen this kind of thinking on any other blog.
This is not my post.
It is a good question, however.
I'm a lefty a big ol' lefty, left of the left overs. And no, people here do not want diversity of thought. They want the new and improved Ritmo, those who will reign themselves in and make no real impact.
As for trolls, and as for Freeman giving the "stink eye" and reminding that "we don't do that here", did she remind Methadras that it was not playing nice when he called black people "mongoloids and stupid"? No? Oh, I guess she can only be on duty for so long and has a life of her own, after all.
I suspect most lefties from Althouse won't come here and stay, because the same ones who abused them there are here and Freeman, as wonderful as she is can't police this place by herself.
I mentioned stink eye to the lefties only because it was on topic, but I do agree with Inga's point that the rules must be enforced across the board. And also, that one person can't always moderate so it really is up to the community. Maybe the person who writes each post should be responsible for keeping the comments below it on track.
I went looking for Garage last night. I found he hadn't posted on his own blog for a long time.
Garage would be a good addition here, I believe.
One more thing on my mind on this topic...
I don't think anyone should maintain negative attitudes toward any other commenter, or post contributer, for commenting on TOP as it is managed and moderated today. I still read TOP, but I won't try commenting for personal reasons that I've expressed previously. I suspect the feeling is mutual. That is just done.
I certainly post elsewhere as well, as I've also stated previously. For example, "Anne's Opinions" and "Legal Insurrection" are two favorites of mine, as well as the little casual one I'm part of these days.
I'm not going to put forward any ideas myself, but just offer questions as topics for conversation, because I'm very interested to see what people think, and to see what sorts of conclusions and possible solutions they come up with through the interplay of each other's comments.
Adorno The Jargon of Authenticity cites Schutze
I do not wish to present you with a patented solution, but I would merely like to bring up for
discussion a series of hot potatoes which do after all face us. For we do not need ready-made opinions, which anyway do not touch us deeply, but what we need is rather the genuine dialogue which moves us in our humanity.
Christian Schutze, Stencilled Speech for All Occasions
Evidently it was something going around.
I like Garage, but I think Ritmo or Cook would make points that are harder to argue against.
The center of gravity of a skilled high jumper goes under the bar.
Commenting should be the same way.
C Stanley said...
I mentioned stink eye to the lefties only because it was on topic ... the rules must be enforced across the board.
So far they appear to have been done that way. The commentary vis a vis mongoloids was criticized by others without any though police waving hammers. The fact is making crude references in general is not that same as directing them to an individual personally. We can abide the former, [and critique it] but not the latter, if we value the reputation Lem and the Gang of 10 are striving for here.
And also, that one person can't always moderate so it really is up to the community. Maybe the person who writes each post should be responsible for keeping the comments below it on track.
Whoa up. If this gets to the point where full moderation hammers are invoked, we will have defeated ourselves. If we can agree to be civil we should not have problems with moderation. I can be very un-civil, but I am willing to change, to rein it in, so to speak, if others are too. Actually I will try to even if others do not. I can learn to say the same things without the animus and rancor.
Pasta, we have discussed this obliquely before. The blog is evolving into a pleasantly clubby outlet for a particular subset of ex-Althouse posters. I don't think that this is necessarily a successful formula for the mid-term if the goal is to grow the blog or even maintain current levels of interest. I have posted less over time since I can't see any point disrupting the current vibe. The blog has attracted some people, like ed, who seem incapable of tolerating views different to their own, even if those alternative views are more reflective of the mainstream. As a consequence, posting by me or I suspect others, can seem unnecessarily disruptive to this vibe.
For good or bad the threads that have attracted the most discussion and frisson are the ones that have harkened back to the days on Althouse, helped in large part by Meade's passive aggressive posts. Controversy is good for a blog. The community needs to decide if it wants more controversy. Personally I think it needs more frisson to have any chance of being successful. What Althouse did well was piss people off, giving license to a quite critical give and take. This is one way to go but it would require a greater diversity of voices than you have at the moment.
Also, blogs are like magazines/newspapers, they need effective editors. The Corner and Andrew Sullivan are the two most successful blogs in this regard and they both arose out of well established magazines and are run by professional editors.
I think you need to add some left wing posters but you also need to add some editorial control. Maybe a right wing, libertarian, left wing editor and cultural/math editor could be set up. Their job would be to solicit the best posts that they can get from the commenters who are still active and limit repetitive and less interesting posts. For instance, we could have more non-political posts from ed, his one post so far was one of the more successful non-Althouse posts. I would also increase the diversity of the blog roll. At least add the Corner and Andrew Sullivan but also consider some other more diverse views.
Don't be afraid to make contentious posts. That's what attracts comments. I don't mean to deliberately antagonize, but provoke in a thoughtful way. That's what Ann does so well; she can take on a big issue in the news, like Benghazi or the IRS scandals, and tease out interesting points that the big media outlets are not making. Sometimes these points appeal to lefties, and sometimes to righties.
Congeniality is nice to a point, but it gets boring after awhile.
I didn't mean to suggest that the writers have to be heavy handed. Just thinking that the person who writes could keep checking in. If other commenters have already reined in a problem, then that's it. If they haven't then it seems like the writers here are all pretty capable of using their individual styles to put violaters in their place (with terseness, humor, or what have you.)
