« Supreme Trading to Become Eco-Friendly Nightclub Horror Show Friday: 8 Dikeman Street »
March 27, 2009
Let's Talk About Commenting
We twittered about this a few days ago, but we'd like to open it up for discussion: What can we do to improve the overall the quality of comments on the blog, to encourage lurkers to get involved without alienating some of the more active and, um, spirited commenters? We hear quite often from regular readers who feel uncomfortable, even intimidated, with the prospect of commenting. This isn't surprising given the verbal beat-down one new commenter received from a gang of regulars a couple of weeks ago. Nor is the level of discussion going on in today's Open Thread really where we'd like it to be. Short of active comment moderation, which really isn't a practical option, what do you think we can/should do to elevate the quality of discussion and make newcomers feel more welcome? We'd be particularly interested to hear from some folks who usually hang back on the sidelines. It's in the best interests of the blog and everyone who reads it to have as many people contributing their knowledge and opinions as possible.
Thanks,
Mr. B
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.brownstoner.com/mte/mt-tb.cgi/9020
Comments
blogs are a fluid and organic online medium. you cant make new people feel welcome intentionally, they will ingratiate themselves if they want to. this blog is nothing like a lot of other blogs where it's a gazillion nasty comments in threads. everything seems civil, regardless of the circus that takes place in the OT. also, the fact that a lot of people have become friends on this board is a testament that it works. mr.b. im curious what exactly is/was your vision for a blog about brooklyn anyway? did you envision something completely different? it's great that you ask us, but you also have to give your direct input on it as well. you can't be all wishy-washy about it, which sometimes you seem to be.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 10:48 AM
I barely go to the comments anymore because "the usual suspects" normally shanghai the topic every time. There's only a handful of them, but they are on every post. Ban them.
Posted by: greenwood slope at March 27, 2009 10:52 AM
I find it ironic that probably the single biggest reason I don't engage more in the comments was the first person to comment on this thread.
Posted by: lowintheheights at March 27, 2009 10:52 AM
What thread was the beat-down thread?
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 10:53 AM
I think rob asks some useful questions.
Of course interesting and/or controversial real estate threads usually bring a lot of discussion. The economic trend threads always generate a lot of comments as well.
Who are you actually talking about that received the verbal beat down??
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 10:53 AM
if you're too timid to risk a beatdown from people who can't even touch you, what are you doing in Brooklyn?
Posted by: joe_the_bummer at March 27, 2009 10:54 AM
In my opinion, Brownstoner succeeds in spite of itself as far as the comments go.
The banter should really be in a forum format. The Open Thread was initiated specifically to keep off-topic chat in one place. Specific blogpost comments do usually stay on topic.
Posted by: the chicken at March 27, 2009 10:54 AM
take away the open thread. all those regulars can do the same thing over iChat or aol messenger or something. pathetic losers.
Posted by: randolph at March 27, 2009 10:55 AM
Can't remember the new user's name but he/she was absolutely thrashed. Maybe it was in an Open Thread? Can u remember?
Posted by: brownstoner at March 27, 2009 10:55 AM
What about a hall monitor approach? When you see the comments or commentors getting out of hand in a particular thread, then gently remind us to stay on topic.
Leave the OT the way it is, so people have a thread for the stupid comments and BS'ing
Posted by: Troy McClure at March 27, 2009 10:56 AM
quote:
I find it ironic that probably the single biggest reason I don't engage more in the comments was the first person to comment on this thread.
if that's the case, ill slowly back away. sorry you feel that way.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 10:56 AM
No Comment
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 10:58 AM
Maybe just the fact of your post this morning will clue people in. There are days when I wonder why the peripheral comments that barely relate to a given topic aren't shuttled over to the OT - such as the ad hominem indulgence of aesthetic opinions when someone's asked a perfectly innocent question.
Another Brownstoner event might help, too, since people who have bonded aren't as hostile (or are embarrassed when their anonymity is lessened). Perhaps outdoors when the weather's more reliable.
Posted by: Arkady at March 27, 2009 10:59 AM
"What can we do to improve the overall the quality of comments on the blog, to encourage lurkers to get involved without alienating some of the more active and, um, spirited commenters? "
Eh I have a suggestion... How about shutting it down?
"We hear quite often from regular readers who feel uncomfortable, even intimidated, with the prospect of commenting. This isn't surprising given the verbal beat-down one new commenter received from a gang of regulars a couple of weeks ago. "
Aaawwww Call the Wambulance!!!!
"what do you think we can/should do to elevate the quality of discussion and make newcomers feel more welcome?"
"t's in the best interests of the blog and everyone who reads it to have as many people contributing their knowledge and opinions as possible.
Thanks,"
I need a rag to clean coffee off the walls!
Brownstoner, Brownstoner you sound like King Nebakanezer after reading the writing on the wall. You need to pull you head out of your ass, get out and interact with the people in your neighborhood, Then come back and write your blog! That would be a fresh start!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
How about topics on Brownstones?????????? Hey that's a nice concept! Instead of Covert Race/Class warfare nonsense.
"We'd be particularly interested to hear from some folks who usually hang back on the sidelines."
Eh Brownstoner Over here! Remember me you homeboy "The What"! You know NY Mag and the Crash Caller of '08!
Posted by: Return of The What at March 27, 2009 11:00 AM
I'll get my virtual ass kicked for this, but how about politely requesting all the "usual suspects" to shut up for a week (or, much more fun and sinister-sounding--just banning them for a week). I don't comment that often, but I'd be happy to pipe down for a week. I'm not advocating a permanent silence. I'm simply asking for an experiment. It would be interesting to see how things go down for that one week. Hell, make it two weeks.
Of course, the truth about most blogs is most lurkers remain lurkers regardless, because it is their nature to lurk ... and the loudmouths and sarcastic jerks do end up having quite a bit of useful information. I wonder if comments would be deadly quiet without the usual suspects ... even at the end of two weeks.
If they are still quiet, the usual suspects have a point. If you end up seeing an uptick in comments and a whole bunch of fresh voices, maybe the usual suspects would find it in themselves to at least acknowledge that maybe, possibly, their sarcasm, attacks and tone are indeed scaring people away. Hell, maybe they'll change just a little. But I doubt it.
Posted by: RaginCajun at March 27, 2009 11:00 AM
What about limiting each commenter to a certain number of comments each day? Or to a certain number for each post?
Posted by: alsawo at March 27, 2009 11:00 AM
Was the beat down on randolph? Who comments only to call other commenters "pathetic losers?" See 10:55am above.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 11:00 AM
Mr. B...I think it WAS randolph whom you are referring to. randolph's first post that elicited the beatdown was similar to her post up above. It was all in good fun actually and we invited her to the party at the end because we needed a real "pathetic loser" there :)
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:01 AM
I don't know what the answer is but I rarely read comments any more because of the same few commenters. I get the feeling that they are lonely shut-ins. Why do they need to post multiple times on every item. Do you need to make 6 comments on a house in a neighborhood you have never visited and when you have nothing to add.
Posted by: carroll2stones at March 27, 2009 11:02 AM
I think the Open Thread is a great idea, since it is clearly the place to chat, kibbutz, joke, go off-topic, etc. I've been here from (nearly) the beginning of the site and I agree that when regulars banter and argue on every thread, it is hard to discuss the topic at hand. It had actually gotten less nasty around here since people have had to register...
Posted by: Carol Gardens at March 27, 2009 11:02 AM
The beat downs don't require a specific example, there are plenty of them, probably too many to point to. Warranted or not.
I stick to the OT because a few posters made me uncomfortable in regular threads, and so now I mostly just read. And I'm no real estate expert. I like chatting with the 'usual supsects'.
Mr. B, if you would prefer that we not chit-chat as we do, then why give us the OT? I'm vaguely annoyed at the tone of your comment above. Raise the tone of the comments in the main threads and leave the OT alone. People do come in, and are welcomed. I can't think of a case where a beat down ensued beyond the usual banter with What - which is hardly unusual.
Randolph. But 'Randi' was intentionally antagonistic and banal.
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 27, 2009 11:03 AM
success!!!