" helped in large part by Meade's passive aggressive posts."
There is nothing passive about my aggressive posts.
A one hundred word limit per comment. Call it the AllenS rule.
Is it possible to be a traditional rock-ribbed conservative and a total hedonist at the same time? Please advise..
Or better yet, how does one reconcile the more stoic aspects of one's personality with the hedonistic ones?
Meade said...
" helped in large part by Meade's passive aggressive posts."
There is nothing passive about my aggressive posts.
Whatever their formal psychological description they have tended to prolong the discussions.
Michael Haz said...
A one hundred word limit per comment. Call it the AllenS rule.
I think longer posts are fine but they should require a click to read on so that they don't clutter up the main page. A 200 word limit above the fold seems reasonable.
Interesting how some people finally say what everybody knew at TOP.
AReasonableMan said...
I think longer posts are fine but they should require a click to read on so that they don't clutter up the main page. A 200 word limit above the fold seems reasonable.
I agree with this idea...and as one of the more "verbose" commenters, I suspect it would encourage me to be more succinct and concise. 200 words before the fold would encourage brevity, but I think 100 word limit per se would encourage staccato posts to work around the limit. The 200 word before the fold idea is workable ...and that comes from a blabbermouth. It would encourage brevity because the fold is there and who goes past it often? Still, it is there for use when worth it.
Call it the Amended AllenS and Rabel rule.
AllenS and Rabel can say more in 10 words than I manage in 100^2.
More lefties, Yes. Either them or I are really wrong, and someone needs to find out why.
Of course, the key question for an "above the fold" limit is whether the Blogger platform can manage it for comments?
I thought it was lesbians who wanted to organize all the time.
I have a deep fear of carpal tunnel.
It should be forbidden to say "Daddy, he punched me in the stomach!" in any form. Your Daddy isn't here, unless Maury Povich says so.
What's needed is a way for commenters to strike out parts of the head article.
Commenter moderation.
Allen, try switching to the other hand, it'll be good for your brain, also :)
I use two hands, deborah, it's twice as fast that way.
Rh, feel free to quote the parts you'd like stricken. One would love to get an insight into the workings of that finely tuned instrument of yours.
lol sounds complicated, but you are a former machinist, I bow to the master.
rhhardin said...
I thought it was lesbians who wanted to organize all the time.
Maybe you can suggest some lesbian blogs that you read regularly?
I was meaning to bring this up since early on, but the suddenly cordiality between the same people who never got along at TOP has been stark. It's also true over at Troopers. People who argued about the color of the sky at Althouse are like best friends over here. It's kind of weird, but I like it, and hope we could keep that, and still go nakedly into the contrary pool without all the old Baby Ruths floating to the surface.
Maybe the person who writes each post should be responsible for keeping the comments below it on track.
Ugh. Couldn't disagree more. Enforcing that comments below each post remain "on-topic" is a good way to kill a conversation.
I'm not good at brevity and admire those who are. I suggest a "post like Allen S day" so some of us can practice.
I have such a delima delema situation where I would prefer to boot the guy on principle, so I'll probably always vote, "get out," because his family is entrenched and I do not like intergenerational public tit sucking I mean public service. It's wrong. UnAmerican. *digs out flag from sofa cushions*, *waves flag*
Udall. And Democrat. Dynastic type thing going on. It's wrong. It's so wrong it goes like this in my head:
wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong
And then there is the other side that an entrenched family like that really does know what is best, and possibly knows best for a whole region and even possibly knows what is best and does in fact serve for the best over time. There is that possibility that it is not only big fat rent-seeking.
Then the guy turns around and does the right thing by opposing NSA expansion (talks about that anyway), and I go, "Hurray!" He really did do (say) the right thing.
That puts a crimp on my hard and fast rule, my senator doing the right thing. Keep that up and I'll have to vote for him.
Exactly. Off topic poetic all the way. I want to express and celebrate my ADD.
The Denver Post is so lame. Today's lame-o edition is out of pro-democrat talking points.
They have a story about a couple who is surprised to find they have 4 bats living in their house.
Big deal. I find bats in my house all the time.
I found a dead bat clinging to the back of the drape once. Poor little guy.
I did not alert the news media.
Again, Icepick, I think you guys are reading in stuff that I didn't actually suggest. The writer can enforce only what he wants to. If he wants it to be free wheeling, most people here seem to want that (including me.) But I think there's a type of comment that most of us would agree needs to be slapped down, and the writers could do that. If this suggestion is rejected I'm fine with that but the suggestion wasn't about heavy deletion or sticking to topics so I wanted to clarify.
I voted for Mo Udall in the '76 primaries. Didn't vote again till 1988.
Congeniality is nice to a point, but it gets boring after awhile.
That is the most stupid, most wrong "thought" I have ever read on the internet, r-tard. It's really hard to believe that ANYONE could be that fucking stupid! I hope that a crawler runs over your begonias. Joe Schmoe indeed!
(Hope that helps.)
Who can we run against Udall? Is there anyone who will do it who stands a chance?
I will probably try to make your arguments look bad if I think they are. Do the same with me.
I promise I will not hold a grudge or take it personally if you don't take it personally. Or even if it got a little personal I will set that aside the next time we meet if you will.