Posted by: randolph at March 27, 2009 11:04 AM
One of the best lines in Caddyshack-ted knight: " Don't you people have jobs?"
Posted by: billyboomer at March 27, 2009 11:04 AM
I don't buy the idea that it's not possible or practical to actively moderate the threads. This is not a big site, and there are not that many posts. If the active commenters can keep up with every article and post while also working at their real job, certainly the site owner can also moderate those same forums.
Have some fun with the discussions, push people back on topic, show your own personality more, and make your reader feel like you will defend their reading time by making worth their while to post.
Posted by: Park Place at March 27, 2009 11:05 AM
Kisses to you too Randi.
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 27, 2009 11:05 AM
I say we start by banning randolph. She's a clown anyway and you know how creepy they can be.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:05 AM
if i hear "the usual suspects" one more time im gonna blow a gasket. do you mean people who actually comment on a medium that is made for people to comment? if a tree falls in a forrest does it make a sound? (that made no sense but whatever you get my point). the regular threads on this site rarely every go off tangent. and the peanut gallery that pops up out of no where screaming bloody murder about people who post regularly is just absurd. i've changed my mind, im not leaving, im speaking my mind for a change.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 11:05 AM
"""How about topics on Brownstones?????????? Hey that's a nice concept! Instead of Covert Race/Class warfare nonsense.""
LOL - the guy whose entire e-persona is all about class warfare!
PUULLLLZZZ - You of all people need to STFU. You provide nothing. Any substance to your post are links from people who actually know something. You just provide the snark and cynicism.
Posted by: crimsonson at March 27, 2009 11:07 AM
compared to the comments on "curbed" this blog seems quite civil. There are the various truly annoying posters that have, on ocassion, made even me lose it, but that's the way of anonymous blogs I guess.
The regulars have a kind of sweet bond between them. Demented, but sweet. and the fact they meet for drinks now and then is pretty special. I do sometimes wonder what they do besides post all day.
Posted by: sam at March 27, 2009 11:07 AM
Its like we are all in a classroom. There are quiet people with interesting things to say but they are not going to speak unless called upon. Instead that girl in the second row who likes to hear herself talk, has a crush on the teacher, and thinks guys dig her dominates the conversation with all sorts of thoughts that haven't being formulated into ideas. Just a lot of base, knee jerk reactions that steer the conversation over a cliff. And suddenly before you know it someone is accused of being racist, classist, republican or over educated.
Posted by: Argyle Road at March 27, 2009 11:07 AM
Get rid of registration. (Yes, before anyone asks, I was reading this blog when there was no registration... and during the first registration experiment... and before that back to 2005 or so.)
Registration makes the comments a little more scrollable and cuts down some of the anarchy, it's true. But with it, you get cliques. Unavoidably. It becomes a club, and becomes all about the regulars high-fiving each other, having the same fights or golf-clapping for their own echo chamber.
Posted by: basementalist at March 27, 2009 11:08 AM
I think the open thread may have helped, by diverting a lot of what many might see as extraneous banter. I seldom read it, but, it seems, many regulars have a lot of fun there. My only other suggestion would be for regular commenters to restrain themselves a little and post more of the time about things they actually know something about. [OTOH that would make this site less fun].
Posted by: Bob Marvin at March 27, 2009 11:08 AM
All this discussion about seriousness and then Mr B posts Horror Show Friday up above!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^
Unless the hits are down and the advertising revenues are drying up, leave well enough alone.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:09 AM
1) Make some new threads in the evening, especially earlier in the week, or maybe a couple at weekends. Not everyone can comment from work much and evening readers may feel they have already missed the debate.
2) Maybe a 'topic of the day' thread that is more open-ended than just being led by a particular house / article. Could be something as controversial as crime or as innocous as gardening. Think people want to comment about a lot of issues but drift off topic because the format can be a little narrow.
I think the Open Thread is harmless. No one has to click on it if they don't want.
Posted by: etson at March 27, 2009 11:10 AM
I though providing the "the snark and cynicism" was my job.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 11:10 AM
I think what you are hitting on here is unfortunately just the nature of internet communication. Too many people feel empowered by anonymity to treat their fellow posters with derision and disdain. The problem is that I don't think there is agreement as to what is "good" commenting and what is "bad". Lots of people who lurk seem to have a problem with the folks who comment regularly, but these are the folks who give the blog its community and life. As someone who comments regularly in both the Open Thread and in the topics such as HOTD etc, I always try to hear what other people are saying and respond reasonably. I also encourage other people to do the same, much to some people's dismay. I think that the "sarcastic regulars" that some are complaining about are in fact the lifeblood of the site and keep their sarcasm and joking to the open thread where it should be. In short, I don't see what can be done beyond imploring people to speak here as they would speak to someone face to face. That would get rid of some of the vitriol and harshness that we see around here. But to get rid of the posters who are populating the threads is a self-defeating suggestion. You lurkers who feel intimidated to post, I would suggest just doing so. Folks got on "randolph" because she came on here and for her first post called everyone "pathetic losers." Anyone who comes on and says its their first post and says something nice or constructive is generally met positively. So come on in newbies!
Posted by: wasder at March 27, 2009 11:11 AM
omg some of you seriously have to let go of your horrible grade school memories. for realz. let.it.go.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 11:11 AM
"I though providing the "the snark and cynicism" was my job."
It is Snark, you pay them no mind!
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 27, 2009 11:13 AM
Well, since I am arguably one of the usual suspects, I think I can offer up limiting these very suspects to a set number of posts in any given thread. Too often, one person may make as much as 50% or more of the posts in a thread, it seems. Not sure what the magic number should be: 3? 5? It would force frequent posters to be more disciplined in their posts.
I think Open thread is fine as the place where the hard-core folks can talk among themselves, thus leaving the other threads on topic.
I also do think encouraging greater civility would be nice, but not sure of the effect on readership (some, I suspect, like it nasty).
Posted by: Miss Muffett at March 27, 2009 11:13 AM
seriously - this is silly.
I admit - some days the OT is a bit much, but I think the burden is on Mr. B to provide topics which spark debate and discussion. The usual suspects will still post, and if there's nothing worthy of discussion it will be off-topic.
Even the most inane banter I see on here is still more informed and interesting then what I see on Curbed/Gothamist on a daily basis.
Don't bite the hand that feeds you....
Posted by: dirty_hipster at March 27, 2009 11:15 AM
I'm probably one of the more annoying commenters to many people and for that I do not apologize.
I'm also probably one of the people who tries to help posters out on the Forum the most with actual practical advice. I don't see that from alot of the people who are the constant whiners and complainers. I started out on this site utilizing resources I needed from the Forum and for that I am grateful.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:15 AM
Forget trying to address it by "the usual suspects" - daveinbedstuy and pitbullNYC are just annoying. That's why I don't check the comments as often as I used to.
Posted by: greenwood slope at March 27, 2009 11:16 AM
You want quality posts and wider participation? Moderate. And stay away from Curb'esque method of putting cynical comments in every post. That sets the tone.
No free lunch.
Posted by: crimsonson at March 27, 2009 11:16 AM
I also do not understand why it isn't possible or practical to monitor the posts.
All forums for debate have a moderator to maintain decorum and topical comments. I don't think there is another solution.
Posted by: Peter18 at March 27, 2009 11:16 AM
Bring back guest commenting.
Posted by: Ringo at March 27, 2009 11:16 AM
Miss Muffett....you've posted many times in the past on a real estate thread way more than 3-5 times. How would you like that if your ideas and viewpoints were being commented on by others and you weren't alloed to defend yourself.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:17 AM
I enjoy this blog and many of its posters, but since I am not super rich, an intellectual’s intellectual, or someone with a lot of time to chat, I look for information about what is most pressing and then move on with my day. For me right now, that means refinancing options and rates for a 3-family. Also, although it is off topic, I also enjoy knowing more about how international issues/currency/investments and commodities impact the dollar and how that translates into the health – or not – of our economy. For better or worse, this means I usually zero in on “discussions” between The What and DIBS and try to take what’s meaningful from their exchanges. I am also interested in information about cutting expenses through insulation, cost-effective green initiatives, as well as what Master Plumber shares because heating is one of my most major expenses and I’d like to know what to do to save money, decrease pollution, and what to look for if/when it comes time to convert my oil system to natural gas. I’m a new homeowner, and a conscientious one at that, so when it comes time to renovate, I also really appreciate the thoughtful input from previous posters who share their careful restoration experiences – and that runs the gamut from cornices to tiles, and everything in-between. I generally veer away from posting just for posting’s sake. I tried it for a while, but it really just isn’t me.
Posted by: MacD at March 27, 2009 11:18 AM
" This isn't surprising given the verbal beat-down one new commenter received from a gang of regulars a couple of weeks ago"
And here we have the Friday Beat-down thread. Beat downs for everyone!
Posted by: dirty_hipster at March 27, 2009 11:19 AM
I agree with keeping the Open Thread as it is. It's great that there's a place for people to have a silly discussion. I never read the Open Threads and I'd much prefer that kind of off the topic discussion happens away from posts whose subject matter I am interested in. What annoys me most of all is people hijacking a topic post with personal comments or shout outs to another poster that have nothing to do with topic at hand. If there's an Open Thread, it's reasonable to ask them to take the discussion there.
Posted by: CGfan at March 27, 2009 11:19 AM
All this discussion about seriousness and then Mr B posts Horror Show Friday up above!!!! ^^^^^^^^^^
Unless the hits are down and the advertising revenues are drying up, leave well enough alone.
Dave that was Bravo! This is the first time in history I agree with you 100%!!!! Who turn off the realty distortion field???
Good job Dave!
The What The What hands Dave a pack of Skittles)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 27, 2009 11:19 AM
“What can we do to improve the overall the quality of comments on the blog,”
There’s nothing you can do to improve the ‘QUALITY’ of the comments. You can’t speculate what people are going to post, what they’re going to say and how they’re going to say it.
“We hear quite often from regular readers who feel uncomfortable, even intimidated, with the prospect of commenting.”
Why would anyone feel intimidated in commenting? It’s an anonymous system of posting, their identity won’t be revealed. Are they scared of rebuttal to their comment? If that’s the case then they are not of the mindset for commenting on a blog. Yes, every time you post something here there is always the chance that you will be held accountable for your words. If you have an opinion, voice it, damn it. Don’t hold back.
“Nor is the level of discussion going on in today's Open Thread really where we'd like it to be.”
The OT was started to keep all the nonsense banter isolated to one thread. So far, I think it’s done that. Sure there have been some occasions when threads will veer off topic, but it’s been minimal since the introduction of the OT.
People who are lurkers and only hang back on the sidelines are going to do so. It’s their nature.
However, I do find it quite ironic that the people posting right now about commenting, rarely post on the threads about real estate and such.....hhhhmmmm.
Now Mr. B. if you want to improve the quantity of posts in threads, that’s a different story and question all together.
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 11:20 AM
Forget trying to address it by "the usual suspects" - daveinbedstuy and pitbullNYC are just annoying. That's why I don't check the comments as often as I used to.
Posted by: greenwood slope at March 27, 2009 11:16 AM
Have you ever added anything useful to a thread????
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:20 AM
You need to show somes stones and do what Gawker does and ax the annoying people...simple as that. We could make a list in 30 seconds. I dare you to block those people for a week and see what happens.
Guillotine!
Have you ever read brooklynian.com? They have moderators who "moderate" the comments. I bet you could get 3 people who would volunteer to do that immediately and your problem would be solved.
Also you could put a "flag" at the bottom of each comment and when the readers don't approve they could flag it and then you could check it out.
The arrogance you have shown in the past when you used to say that this website can be civil while being unmoderated is beyond me. Please show me any website/message board that works unmoderated. This is your own fault for letting 3 annoying people ruin it for everyone, but I am glad you are aware of it.
Internet - "It doesn't make you stupid, it just makes your stupidity more accessible to others."
Rant over.
I also read your website everyday and have been for over 4 years.
Posted by: Underhill at March 27, 2009 11:20 AM
A lot of the "lurkers" Brownstoner actually have jobs and cannot post all hours of the day. I hardley ever comment because I like reading this blog when I'm home and winding down during the evenings. For the most part I find it highly entertaining (The What) and educational. I'm an Architect and work for a very large A/E firm. I'd rather leave my technical comments for business. The Open Thread as of late used to be entertaining. Now I just find it silly so I skip over it.
Posted by: phillygirl at March 27, 2009 11:21 AM
I don't know how this fits into your business model but maybe the open thread can be moved to a separate tab or even separate message board. It would give the usual, err, dirty dozen a place to rif on whatever that day's topic is while hopefully keeping the main board free(er) of the inanity.
Posted by: LilBitOfLuck at March 27, 2009 11:21 AM
okay what i vow to do as my part to this. i vow not to post any comments if a thread has less than 10 posts or is less than an hour old. because, im not clueless or oblvious, i do understand what some people say.. for the rest, they will do what they have to do. *rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 11:21 AM
Guest commenting won't solve the "problem."
If you can't even choose an online identity, to which comments can be attached, but which is still basically anonymous, then you probably have nothing worthwhile to offer.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 11:22 AM
Welcome back, MacD, we've missed you.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:23 AM
I agree with wasder and also with etson's point about the OT. Actually, the OT has cleaned up a lot of the regular threads, even as it has spiraled into its own strange place. There is a community here and the OT is where some of it likes to hang out.
Although our perspectives are somewhat different, I thing the what makes a good point that the site used to be more about homes, renovations, and neighborhoods, with the focus a bit less on price and global economic matters. (I disagree that there is any racially-motivated animus.) It is in the economic debates where the invective and vulgarism seems to fly the most (what is, of course, one of the more unfortunate practitioners of this, but not the only one by any means). Maybe in addition to the OT, we need a daily economic smackdown thread so that lurkers who just want to comment on houses and neighborhood doings in a more genteel environment can find less choppy waters in which to do so.
Posted by: slopefarm at March 27, 2009 11:24 AM
I think dave-in-bed is one of the least annoying posters. he is sophisticated and witty, like Biff.
The OT belongs to them and BRG and BXG and What and rob, and a few others.
I have commented a few times on the OT, usually to make a joke, but rarely does anyone even notice, much less make malicious remarks.
I do think people should be prevented from making repetitive posts, that is, one after another. That's no fun.
Posted by: sam at March 27, 2009 11:24 AM
Good gracious, we're worried about a potential commenter getting a virtual slap? The back and forth that happens can lead to some useful information being offered. And as a plus some of the usual suspects are hilarious. As for topics, what about more features on the various architecture found in Brooklyn, even a history lesson or two would spark some interest. Lots of new people in Brooklyn, I've been here 20 years and still could learn a lot more about the different hoods and their history.
Posted by: DeLepp at March 27, 2009 11:25 AM
Thanks for the context on Randolph beat-down...March is actually going to be a record month in terms of visitor traffic--we'll clear 1.5 million pageviews for the first time so that's not a concern. And we're not trying to diss the regulars at all--as Wasder points out, they are in many ways the lifeblood of the site and, as last week's gathering showed, care a lot about the community; they also often do have very substantive comments to add about real estate, the economy, etc. This is really intended as a brainstorming session to see if we can broaden the range input. We don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater--we want to have our cake and eat it too. (How's that for a double cliched metaphor!)
Posted by: brownstoner at March 27, 2009 11:26 AM
"You need to show somes stones and do what Gawker does and ax the annoying people...simple as that. We could make a list in 30 seconds. I dare you to block those people for a week and see what happens."
After that there would be 5 posters left on Brownstoner, Dumbass!!!
"Have you ever read brooklynian.com? They have moderators who "moderate" the comments. I bet you could get 3 people who would volunteer to do that immediately and your problem would be solved."
Yep got banned after 3 post and that was light compared to what I post here. Whuh was right you are a bunch of intellectual cowards!!!!! Awww So and so said this or my p*** hurts!
Grow a pair and hit back!!!!!
"The arrogance you have shown in the past when you used to say that this website can be civil while being unmoderated is beyond me. Please show me any website/message board that works unmoderated. This is your own fault for letting 3 annoying people ruin it for everyone, but I am glad you are aware of it."