I promise to treat everyone with the same respect or better than they treat me.
Or as world chess champion Vasily Smyslov once said, "I will play 40 good moves. If YOU can play 40 good moves, we will draw."
A long time ago I read of some event that spoke well of his character, but I can't remember the story. Does anyone know what it might have been? I don't think it was widely known, but something that he did without crowing about it.
Yes, more left of center.
Its good to have a "spirited" discussion.
Its also good for a fellow conservative to calm down (if not slap down) a flame-thrower.
As for the surprising civility (as opposed to TOP) here, I wonder if its the absence of a Diva subtly suggesting "you two fight"?
I think Ed Snowden and Glenn Greenwald are True American Heroes, as Hannity might say.
Does that put me on the left or the right fringe? I can't tell anymore.
"I find bats in my house all the time."
This is not a good sign. Do you have dormers on your house? I suggest you check, or have checked, the points where the fascia boards and soffits of the dormers meet the main roof. Bats can enter extremely small gaps and then use your attic as their seasonal home. Caulk those gaps and you'll likely keep the bats out.
"People who argued about the color of the sky at Althouse are like best friends over here. It's kind of weird, but I like it, and hope we could keep that, and still go nakedly into the contrary pool without all the old Baby Ruths floating to the surface."
Meh. It was the size of her commentariat and that she was an entity who stood alone. Here, we are an off-shoot and we will not be real without frank disagreement.
Ann Althouse was very good at posting something to get a thread started.
Too bad Ritmo had to show up.
Thanks to Pastafarian for an excellent post, btw.
I suggest that it be reopened as a topic from time to time to take everyone's temperature on how we think we are doing.
I also think this blog, a mostly conservative blog, can be one of the most interesting commentary blogs on the net.
But I think there's a type of comment that most of us would agree needs to be slapped down, and the writers could do that. If this suggestion is rejected I'm fine with that but the suggestion wasn't about heavy deletion or sticking to topics so I wanted to clarify.
Glad to hear that. I didn't really think you wanted to be so heavy-handed, so I drew it out. (The stated purpose of this blog is to provide a space for commenters to comment, after all, and not to stay fanatically on point.)
A moose once bit my sister.
Mind you, moose bites can be pretty nasty
john said...
I think Ed Snowden and Glenn Greenwald are True American Heroes, as Hannity might say.
Does that put me on the left or the right fringe? I can't tell anymore.
Right.
Since they're making the Messiah look real bad, you have to be a Righty.
(actually, the Lefties haven't believed in civil liberties since '65)
"Too bad Ritmo had to show up."
I know. And Ritmo was the least of the bad actors. Talk about lost time I'll never get back. What a waste.
No comment Nazi here. Bad park me!
A long time ago I read of some event that spoke well of [Smyslov's] character, but I can't remember the story. Does anyone know what it might have been? I don't think it was widely known, but something that he did without crowing about it.
Hmm. Not sure what that would be. But he's perhaps the only World Champion about whom I can't think of a single negative story. There are even bad stories about Keres and Rubinstein (although the Rubinstein one is probably apocryphal), so that is quite an accomplishment.
Meade - No dormers or attic on this house.
The bats fly in through an open window in the loft. They are, for the most part, doomed because my pets attempt to play with them and that never ends well for the bat. The bat ends up hiding behind a drape or under the sofa up there.
A few times I've placed heavy gloves on my hands and scooped up the bat for release.
btw- I should not say "all the time" - occasionally is more precise. I know they can carry disease. I just don't care. My pets have their shots and I have enough to worry about. Like - are my frootloops getting soggy and stuff like that.
"bats fly in through an open window"
Insane.
April, a high percentage of bats carry rabies, and they can bite you in your sleep, so you might never know you've been bitten.
Yikes. I am insane.
Hmmm, my previous on-topic comment disappeared!
Shorter version: more lefties.
I certainly like the idea of balanced interactions, though having a binary isn't always the best way as it tends to make the topics less nuanced.
But I do think having something to disagree about is the key to comments. People don't chime in if they agree entirely.
This forum has a potential of being interesting because there really isn't a vested interest to protect one side or pay bills through predictable commentary. So many political sites have to be one way or the other. It's boring because it's predictable.
What I liked about Althouse on most topics and most commenters, was while there was an assumption of political allegiance, there was also always an element of surprise and curiosity what someone would think.
Most are conservative, but most conservative with different priorities and opinions on topics. Different kinds of conservative with different kinds of reasons and the more those are explored the more there's space and welcoming for liberals or others to find camaraderie on at least some topics. Not too many people are willing to stand as the lone voice in the midst of a storm of even congenial opposition.
The key to getting a broader commenting pool, though, is getting links from other sites. Not sure how or where we do that. Instapundit has his go to people, and we're not on that list.
Though, there's hope, as he would on occasion make note of a Althouse commenter in his posts.
One way to get attention is to be dramatic. Which we don't seem to want. Another way is to have particularly insightful or investigative posts that stand out and make this site a go-to link on a particular topic or event.
So, anyone who at any point is able to do one of those latter things, should get the ability to post as soon as possible.
The Althouse comments were like Lake Tahoe, occasionally polluted but often beautiful, attracting people from all over.