Please stop trying to massage you prostate here! Do it at home...
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 27, 2009 11:26 AM
Mr. B, The reason I don't get involved in Open Threads is that they quickly fill up with comments by the same 8 or 10 people, and I have a job. I check in once or twice a day and leave pretty quickly. Open Thread could be a really useful tool for sharing information, but I don't have time to wade through all the shit.
Posted by: GHB at March 27, 2009 11:27 AM
quote:
Forget trying to address it by "the usual suspects" - daveinbedstuy and pitbullNYC are just annoying. That's why I don't check the comments as often as I used to.
maybe youre just a homophobe (kidding. sorta);)
*roB*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 11:27 AM
I'd be more likely to be involved in the comments conversations if they stayed on the topic of the post. I agree with Arkady's comment at 10:59. Off topic comments should just be moved by the moderator to the open thread. If you do that and find that some users are so frequently off topic that moving them to the open thread is wasting your time, block them.
Posted by: prospect place at March 27, 2009 11:28 AM
First of all, you need regulars to be "monitors." I bet no one really wants to be bothered with that crap.
There's really only been one serious dust up that i can remeber since the OT and you cam in and asked them to take it over to the OT and it stopped. It was very serious and devisive. It centered around "Park Slope" Ridiculous.
I don't really see the problem.
The OT is like porn...if you don't approve of its banal banter than don't look at it. Period. Full stop.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:28 AM
" As for topics, what about more features on the various architecture found in Brooklyn, even a history lesson or two would spark some interest."
I would love that, and I bet MM and others could add a lot there. Nice one DeLepp.
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 27, 2009 11:29 AM
If we are brainstorming, then how about everyone who signs up to comment gets posted as "New Commenter" for a few weeks. They can sign a handle like Rob does if they want, but this would let new people dip their toe in the water more anonymously while still maintaining a bit of the oversight of registered users.
Posted by: Ledbury at March 27, 2009 11:32 AM
I think part of the "problem" may be that there doesn't seem to be much going on in Brownstoneland. Open Thread and Forum aside, the blog is divided into variations on 4 topics: Brownstone/historic neighborhoods and houses, condos and new construction, Bklyn/city/nation housing prices and economic topics, and quality of life issues, ranging from restaurants to gentrification.
We can only beat up on the economy issues for so long before there is nothing left to say. Many would say we've gotten there already. Many more don't really care, as they don't feel qualified to speak on the subject(includes me), or they just aren't interested, they come here for other topics and issues.
Condos and new construction have never been my thing, but it is a part of the new Brooklyn, and the lives of many of the blog's readership. However, since the economy has been tasered, there isn't much going on, except to speculate on how low prices are going to fall, and wait for the buildings started before the fall to get finished, and see what happens to them. Kinda like watching grass grow. Artisanal, exotic, expensive grass, but grass, nonetheless.
That leaves the core of the site, for me, anyway. The old houses, the history, the neighborhoods, the quality of life in those neighborhoods. LPC issues, interesting buildings, historic preservation issues. The HOTD and open house picks. My most enjoyable days on Brownstoner are days when these topics equal or outnumber economics and new construction.
Some sites I read aren't really blogs, they are forums, and there it is easier to subdivide off topic discussions.Obviously you can't do that here. I like the open thread. It was Rob's idea if I remember correctly, and a great one. Some days we have important side topics that are quite interesting, some days it's a high school lunchroom. I think most people here are able to join in or not when they choose to. Sometimes I do, sometimes I don't. Which is the option everyone has. Since I am a long time regular, I don't think anyone who wants to join a discussion should be intimidated. I see new names here all the time, some who have become regulars themselves in a very short amount of time. People just come and go depending on their time, their jobs and access to computers.
I really don't think trying to ban people for participating too much is the way any successful blog wants to go. I think suggestions for topics, tips, and leads can lead to a better Brownstoner.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at March 27, 2009 11:34 AM
I agree cobble & De Lepp. Do something everyday or every other day to discuss, say, front doors, stairways, what to do with your basement, how to set up a basement workshop, one bathroom or two, powder room on parlour floor, have Adam come in on his own thread about mortgage rates, how about rating bars like restaurants, etc, etc, etc.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:34 AM
Mr. B, I think you should look at the topics you feature. DeLepp has a point.
Maybe you should take a poll and see what topics people that post, read, lurk on here would want more of. Maybe that will get more people posting.
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 11:35 AM
My thoughts:
1. The "no guest commenting" policy improves the overall level of civility.
2. On the whole there is far more intelligence and thoughtfulness to the posts on this board than most of the rest of cyberspace. I actually find this to be a reasonably civil island in a sea of uninformed common drivel.
3. The strong personalities - however you may feel about them - keep the discussions lively. There is simply no way to subdue them without making this a duller place. I for one would find this site less interesting if every post had 5 or 6 on-point, academic, non-inflammatory responses.
4. Lurkers will be lurkers. If someone can't raise the courage to submit a compleltely anonymous comment on the Internet, I'm not sure it's worth anyone's time to try to coax them off the sidelines.
Posted by: lechacal at March 27, 2009 11:36 AM
To some degree, b'stoner, I think you have to take the good with the bad. You could end up alienating your most loyal posters/community members if you take draconian steps to 'elevate' the conversation. I think you'd be better off if they stick around.
Personally, I'd reformat the open thread off the front page, so that this section is clearly differentiated as a social part of the blog. This would probably help lurkers feel less like the blog posts are meant for the same 10 posters who dominate that area.
Does anyone else find it ironic that the What, in his eternal "hatred" of brownstoner, has probably done more to promote, publicize, and generate readership than any other person associated with the blog? What, does it burn knowing that you are providing a nice living for your "enemy"? The fact is, you love this place more than anyone. As you consider your reply, just think, that post you are conceiving is about to more money in b-stoner's pocket....
Posted by: squaredrive at March 27, 2009 11:36 AM
What Lechacal said at 11:36.
Posted by: bridges at March 27, 2009 11:39 AM
There's nothing wrong with any of us, What included, until we say something inappropriate. It happens to all of us. We each have our buttons that get pushed and the ones we like to push.
Has there been any other internet community so anonymous that eventually decided to meet up in real person, I think not.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:39 AM
"Maybe you should take a poll and see what topics people that post, read, lurk on here would want more of."
I think Mr. B can likely already see this activity. In web stats, page views etc.
Poll/suggestions of what people might like to read is a great idea.
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 27, 2009 11:40 AM
OK, I've said enough. Actually I have to run out and get a sandwich and will be back ASAP.
I bet Biff wishes he wasn't on vacation today!!!!
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:41 AM
is the What defending Brownstoner?
Posted by: young archi at March 27, 2009 11:41 AM
DIBS, you and I even managed to push each other's buttons in person! :)
Posted by: lechacal at March 27, 2009 11:42 AM
I totally agree with the commenter above who stated that the constant presence of the "usual suspects" really prevents me from commenting to a greater degree. It just seems like no-one but them is reading the comments, and I really don't have any interest in joining in on their very closed conversation in most cases. I thought the Open Thread idea would keep them busy talking among themselves, but they're everywhere.
There are some commenters who alays seem to have something useful, constructive, and/or interesting to say, and I'll read their writings all the time, but there's a lot of unnecessary and (I hope for their sakes) deliberately provocative crap to wade through to get there.
I mau occasionally take the plunge and attempt to add something, but the provocateurs in question don't seem to want to actually enage in any sort of discussion, only to air their ignorance.
And it really just seems like all of these commenters really have nothing else to do with their lives.
Posted by: babs at March 27, 2009 11:44 AM
"DIBS, you and I even managed to push each other's buttons in person! :)"
- Posted by: lechacal at March 27, 2009 11:42 AM
Please move this to the Open Thread ;-)
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 11:44 AM
Yes, lechacal, and no one lost an eye. :)
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:45 AM
"Does anyone else find it ironic that the What, in his eternal "hatred" of brownstoner, has probably done more to promote, publicize, and generate readership than any other person associated with the blog? What, does it burn knowing that you are providing a nice living for your "enemy"? The fact is, you love this place more than anyone. As you consider your reply, just think, that post you are conceiving is about to more money in b-stoner's pocket...."
Are you finished jacking off?? Good! I will tell you "what's in it for me" Prognostication!
Look just have a "Lounge" feature, a old house section, A Asshat feel-good reach-around section, A financial section and a rant feature and problem solved!
The What (Where is the money now??)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 27, 2009 11:45 AM
Many of the current problems with the site stem from Brownstoner's being a much smaller pond than it once was. Back in the site's "golden age", when it was freewheeling and guest commenting was permitted, it was much harder for a small clique of followers to dominate it. It was really quite the phenomenon at that time and people's first reaction was to step back and marvel!
If you reintroduce guest commenting, that should solve the problem. However, I get the sense that guest commenting isn't really on the table.
The only other practical solution I can think of would be the very aggressive moderation of posts. However, I get the sense that moderation also isn't being considered. (Though, like another poster above, I don't see why not.)
I don't think the open threads are improving things. In fact, I think the overall tenor of the site has suffered since you introduced the open threads. Instead of "draining off" the bile and ill will of the regulars to the benefit of more focused threads, the open threads just get everyone worked up and the ensuing nuttiness just infects the other threads on the site. Not good.
If I may speak bluntly, but respectfully...You long ago made the decision to cradle a few hardcore regulars and to make this site a sort of virtual parlor for them. There's something to be said for this strategy, but it has a cost as you now obviously realize. If you're unwilling to make any serious changes to the way the commenting proceeds, then I think you're stuck with the status quo.
Whatever you decide, I will keep my fingers crossed for you and the site!
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 11:46 AM
As an very occasional commenter, i find the discussions worthwhile despite having to scroll past a lot of nonsense. There are some very knowledgeable and helpful people on this site, and a lot can be gained from reading the comments section. I haven't ever felt attacked, although people have answered at times rather impatiently. I do think newcomers who clearly don't do their homework--by checking the archives first or doing a little research--can get picked on, but that's the nature of all blogs and it forces people to do a little more of their own leg work.
Perhaps there is a way to put a select group on moderated status, such as those folks who perpetually take the discussion off track or cross the line in some way. I've belonged to other discussion boards that follow this approach.
Lucy
Posted by: lucybb at March 27, 2009 11:46 AM
Indeed, this is one of the most civil blogs I have encountered. I am all for a wide variety of people posting, not just the same old dozen or two. But it's always the case with Web 2.0 that 20 percent of people participate and 80 percent of people consume. Ask Clay Shirky. People have to keep in mind that many comments (and personas) are somewhat tongue in cheek, and not to take most things too seriously.
As for Rob, DIBS, What, and most commenters on here, I find them to be amusing and informative and hope they keep posting.
Posted by: mopar at March 27, 2009 11:48 AM
I'll put in my 2 cents as an avid reader and lover of Brownstoner. As you may or may not have noticed, I've taken a break from commenting for the past week or so, so I've been able to take a step back from it all, so to speak.
I think you've got a great thing going here, but we should also realize that Brownstoner.com is a gateway for many newcomers to Brooklyn and New York City. I don't know about you all...but whenever I hear about someone moving here, or hear someone say they love old architecture or they want to know about a new restaurant opening in Ditmas or wherever, I direct people to this website.
More and more, I hear feedback from these people saying they were turned off by the "high school" mentality of many of the posters here who comment in the Open Thread and elsewhere. It scares them...whether that's irrational or not is beside the point. I'm certainly speaking to myself as well.
Now personally I have no problem with the Open Thread although I don't really read it. But we should be more aware that this website is a really terrific "face" of Brooklyn for many new people to this city and our borough who come here to look for information, and we should be mindful of that. Many of these stories get picked up by other media outlets, and are read by a variety of different people all over. I sometimes cringe when I see a brownstoner article picked up somewhere else, thinking about those who might read some of the comments here. I know the other websites are worse, but we should rise above that, and continue to try to increase quality, as Mr. B seems to be trying to do here. It seems to have devolved lately.
I think the idea of having the Open Thread separated in some fashion is a good idea. Not sure how that would work exactly.
Posted by: 11217 at March 27, 2009 11:49 AM
For what it's worth, I just jumped into commenting head first when I started using the site last year, and didn't find it too hard to fit in with the regulars ... I do try to stay on topic as much as possible tho, and I tend not to comment on threads where I don't feel I have anything of value to contribute.
Posted by: cwbuecheler at March 27, 2009 11:50 AM
Mr. B,
On more than one occasion I have stepped in to defend your right to police, guide, gear the sight however you saw fit as it is your right to do so.
"Nor is the level of discussion going on in today's Open Thread really where we'd like it to be."
I thought the basis for your starting the open thread was to give people a place for off topic discussion and friendly banter. This would leave all other core posts open for on topic comments.
You alienate your core commentators and you might see your "clicks" plummet. I'd be very careful not to bite the hands that feed you!
I also wholeheartedly agree with what Montrose said at 11:34, Lechacal and squaredrive at 11:36.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at March 27, 2009 11:51 AM
"gang of regulars"
there's your problem.
no disrespect, as i think some of them make quite valid points. it's just that the same 10 or so posters seem to dominate nearly every thread. many threads seem to get hijacked off track pretty quickly, usually on the same tangents (bull/bear, nabe borders, economy, etc..) that's got to be alienating a lot of folks.
perhaps a moderator to keep threads on track and on point would be helpful.
Posted by: manofelt at March 27, 2009 11:51 AM
You long ago made the decision to cradle a few hardcore regulars and to make this site a sort of virtual parlor for them. There's something to be said for this strategy, but it has a cost as you now obviously realize.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 11:46 AM
...March is actually going to be a record month in terms of visitor traffic--we'll clear 1.5 million pageviews for the first time so that's not a concern....
Posted by: brownstoner at March 27, 2009 11:26 AM
This is actually what i hate the most....when someone jumps in and posts without thinking or having read the previous posts or posts something on topic but completely out of context. Its annoying that you don't take the time to read before you post.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 11:52 AM
Perhaps some sort of voting system can be instituted? Posters whose comments are voted to be the most useful/informative get their "comment allotment" increased or some such thing. The opposite can be true as well. That way What (and possibly Rob, sorry) will be limited to 1 comment a day. Democracy inaction!
Posted by: heck_of_a_job_brownie at March 27, 2009 11:52 AM
People actaully read the comments, I thought they were there for looks! I havent read a comment in forever (except a few on FIPS about the dancers at 13's)! I just write to see my name in print!
So come in the waters fine!
Posted by: Pragonetti at March 27, 2009 11:53 AM
Ha! Don't get mad at me What, just pointing out the obvious. I actually appreciate your comments and think they are needed here.
But it seems you've got a conflict to work out between enjoying the notoriety and promoting readership on one hand, and rooting for the demise of the site on the other.....
Posted by: squaredrive at March 27, 2009 11:53 AM
i don't think i post less often directly because of the regular posters, but it's an interesting thought. if you feel intimidated by the Usuals to the point you won't post something you would otherwise, I gotta assume it really wasn't worth posting in the first place.
Posted by: Jimmy Legs at March 27, 2009 11:53 AM
"After that there would be 5 posters left on Brownstoner, Dumbass!!!"
Illusions of Grandeur. That is a myth you would propagate because the arrow points to you.
Ever decent semi to serious forum/list I am on have moderation. Participation varies much more there than here.
"Grow a pair and hit back!!!!!"
And there lies the disconnect between the casuals and regulars. You apparently take this very seriously and want the fight. Some just want a discussion. And not like there is intellectual honesty in the flame fest that goes on here.
Posted by: crimsonson at March 27, 2009 11:54 AM
I did read the post, but I wasn't talking about hits in my comment. Brownstoner is a "smaller pond" in the sense that registration is turning away lots of folks out that would otherwise be active participants. It's consistent with this that the overall number of hits on the site has increased.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 11:55 AM
My 2 cents:
I enjoy reading this blog and use it daily to gain important information on all aspects of Brooklyn living, I check the forums, reply where I can and post my own questions. I find most of the threads informative and entertaining. Yes, the OT has become a bit of a clique and sometimes you are in and sometimes you aren't - which is fine - it's cyberspace for crissakes - but I don't think you should moderate posters or limit posts. The creation of the OT was the perfect way to keep the silly banter contained and has fostered relationships outside int he real world.