If we stay insulated, not drawing in new voices, we'll be like the Salton Sea.
deborah is exactly correct.
She's got bats in the belfry, sqirrels in the attic, owls up in the loft. She's apeshit, bughouse, batty, mad as a march hare.
You shouldn't talk about your meal ticket that way buddy.
Once again, my comment disappeared. Must be my cheap Android tablet.
Any, more lefties.
"Any(way), more lefties"
When I lived in the mountains, I had bats every so often. Freaked me out.
Partially because of the "they'll bite you in your sleep" sort of comments I came across.
Upstairs bedroom. High ceilings. There were tiny gaps either in the fireplace somewhere or the rafters. Tried to seal it up, but it was an old mountain cabin.
They didn't want to be there anymore than I wanted them there. They'd seriously swoop at me when I got up. Hugged the ground, down the stairs, open all the doors and windows, out they'd go. Usually pretty quickly.
There's that big brooklyn boy finally out of bed, rubbing sleep from his eyes. Wearing his John Wayne mask and looking for his Cheerios, milk, and sugar.
Meade, I'm not getting your schtick.
Thanks Meady.
Unfortunately I don't have a houseboy to make me pancakes and shave down my hobbit feet.
Paddy O, it was probably your freaky hair that attracted them.
And is it me or did this blogs background turn all white.
Blinding.
Reminds me of Mr. Clean.
What is great about this blog and why the people get along a lot better is that the hosts are in the main decent people who are not the types who start a fight and then step back and go "oh how terrible, I can't believe they are fighting."
On the one hand you have a nice atmosphere but on the other hand you will get fewer hits and comments. So you have to make a choice.
Adding a real strong left wing voice to the masthead like Phx and A Reasonable Man would be a great idea.
Paddy O said...
The key to getting a broader commenting pool, though, is getting links from other sites. Not sure how or where we do that. Instapundit has his go to people, and we're not on that list.
Freeman Hunt mentioned that her blog had been linked to several times by Instapundit, maybe via Althouse, so this is not impossible with quality posts, but it is a clubby world. Some bloggers post on other sites solely to draw attention to their own blog. I largely find this irritating but sometimes it takes me to something interesting.
As always the first step is to produce the best product possible and then worry about marketing.
I will say that Chip Ahoy has been a revelation and a bright new blogging talent.
More gays are needed.
Meade, please don't agree with me in order to insult an excellent commenter.
Meade, I'm not getting your schtick.
Sometimes 'asshole' isn't a schtick.
I think this is being overthought.
I nominate Robert Cook.
His crisp, clean communism is invigorating.
And a request: If you consider yourself to the left of the average Comments Home commenter*, please reveal yourself as such in the comments to this post, and we'll take a quick survey. We'll sedate you, tag you with a transmitter, and release you back into the wild.
Well, I think that labeling myself as either left or right is difficult. Obviously, I'm pretty conservative on many issues, but I consider myself a libertarian on others. I'm just all over the place.
I do appreciate a wide selection of viewpoints and REALLY appreciate the ability to discuss and debate without the bomb throwing and name calling that has been the practice at many other places. WE can do this. Disagree without being disagreeable.
Also Micheal Haz has a good point. We can have fun. Not every thread or every topic is controversial or debatable. Food for example. There is NO debate....lard is best for pie crusts. The end.
Gay, black, and female?
Robert Cook would be an excellent choice. He is a man of integrity even if you never agree with a word that he has to say.
I am here, and agreed to help here, in order to continue reading you people, the people I used to read at TOP. I have zero ambitions beyond that.
Blogger Trooper York said...
Adding a real strong left wing voice to the masthead like Phx and A Reasonable Man would be a great idea.
Or Montana Urban Legend (I remember him back in those pre-Ritmo days when he was, well, brighter.)
I nominate Robert Cook.
His crisp, clean communism is invigorating.
I'm more impressed with his ability to state a principle and stick to it even when it runs completely counter to what the Democratic Party is doing. That makes him one of about 65.4 million.
I use two hands, deborah, it's twice as fast that way.
I use two because that's how many it takes?
"Here, we are an off-shoot and we will not be real without frank disagreement. "
I found the animosity between some people at TOP seemed less authentic than the cordiality they practice here now. This seems more real and normal - almost like a face to face. The disagreements there were often not frank, but rather neurotic, unwarranted and so over the top it was silly. Nothing like real life arguments or discussions.
We need more disagreement here, but not the cartoonish venting that was common there.
Not everyone has the same motives for being here. Or the same ambitions so to speak. That is what we call freedom.
Not what you find in a dictatorship. If you know what I mean.
I agree with bagoh20 as far as the greater authenticity of the cordiality.
Agreed, bago, but currently everyone is on their best behavior.
Ah - thanks Deborah. No worries. I think Meade is a total nut job for liking that horrid TV show about New York girls starring that icky girl whatshername.
But in a good way.
Well not everybody baby.
That would be boring.
Motives? An interesting word choice, my dear Twinkie.
"As always the first step is to produce the best product possible and then worry about marketing."
"I think this is being overthought."
These go together. I agree.
The other nice thing about Althouse was people just posted their thoughts, as they came. If quality people keep doing that, there's going to be content here that keeps people around and draws new people in.
Be free.
So far, there's only been one commenter that hasn't been cordial.
The official t-shirt of Comments Home?
Freeman Hunt said...
I think this is being overthought.
For some of this that is our day job. :)
I think Trooper makes a key point.
Trooper York said...
On the one hand you have a nice atmosphere but on the other hand you will get fewer hits and comments. So you have to make a choice.
If the goal is to replicate something like the old Althouse comments section then some thinking is probably required because it did not come about by chance. As others have noted, Althouse is obsessively competitive. If, on the other hand, the goal is more of a community atmosphere then things should remain much the same. I think creating a blog that attracts a reasonably high readership and comment rate would be very difficult, so there is a high risk of failure by making this the goal.
The comments that went to spam have been realeased.
Motives are important. They become clear by the actual words people write and not by what others label them and assume them to be.
Most came here as refuge. To keep commenting with the same group of people. Others came to read those comments without having to go to a place were they were not wanted. Still others found their voice like Chip Ahoy in a way that is exciting to see.
So everyone has motives. Don't you agree debs?
This will never be Althouse. Althouse was Althouse. This is something else.
Additionally, this is bottom up rather than top down. The point here is the commenters and their comments. Posts are window dressing. This is a place for a community that formed over years and years to have continued interaction. At least, that's how I see it.
Chip already had excellent blogs and an excellent, known voice. I wouldn't say he found it here.
Freeman is right ... this is more crowd-sourced.
And would hope the freedom of speech gets the same respect as the commenters do.
Keep the focus on the impersonal.
That's true. But I for one was not aware of it since I did not go to his blog. This has given him a platform to really show his stuff and he took it an ran with it.
That's all I am trying to say. It has been quite impressive.
Yes, Trooper, we all have motives, but I was thinking along the line that motives sounds sinister or ulterior. After all, I love a good detective novel.
So far, there's only been one commenter that hasn't been cordial.
Hmmm, Allen, I never pictured you as a hall monitor.
Oh yikes.
I know the back story on a lot of blog meltdowns.
First interestingly a lot of the meltdowns were precipitated by an OCD fixation on one subject--and that can come from either the blogger, or the commenters.
Balance fixes a lot of things in life.
Also unfortunately the psychology of Republican commenters --and also because of other characteristics --they are less likely to comment on blogs.
So in other words you can easily get too many liberal commenters.
Think about it--you would be surprised to know that many of the commenters at Daily Kos are European--and anti-American.
So be very careful there.
[ugh they are blaring music for a marathon outside]
Also I remember many people from before the meltdown.
I think it would be great if people--everyone was given a fresh start--and people would stop trying to "win" whatever the contests were over there.
Now another thing group blogs are almost a recipe for drama--good luck with that.
There should be an etiquette for not smashing each other's posts--and there is an art to pacing the posts but--that has to be done in relation to how many commenters that you have.
Finally--I like Lem's idea--he isn't doing this for the links and/or the numbers.
Realize you are not going to solve much online.
Treat this like a classroom, a bs session with your friends--whatever.
Just because you convince and or bully everyone or most here on a thread--or "Win" an argument here probably means jack in the real world.
The distribution of who "comments" at a blog will never represent the population as a whole.
In other words you will never be able to make and/or draw significant conclusions about what is "won" on a blog and apply that to any larger demographic.
These are great questions. They are the type of questions never asked @ TOP because what we thought about the blog was the same as what a student thinks about the class she teaches. "It's my blog[class]!"
Any person who has worked in the public sector, or more importantly had their own biz, knows you need feedback. You need to seek it out and you have to make it clear, you want honest feedback, no ass kissing and no vitriol..specific problems, praise, suggestions, etc. Folks in the public sector, where I worked for ~6 years, have not a clue about what I just said.
We do have a decent diversity of thought. I agree w/ Haz, if we keep down the vitriol, something that some folks are always trying to fuel, the diversity will ebb and flow. That's how the world works, and I think having a blog resemble the real world is a laudable goal.
Some folks have brought the toxicity from TOP w/ them. For some, there is no ulterior motive, they're toxic by nature. A few have motives that most of us see, some are coming to see, and others need to see. I'm a patient man by birth and profession. Those who need to see should be given time. It's tough to retrain your brain. What can happen is for us to each try and identify the toxic folks and decide their motivation. edutcher can be toxic, but I think he is redeemable. In that regard I have made it a point to diffuse arguments between he and I before they get into a pissing match. edutcher is conflicted. He loves TOP but he knows the love was not returned there, he was mocked by Anne and Larry. Even folks who have no use for edutcher felt bad. Just like we felt bad when garage was attacked for his weight, for chrissake. For the toxic folks w/ an agenda, well that's a tough one. Ignoring whenever possible is good, but sometimes easier said than done.
This was a superb post w/ a pure intention. Most of us have, to varying degrees, shown our respect for that sincerity. However, one merely needs to look @ the leadoff comment, @ it's narcissism and lack of respect by so little effort, and see just what this post, and this blog, are up against. "The truth shall make you free."
"So far, there's only been one commenter that hasn't been cordial."
August 3, 2013 at 12:10 PM
--------------------
"You shouldn't talk about your meal ticket that way buddy."