I agree with some of the previous posters - I would love to see more threads in the evening or on weekends. Perhaps you can offer regular posters a chance for them to get a small payment if they too contribute a lot of pictures or stories that you might not be able to cover.
Perhaps creating an incentive to your loyal fanbase might spark more interest.
Posted by: gemini10 at March 27, 2009 11:57 AM
Hello everyone,
I very rarely comment and when I do, I usually find myself on the receiving end of snarky commentary mixed in with true pearls of wisdom.
Some Ad hominen attacks thrown in on occasion.
In one of my other lives, I actually help to create usability structures for interactive projects and have a few simple ideas.
#1. Ratings on comments. The idea here (and lots of websites use this approach) is to let anyone rank a comment written by another user as either a thumbs up or a thumb down rating. This allows the community to generate a metric that we all can use to rate the relevance of a particular comment writer.
In other words, all this would do is give everyone a percentage rating. Maybe i'm a 50% approved, maybe others are higher or lower, but the point is that by doing this we can make visible the community based rating for everyone who does choose to post. ratings can be based on a user, or on a post on a particular thread.
#2. sorting/filtering/promoting.
Point #1 might be good enough and maybe all I need to know is what the ratings of others are. But... we can take it further.
filtering comments is a good way to tone down a thread that has become overburdened. The idea here is that for any given thread (or for any given user globally in the community) if a particular user's comments are very poorly rated then the website simply hides that comment. It creates a little temporal problem of course but also let's the community choose collectively what to see and what to not.
Software can create a threshold (maybe a rating of 10% approval?) which removes anything that the community has rated poorly.
software can also toggle on/off the mean threads so the hard core users can see everything if they like.
Sorting and promoting comments is a little bit different and also produces some temporal problems. The idea here is the inverse of filtering. Brownstonersoftware (tm) would promote the highest rated community rated postings to the top of the list. It would be a little bit like the comment of the day thing that brownstoner does except it would go at the top of the page, and then beneath it in another window would be the raw commentary. This way casual forum users could just look at the top rated posts as nuggets of wisdom and hard core users could read everything deep in the notes.
There's a bunch of different approaches you guys can use to upgrade your project you just need to be flexible.
Posted by: xander at March 27, 2009 11:58 AM
If the What or rob were to be banned that would be tantamount to the Supreme Court revoking the first Amendment. If you don't like what they have to say or their delivery either skip over them go to a kinder, gentler place, if there are any.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:00 PM
I posted the below comment in the Open Thread, but I'll go ahead and paste it here:
Right now I'm riding the line between offended and annoyed. I'm also starting to think, really think, about something the What has been shouting for a long time. I feel like we are being baited. Active vs. Lurker, Informed vs. Uninformed, Projects vs. Cozy Condo, etc. Is that "comments" thread a true attempt to figure out an issue? The conversation has been had before. Or, is it a way to get more clicks? Yeah, all of us click like fiends all day, but what better way to up it than to invite occasional lurkers to click today and keep coming back for the update on "As the Blog Turns."
Mr. B. will never move the Open Thread to another site all together. That would screw up the number of clicks he gets on B'Stoner and therefore mess with his advertising money.
We all took the bait on this thread. Happy now, Mr. B?
What, hand me some skittles.
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at March 27, 2009 12:02 PM
i am neither a girl nor a clown. i was purposely trying to point out the obvious- that this site has become a boys club of sorts. and all it took was a childish insult to get "the regulars" to bite.
not sure what the answer is, but this conversation is definately a start.
Posted by: randolph at March 27, 2009 12:03 PM
I have an actual suggestions Brownstoner.
Why not give certain people you know and trust the authority to monitor the comments. They can remind people to stay on topic, delete the inflammatory and inappropriate posts and shut down threads when things get really bad.
Posted by: Brownstonebabe at March 27, 2009 12:04 PM
Also to add to my point - I find sooo many posters here are truly helpful and talented, just to name a few:
masterplumber/adamdahill/Montrose/Dibs
These 4 people capture the essence of Brooklyn but in 4 very different ways - I would like to hear from them more often - perhaps allow them to have a piece of your pie and give them a daily thread where Montrose can inform us all about the history of certain neighborhoods or Dibs can blog away about the economy and Adam&Master can talk about mortgages and plumbing
I think you have a VAST readership here Mr.B and it's time to take advantage of the talent.
Maybe have one of the local real estate brokers partake in their own thread where they can divulge what's really happening in the real estate world or feature a weekly stint of a certain person...
again - my 2 cents - but I would like to see this blog expand as I look forward to reading it every day but as MM stated it's gotten a bit dry b/c there really isnt too much happening positive with the economy/Real Estate world...
Posted by: gemini10 at March 27, 2009 12:04 PM
Exactly my strategy, DIBS. And that "kinder, gentler place" involves actually working. Some of the people on here all the time might try it.
Posted by: babs at March 27, 2009 12:05 PM
A few ideas from other successful web communities I know of:
1. Use software with an Ignore function. If registered users and put other registered users on "ignore", this allows people to actively participate without being actively annoyed.
Ignore buttons also help avoid boring recurring flame wars.
2. Consider recruiting unpaid moderators from the more reasonable and more active regular posters. Not all will have the time or energy to do so but some will.
3. Use software that allows "infraction" points and various levels of disciplinary activity (temporary bans, "read only" account status, permanent bans, etc.).
4. Use software that allows people to have avatars, titles, signatures, and shows statistics like "total post count" or personal info that they chose to reveal like "Location: North Slope".
5. Use software that allow avatars and signatures to be hidden.
That's all for now... real job calls.
Oh, but some new commenters would be good. Too many of us are just repeating the same viewpoint too often.
Posted by: northsloperenter at March 27, 2009 12:06 PM
Dave, you're right. But I'm not talking about banning anyone, just forcing them (myself included) to make informed, well-rounded comments. The details would have to be worked out and maybe lowering someone's limit to once a day is a bit much. I'm all for freedom of speech, but the question we're dealing with is how to make people who don't tend to comment (but may have something good to say) feel "welcome". Inevitably, I think, that means lowering the number of less useful posts.
Posted by: heck_of_a_job_brownie at March 27, 2009 12:06 PM
I don't think that anyone feels "intimidated" by the regular posters here. I think a lot of people wonder why they should bother to post when they feel the thread will inevitably deteriorate into chaos, but that's something quite different.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 12:08 PM
randolph...when I said "girl" I meant female. As for a clown, that's what you told me your business was, rightly or wrongly, operating a clown service.
You don't enter a discussion calling everyone "pathetic losers" (whether we are or are not is not the issue) and expect to be part of a civil conversation.
As far as baiting to get the "boys club" or the "regulars" to bite, maybe all you're looking for is attention.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:09 PM
Also it's hard to comment during the day because of work. If only Brownstoner posted all threads nights and weekends! But I realize that's not practical.
Posted by: mopar at March 27, 2009 12:10 PM
Personally, I thought twice about commenting on THIS thread, but not for most of the reasons stated by Mr. B. My hesitation to comment on ANY *actively running* thread stems mostly from a lack of time today and most days, and my OWN limitations in being an active participant regarding replies. Even if I had the time, it’s clear I couldn’t keep up with the banter of “the usual suspects,” though I’d find that an entirely bizarre criterion for hobbling exchanges. Do many posters have interests and standards that are different than mine? Absolutely. Do I find the large number of intentionally rancorous exchanges unpleasant? Yes to that too. Do I have the time right now to sift through all the comments that preceded mine. No, today, not in the least, and my apologies to those who I’m ignoring, repeating or contradicting without follow-up.
Many of my interests, experiences and heartfelt beliefs differ from many users of this site. That said, what I’d also like to say—loud and clear—is that when I have the time and inclination I thoroughly appreciate the levity and distraction of the open thread, conveniently and abundantly available throughout the day. I absolutely recognize the existence of an “in-crowd”, and the degree to which I and others might find that off-putting, intimidating, or distasteful—OR NOT!...depending on time and day. Concerning this site, I especially value the knowledge, insight, experience and useful information of Brownstoner forum posters, where I try to limit the contents of my posts to the useful. Mr. B: I’d be really interested in hearing specifics from you regarding YOUR opinion of what would elevate the quality of discussion and make newcomers feel more welcome. I think if you could be more forthcoming about your personal hopes and vision, and set a stage for this discussion rather than simply opening the door, it might help create a cooperative result.