August 3, 2013 at 11:46 AM
----------------------
I so agree Allen!
Motives are not always sinister or ulterior. Some people are motivated by their religion. Others by their politics. Still others by more personal reasons.
Sometimes the motive is that girls just like to have fun.
Everybody has motives. To think that is not true means you are not paying attention. That's all.
Lem,
What in my comments gets caught in the spam filter?
I'm dumb. What's TOP?
That Other Place?
Freeman Hunt said...
Additionally, this is bottom up rather than top down. The point here is the commenters and their comments. Posts are window dressing.
I think you are confusing two things here. One, what is the best strategy to keep things active and viable over the mid-term. Two, how to retain a pleasant community atmosphere for commenting. These goals operate on different levels.
The posts are important for the first goal and require some strategic planning to produce a semi-pro product. The second goal requires good will on the commenters part. Arguably this is the harder goal to achieve but it is not affected by thinking about how best to achieve the first goal.
So far, there's only been one commenter that hasn't been cordial.
Thank you for noticing.
EMD, don't be so hard on yourself.
Some folks have brought the toxicity from TOP w/ them. For some, there is no ulterior motive, they're toxic by nature. A few have motives that most of us see, some are coming to see, and others need to see. I'm a patient man by birth and profession. Those who need to see should be given time.
***********
Correct. That is an excellent point.
You cannot set an artificial time as in--after three days everyone shuts up about "X".
Some people had more invested in "X" than others did.
Although I do think maybe a 12 step process to help some get over their addiction would be helpful.
Ya--I know that sounds pissy-so be it.
EMD said...
I'm dumb. What's TOP?
That Other Place?
*********
Yes.
That has been used not to exclude people but because the only extra privileged commenter here--Laurence Meade made that request.
I'd prefer to call it Althou.se
I think AReasonableMan is on to something.
You have divergent forces at work.
You can have a collegial atmosphere where most people get along when the topics are not political. Or more correctly when the topics are not presented in a needlessly provocative way.
But to get hits and comments you need some conflict. Witness the fact that this thread has far more comments than any of the others posted today.
You only get a pearl if you irritate the oyster.
Trooper, I know everyone has motivations for everything they do. I was commenting/teasing you about the use of motives instead of motivations, because of the darker meaning the word can imply.
EMD said...
I'd prefer to call it Althou.se
********
That probably still would show up on their google alert.
Oh sorry Deb. Do you really think that is a "darker" word?
That's interesting. I never thought of it that way.
You only get a pearl if you irritate the oyster.
But don't cast your pearls before swine.
Never forget, Inga, we love you and think you're a remarkable person.
That said, we think you sometimes try a bit too hard, and think you might relax just a bit because you'll live longer and we'll get to enjoy you more, for longer.
Not that way. The other way.
That's interesting. I never thought of it that way.
Sure it is. It's part of the whole "means, motive and opportunity" school of crime-think.
Motive is why you commit the crime.
Motivation is what you need to clean out the garage.
(Sometimes the two coincide, when one keeps bodies stacked in the garage. But maybe that's just me.)
I like conflict and drama. The goal is to keep it away from "EMD, you filthy c*ck***ing bastard" and more "EMD, your logic doesn't make sense and here's why .."
I don't have the impulse or desire to insult anyone I disagree with, but I will be emphatic about supporting my POV and using reason to dismantle the opposite POV.
Yes, keyboards and avatars have made us needlessly courageous (and stupid.)
That probably still would show up on their google alert.
Do 'they' have a virtual Stasi?
EMD is gay? (NTTIAWWT)
"(Sometimes the two coincide, when one keeps bodies stacked in the garage. But maybe that's just me.)"
Good one.
Years ago when I was an active blogger, there was a period when I was getting Instapundit links regularly. At that time, I was intensely focused on writing well. I did not try to be controversial. In fact, I usually tried to find things that people could agree on.
There are different ways to generate hits.
Do we care about hits here? Speaking for myself, I don't. I only want to read you people. That's it.
(Sometimes the two coincide, when one keeps bodies stacked in the garage. But maybe that's just me.)
That's dumb. The neighborhood dogs can smell your garage from yards away. Why not keep them stacked in a former nuclear fallout shelter in the backyard like I do?
Pasta
I forgot so say you get links to get the Liberals--they won't feel any attachment to this place and it will get the people that have invested time defensive and you will and up with all the rancor you did not want.
Also it should be obvious but people shouldn't be led to other places to fight battles and do the flame war thing--that gets you right back to the original problem again.
EMD is gay? (NTTIAWWT)
Only in your dreams.
CEO-MMP said...
Never forget, Inga, we love you and think you're a remarkable person.
Uh-Oh, the Reverse Edutcher gambit. This will not go well.
I like the big détente approach Lem has taken so far -- room enough for all political view points. And Troop is right that blogs thrive on conflict. What's tiresome is when viewpoints are deliberately taken by disingenuous characters just for the sake of taking the viewpoint. I dislike the whole attitude of "the blog is my novel and I reserve the right to populate it with characters as I see fit." That works in autocratic blogs and such but it won't wok here, IMO.
Do 'they' have a virtual Stasi?
Decrepitdomicile has written about using Google alerts before. And someone I know recently ran a test by mentioning THOSE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED on his self-described extremely obscure blog. (Basically even he doesn't read it.) And within minutes lawnboy had shown up in the comments.