Posted by: vinca at March 27, 2009 12:10 PM
I'VE GOT A GREAT IDEA!
How about everyone that posted on this thread so far and on NO OTHER thread today on Brownstoner, GO POST ON ANOTHER THREAD AND STAY ON TOPIC.
That might help a bit, here.
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 12:10 PM
Why would anyone want to rate poster's comments? It's someone's opinion, not the user friendliness of the latest gadget. Seems to me, that's a good way to keep people off the site - you give your opinion, and a host of anonymous people decide you aren't worthy. Yeah, I'd post again. Not.
Much of what we discuss is just that, opinions and observations. This isn't the Economist Masters of the Universe website, or even the Architectural Forum. It's mostly ordinary people with a wonderful variety in professions, expertise, and backgrounds commenting on the one thing 98% of us have in common - we live in Brooklyn, have lived in Brooklyn, or want to live in Brooklyn.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at March 27, 2009 12:11 PM
If the What or rob were to be banned that would be tantamount to the Supreme Court revoking the first Amendment. If you don't like what they have to say or their delivery either skip over them go to a kinder, gentler place, if there are any.
Man the meds are working, Damn! I agree 100% with this statement!
"i am neither a girl nor a clown. i was purposely trying to point out the obvious- that this site has become a boys club of sorts. and all it took was a childish insult to get "the regulars" to bite."
Hi Randolph just a little chum bring the Asshats out, LMMFAO
"What, hand me some skittles." *** The What throws ISNH a pack of skittles***
I have to run (Meditation class ** Dave is a Asshat Om.... Om... Om...)
The What (Pick up some skittles on the way home)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 27, 2009 12:11 PM
babs, I'm posting from work right now. Most of us are actually. You may think that sad or unproductive but it is what it is.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:11 PM
Oh, yes, let's please put the ACLU on notice, DIBS. This is about a poor a comparison as you can possibly make. And I don't hear anyone saying they have a problem with poeples' comments--more along the lines that they are tired of the same 8 people making 50 comments (inane or not) on one post.
Posted by: tiptoe at March 27, 2009 12:12 PM
I dont care if anyone reacts in a less than civil manner to my posts/queries - as long as I receive real advice , good faith suggestions and tips by others. That's what is brilliant about this site.... I had never looked at the Open Thread forum until right now and frankly I dont get it. It has nothing to do about brownstones, real estate. A total distraction..BTW shouldnt all you open thread folks be working or studying or doing something productive ?!!! Thank goodness I finished college and grad school long ago, before the era of blogs, or I too could have gotten sucked into irresponsible blogdum...
Posted by: crownheights2007 at March 27, 2009 12:13 PM
"some of you seriously have to let go of your horrible grade school memories."
LOL.
Posted by: mopar at March 27, 2009 12:14 PM
THE REST OF brownstoner.com IS SUFFERING TODAY BECAUSE OF THIS THREAD, EVEN THE OT.
All of you people that just came out from lurking please add something to the other threads. Then we can discuss who's useful and who is not.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:15 PM
Sam, we notice! Everyone -- especially Snarkslope -- just because someone doesn't comment on your comments doesn't mean we don't hugely appreciate them.
Posted by: mopar at March 27, 2009 12:16 PM
Need my name say more.
And as for non-anonymous commenting...there's no more disinformation, misinformation, or uninformation (not a word, i know, so don't be TOOL and comment that it isn't) passed when people are required to sign up than if there's anonymous commenting. The only difference is that the stupidity is now attached to a name - and mostly 'tarded names at that (exception: usualsuspectsaretools).
The usual suspects are your typical narrow-minded, brooklyn-native wannabe, dimwits who may think they know everything about every subject broached on Bstoner, but in reality have no idea.
If there's any one forum on this site that puts the usual suspects' TOOLNESS on FULL display, it's the open thread. get rid of it. It's lame.
Posted by: usualsuspectsaretools at March 27, 2009 12:16 PM
I doubt this post was a conspiracy to drive up clicks.
If I started a blog to discuss brownstones, and blog ended up generating 400 daily comments on edible spreads, and the on-topic comments seem increasingly like retread worn-out arguments, I'd probably also take the opportunity to reflect for a moment on where it's headed...
Posted by: squaredrive at March 27, 2009 12:17 PM
For crying out loud, if someone is tired of reading comments by the same eight posters, then post something. Take some responsibility, don't go crying to teacher.
Posted by: mopar at March 27, 2009 12:17 PM
DIBS had it right - how can you call for less snarky, insulting or otherwise obnoxious comments when you start off one of your entries with the title - "Horror Show of the Day"
While there are some exceptions (The What - IMHO) the tone of Brownstoner comments generally reflects the creator....and frankly its working (with that one exception)
Posted by: fsrg at March 27, 2009 12:17 PM
if you go back to a certain date and read posts you will see the circus start and grow (or should i say carnival). circus now has ringleader, lion tamer, trapeze artist, clown car, strong man, fat lady, etc. some people who post here are addicted and it's easy to figure out who. the circus also slyly moderates often. the site was far more informative early on before they came, and i used to come to the site for information, i also used to participate far more. now i only really come to skim and check the forums.
i really think that if you could build a proper forum or message board into the site, that might solve some of the problems. otherwise you should restrict a number of posters to one post per day, it might help ween them off of their addiction.
Posted by: werner at March 27, 2009 12:18 PM
Oh, yes, let's please put the ACLU on notice, DIBS. This is about a poor a comparison as you can possibly make. And I don't hear anyone saying they have a problem with poeples' comments--more along the lines that they are tired of the same 8 people making 50 comments (inane or not) on one post.
Posted by: tiptoe at March 27, 2009 12:12 PM
Its also very sad when posters don't recognize sarcasm. When you feel comfortable enough to stick that toe in the water then maybe we can bump it up to 9 people making inane comments.
:)
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:19 PM
DIBS, that wasn't directed at you -- I know you work. And your comments are usually on-topic, well-measured, and grammitcally correct. Thanks!
Posted by: babs at March 27, 2009 12:19 PM
Even though my typing isn't -- that would be grammatically correct.
Sorry!
Posted by: babs at March 27, 2009 12:20 PM
I agree with Montrose -- the market isn't very hot right now, and all the new projects look the same anyways, so there's not a lot to say.
My suggestion for a new topic would be focusing in more on what some of us enjoy commenting on anyways -- interior design. Sort of a localized apartment therapy, brooklyn-style. This would also be less divisive than the whole gentrification vs. the mysterious "them" thing, and a hell of a lot more fun.
I know you're already doing a little of this, Mr. B, but I think you could do a lot more.
Posted by: Heather at March 27, 2009 12:20 PM
"Why would anyone want to rate poster's comments? It's someone's opinion, not the user friendliness of the latest gadget. Seems to me, that's a good way to keep people off the site - you give your opinion, and a host of anonymous people decide you aren't worthy. Yeah, I'd post again. Not."
100% agree with MM. Give a poster that bickers with another that weapon and it will become a lot worse around here. I guarantee it. Human nature - it will become even more 'High School cafeteria-like".
If you do not like another's post, you are free to state why you do and post it. There, isn't that nifty!
om mani padme hum, What! Snappy, can you pass me some skittles.
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 27, 2009 12:20 PM
"If I started a blog to discuss brownstones, and blog ended up generating 400 daily comments on edible spreads, and the on-topic comments seem increasingly like retread worn-out arguments, I'd probably also take the opportunity to reflect for a moment on where it's headed..."
^^^^^ Mr. B take a look at your stories, dress those up!
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 12:21 PM
Brownstoner:
Since you began to require registration, threads here have much improved.
Since the start of the Open Thread, other threads are much more on subject.