Pearls before swine
BTW I agree with Freeman about this being over thought.
I guess the question is--do you want this to be a place that gets thousands of hits a day, or do you want it to be a tight little community where people actually get along?
If you want it to be a big time bloggy blog, you're going to have to change a bunch of shit. Starting from the top down.
If you want it to continue being a comfortable spot to visit and hang...things are fine as they are.
Maybe add your left-leaning voice. I think phx would be good, but I have respect for Mr. Cook as well.
OTOH, there's such a thing as too many posts during a day.
People get busy living their lives and don't have time to read and comment on everything. That leads to rushed comments and not reading carefully.
And quite honestly--a little more attention paid to the people who disrupt wouldn't hurt. There's one guy in particular who, just in this thread, posted a bunch of things nowhere near the topic, tried to insult a few other commenters, and specifically stated his intentions (being aggressive).
Ritmo's being good, or as good as he can be. I'm being good, mostly. Inga's being good.
But there's still the one baby ruth floating around.
And that baby ruth did promise not to float around when certain words weren't mentioned. Those words didn't appear. He did.
So add "liar" to the list of his faults I guess.
I was commenting/teasing you about the use of motives instead of motivations, because of the darker meaning the word can imply.
Racist.
I read Althouse for the opportunity to comment, with occasionally slight obedience to the topic.
The only feedback is how big the comment thread is, not how widely read it is.
We more or less have that here, if nobody tries to organize it.
I only want to read you people.
What do you mean, "you people"?
I would concur with bagoh's 10:54 comment about the cordiality between the same people who never got along at TOP, as well as with comments that not every post needs to be about politics, etc., but also that some level of being provocative (not necessarily the same as controversial/sensationalist) can stimulate a give-and-take.
All that said, it would seem that topics for posts - and hence the success of the combox - is dependent upon whatever the current events are. If nothing interesting is happening on a given day, or week, then that's just the way it is.
What is to be avoided, I would suggest, is the radio/TV mindset that two seconds of dead air is the worst possible thing. To create a blog where the expectation is that there should be something highly commentable every day -- or every hour -- is an impossible task. For our own sanity, as well as social well-being, we should probably allow for the very good point that there is more to life than blog commenting. If nothing is said for a day or two or seven, that does not mean panicking at the end of the blog, much less the world.
It should be enough that if there is something going on in the culture, society, etc., especially some big event, that people can turn from their "real lives" and come here to discuss it, but if there is nothing going on, then it is OK to do our own thing.
It should be enough to be friendly neighbors and not have to live in the same house, much less the same bed, and have this expectation that we must talk to each other all the time. I don't even talk to family that much.
What is great about this place so far is that the different people posting threads that you can just avoid the people you don't like and read the people you enjoy.
That's choice and choice is good.
Uh-Oh, the Reverse Edutcher gambit. This will not go well.
Nothing of the kind. Before, at TOP...before she decided I needed to be attacked for some reason, Inga and I got along. Even once or twice once the war was on, we managed to get along. She's never done anything to me...at least nothing I bother to get worked up about. Sure she's a nut. So am I. So are you. Ya know?
So now we're here, and it's like a new day.
And when Inga's not being Evil Inga, she's actually capable of some pretty funny, pretty insightful comments.
Despite being a lefty loon.
That's dumb. The neighborhood dogs can smell your garage from yards away. Why not keep them stacked in a former nuclear fallout shelter in the backyard like I do?
Because I live in Central Florida. Duh. We don't have those things down here.
Besides, the lime I use helps keep the dogs away. And given time makes all the bodies go away, too. Much more effective than serving them up in chili contests.
Only in your dreams.
That was you? Huh.
I guess the question is--do you want this to be a place that gets thousands of hits a day, or do you want it to be a tight little community where people actually get along?
I vote for the second option.
I like conflict and drama. The goal is to keep it away from "EMD, you filthy c*ck***ing bastard" and more "EMD, your logic doesn't make sense and here's why .."
Agreeing with EMD here. We can disagree without getting personal.
Oh no worries, I'm all Sturm und Dranged out. I love CEO. Not that way. The other way.
Much more effective than serving them up in chili contests.
Boh-ring. Ever see Delicatessen?
My mom went to Spinnakers Restaurant this week.
Is that my you Ingy?
Freeman Hunt said...
There are different ways to generate hits.
Do we care about hits here? Speaking for myself, I don't. I only want to read you people. That's it.
As you noted Chip had a blog, but it was little read. I am sure he is happy to have a larger readership.
I am not really clear on what your concern is, although you clearly have some still not clearly stated concern. If the blog is modestly successful it will draw in more readers and commenters and maintain a reasonable size commentariat. If it is too self indulgent, like most blogs, people will gradually drift away and your goal will not be achieved.
EMD, do you work in radio?
I'm saying that I, like DBQ, am voting for the second option. That would, in my opinion, be success.
Titus,
Ah Spinnaker's on the Lake. Yes, I was the lady in the red dress with her boobs hanging out. Was that you ogling them, you sweet gay man who loves and appreciates boobies?
And I agree with Freeman.
I wasn't there Ingy. I live in the peoples republic of Cambridge. My mom was at Lac La Belle (which sounds like a draq name) but now you got me horny.....I will be back in 3 minutes.
Yes, I was the lady in the red dress with her boobs hanging out.
TTIUWOP
What in my comments gets caught in the spam filter?
I don’t know what the criteria is for a comment to be sent to spam.
For what is worth, I used to get sent to spam at top sometimes.
Three Sean Connery DVDs arrived including the always missing Never Say Never Again from the 007 series.
He seems to be in plots that make no sense a lot. The girl dies, the girl lives, whatever the writer thinks will be more pretentious and meaningful, in a highly visible writer's coin flip.
007 Bond though has jokes as a sort of comment thread to an Althouse post.
Boh-ring. Ever see Delicatessen?
It's not about the excitement. It's about getting Radiohead to show up. Then I get them to autograph a bunch of crap and sell it online. It's not much, but it pays for the gas.
I'll take anal bum covers for 200, Alex.
rh, are there any Sean Connery movies that are weirder than ZARDOZ?
You know I never thought I would ever say this but I think Daniel Craig is a better Bond than Sean Connery.
I wasn't there Ingy. I live in the peoples republic of Cambridge
I was just in Cambridge for a week.
Around MIT, it's a cold, sterile place.
A little further west it livens up.
Freeman Hunt said...
I'm saying that I, like DBQ, am voting for the second option. That would, in my opinion, be success.
I guess I don't see these as mutually incompatible options. The likelihood that this or any new blog would become 'big' is infinitesimal. The likelihood that this or any new blog will wither and die is very high.
To me, just as an outside observer, to achieve in a sustainable way what you want requires some thought being invested in the first goal.
You know I never thought I would ever say this but I think Daniel Craig is a better Bond than Sean Connery.
I agree. But I don't put it all on the actors ... the writing and directing styles have changed to make Bond hew closer to the rough-and-tumble aspect of the character.
This will never be Althouse. Althouse was Althouse. This is something else.
I would like to associate myself with the comments of the right honorable gentle lady from the former republic of Topastan.
More CSPAN, less fighting. Or should that be the other way around?
As long as everyone's happy, why does it matter, ARM?
I guess the point is that working toward success (whatever that is) means that a lot of changes will need to be made.
I just think that Craig is much more athletic and more believable as an action hero. The fx and the computer graphics have a lot to do with it too.
I don't compare the different Bonds, just notice the joke vs. soap opera deep emotion ratio, which goes unfavorable in the later ones.
Different Bonds make it hard to recognize the real one if you do one DVD a day, though.
I find the internet an excellent escape valve for bad jokes. This is an easy room to work. If the joke falls flat, I'll never know about it.....I have a suspicion that I'm somewhat to the left of most people here. However, on those issues that I'm moved to comment on, I take a conservative position. Perhaps I'm more old and grumpy than truly conservative. I think capitalism works better than socialism, Obamacare sucks, and Zimmerman was innocent. On most other issues I'm fairly apathetic and content to let the mills of democracy grind out the sausage.....I miss Cedarford. He was definitely from the dark side. A blog site needs a villain.
Well the Roger Moore version became too hokey and jokey since he could barely get off his barstool.
Pierce Brosnan was not believable at all.
Lazenby had only one shot so he doesn't count.
It is between Connery and Craig and I just think Craig is far superior in just about every way. Except I guess in humor. Connery was funnier.
I agree with Mr. Reasonable. I think the current setup will stagnate if some thought isn't put into it. And I don't see why the planning can't figure out how to maintain what is already working.
Maybe I see it differently because I'm not really part of the club though, and less concerned about maintaining that.
The real competition in the Bond films is to who is the best Bond girl?
Now you are talking.
A blog site needs a villain.
A cardinal rule of good blogging?
..I miss Cedarford. He was definitely from the dark side. A blog site needs a villain.
********
Almost completely agree.
See if you get this--no one person is worth the autobahns.
More smarm would be refreshing.
CEO-MMP said...
As long as everyone's happy, why does it matter, ARM?
I guess the point is that working toward success (whatever that is) means that a lot of changes will need to be made.
It doesn't. It is an interesting topic that comes up a lot in life at all kinds of levels. My son, who has the intellectual ability to be anything he wants, is deeply conflicted between personal ambition and his desire to be a good and moral person. He has created a conflict that doesn't exist and consequently completely hamstrung himself. You see this a lot in idealistic people, myself included. People often create false dichotomies around things that are important to them emotionally. Perfection being the enemy of the good.
If you want a villian you'll always have Meade so most of you guys are full of shit.
Has Meade been "worth" it?
I nominate Honor Blackman (Pussy Galore) as the best Bond girl.
You know I never thought I would ever say this but I think Daniel Craig is a better Bond than Sean Connery
Different era; different sensibilities.
Its like John Wayne compared to Jeff Bridges.
C4 wasn't a villain. At times he said things that others were too polite to say, even if they thought it, but most of his stuff was interesting, insightful, and well-informed.
William said...
I miss Cedarford. He was definitely from the dark side. A blog site needs a villain.
He did have a dark side but he also gave one of the best accounts of how the current military see themselves relative to civilian society. It was a very balanced and well thought out view.
Post a Comment