Perhaps something like the New York Times' "Editors' Selections" and "Readers' Selections" systems would highlight comments you and others thought most interesting, making Brownstoner more efficient to scroll (at least for some readers) without banishing any comment.
You might also try allowing people to link their comments directly to earlier posts so readers can create and follow a line of discussion. The Huffington Post does this, and its effective.
But Brownstoner isn't the Economist (on this I'll agree, as I usually do, with Montrose Morris). It's a gaggle of posters who love Brooklyn and its neighborhoods. And Brooklyn, as we know, isn't a neat and tidy place.
Nostalgic on Park Avenue
Posted by: NOP at March 27, 2009 12:22 PM
the usualsuspectsaretools...we welcome you as another "typical narrow-minded, brooklyn-native wannabe, dimwits who may think they know everything about every subject broached on Bstoner, but in reality have no idea."
Glad you're one of us now!!!
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:23 PM
Oh for Pete's sake--if you don't like a thread, either join in or skip it!
Who goes around rating people's comments and then insists they adhere to their personal standard of decorum before they'll grace us with posts of their own? Sissypants! Talk about a cold dead hand...that's the quickest way to kill off a blog.
Posted by: bridges at March 27, 2009 12:24 PM
One of my coworkers just made an interesting suggestion.
Suppose you put some VERY liberal cap on the number of posts someone could make to the site over the course of a day. Perhaps 10 or 15? A large enough number so that we could capture anything they have that's of substance, but a small enough number so that we could avoid the rest.
A cap of this kind would force people to THINK about what they're saying. Remember the old Seinfeld episode when Elaine was evaluating men in terms of whether they're "sponge worthy"? Well, some of the regulars would have to consider whether the idea that just popped into their heads is "post worthy".
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 12:25 PM
DIBS, that wasn't directed at you -- I know you work. And your comments are usually on-topic, well-measured, and grammitcally correct. Thanks!
Posted by: babs at March 27, 2009 12:19 PM
babs might be delusional!!! But thank you anyway. :)
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:27 PM
Hmmmm, the protestations over comment rating intrigue me...
Sounds like maybe it should be done.
But not until an "ignore" function is added.
Posted by: northsloperenter at March 27, 2009 12:29 PM
All ideas are "post worthy." That's what defines a "blog."
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:30 PM
My post was directed to the babs, not OP.
I like this site but it seems poised to go the way of datalounge, a howlingly funny site back in the day that eventually succumbed to the nannies red-tagging anyone they disagreed with. Oh well
Posted by: bridges at March 27, 2009 12:31 PM
I mostly avoid reading comments. Too often they seem focussed on providing snarky amusement rather than informed opinion or substantive information. Reading these comments is something akin to rubbernecking on the BQE - it may create some traffic but ultimately you gain absolutely nothing from your time investment.
Posted by: tvtvtv at March 27, 2009 12:34 PM
I like the idea of comment ratings, if for no other reason that it would be amusing to see how quickly The What acquires a negative poster rating.
I like commenting in some of the lesser-read threads, sometimes. You know things like the house of the day are going to get a ton of comments, and the open thread fills up so fast at this point that I don't even look at it because I can't keep up ... but there are interesting discussions sometimes to be found in the posts that only garner 8-12 comments.
Posted by: cwbuecheler at March 27, 2009 12:34 PM
Mr. B
You know what you have (want) to do: institute some soft of a rating system.
_
Posted by: heck_of_a_job_brownie at March 27, 2009 12:35 PM
Brownstoner:
Again. The open thread IS LAME. I never click on open thread. It is horrible. Can we start a "tool rating system" for how TOOL a particular open thread was?
Posted by: usualsuspectsaretools at March 27, 2009 12:35 PM
easy solution, set up a forum alongside the main blog.
Each blog post has a link to a separate discussion thread on the forum.
Every forum that I know has a separate area for off-topic posts and general chat. With a separate area for chat, the on-topic threads generally stay on topic.
(Hell, why not merge with Brooklynian if you can't be bothered to set up a forum - although a friend who has set up his own forum says it is pretty cheap and easy to do).
Posted by: the chicken at March 27, 2009 12:36 PM
'All ideas are "post worthy." That's what defines a "blog."'
I respectfully disagree with you here. It's reasonable for any blog owner to want to increase the "signal to noise" ratio on his/her site.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 12:37 PM
Why should anyone feel the need to think about their quota of comments before doing so? Even at 20 or more? That's like timing your minutes on your cell phone, and then someone calls you to talk for an hour. Plan totally out the window. If I am in the midst of a good talk or even an argument with people about a subject that is meaningful to us all, I don't want a cyber-mommy telling me to come inside. I'm an adult, not a child.
Registration was a necessity, due to some trolls and idiots who were ruining the site. Since I was a target, I got pretty tired of seeing explicit sexual and personal comments about me whenever I posted anything at all. I stayed because as bad as that was, it was nothing compared to some of my life experiences, which have taught me to stand and fight for my right to be wherever I choose to be.
I've made real friends here. I did not expect that. Brownstoner is not perfect, but it has become a community of real people that I care about, and a source of information and a bully pulpit, at times. I don't want to see it regulated and moderated into bland nothingness.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at March 27, 2009 12:45 PM
Can some of you people go post in other threads besides this one!!!!
Come on you can do it.
Scroll all the way up the page and hit 'home', read a thread, go to comments, write about what you think of story.
Do it right NOW!
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 12:46 PM
MM - I agree that setting a comments-per-day limit is the wrong way to go.
BRG - I'm posting in five different threads on the site today ... none of which, I must point out, have any posts from you in them. :)
Posted by: cwbuecheler at March 27, 2009 12:49 PM
a usual suspect should be defined by how many times they post to Bstoner in a day.
Once someone is defined as a usual suspect for the day, then at the end of said day, Bstoner should post a "top-five usual suspect-of-the-day list - let us know what you think readers." Maybe is should be called "the commenty list" and allow us to rate the quality of the commenty crew's comments.
Posted by: usualsuspectsaretools at March 27, 2009 12:49 PM
"I don't want to see it regulated and moderated into bland nothingness."
If you'd prefer to see it unregulated and unmoderated into bland nothingness, that's your prerogative. I don't like moderation either, but I do hope to find a route around "bland nothingness".
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 12:50 PM
Tempest, meet teacup.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 12:53 PM
Good point, MM, about cutting someone off in the middle of discussion. Again, I think details like this will have to be worked out. And most of us do act/post like children, though some more so than others. The whole thing does not have to be a choice between complete freedom of expression and your ability to comment being taken away. Shades of gray can make all the difference.
Posted by: heck_of_a_job_brownie at March 27, 2009 12:56 PM
"BRG - I'm posting in five different threads on the site today ... none of which, I must point out, have any posts from you in them. :)"
Not today CWB, but I have in the past and will in the future.
I've been busy reading all the posts here, I can't keep up with what else is going on. :-)
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 12:57 PM
Brownstoner:
Again. The open thread IS LAME. I never click on open thread. It is horrible. Can we start a "tool rating system" for how TOOL a particular open thread was?
Posted by: usualsuspectsaretools at March 27, 2009 12:35 PM
If you never click on it how do you lnow its lame and horrible??
I think we've found the epontmous "tool"
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 12:57 PM
A quick count shows Robs/DIBS/bayridgegirl posted 34 times in this thread before I refreshed. 34/150. And it's just lunchtime.
When Mae West said, "too much of a good thing is wonderful", she wasn't talking about commenting.
Posted by: Ringo at March 27, 2009 12:58 PM
My inclination is to say, 'Don't mess with success.' No one is forced to read the comments, and if someone is too timid to add to the discussion, that's not your problem, Mr. B. You're doing a great job. Let it be. (That said, I've never looked at Open Thread, and now I don't think I'll bother.)
Posted by: casacara at March 27, 2009 12:58 PM
35
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:01 PM
Rare is the person who can moderate fairly. Rarer still is someone who has time to volunteer to do it. It's a full time job on an active site like this. Ask Jon, when there was no registration, that was his job. Good thing he had staff then.
"Once someone is defined as a usual suspect for the day, then at the end of said day, Bstoner should post a "top-five usual suspect-of-the-day list - let us know what you think readers." Maybe is should be called "the commenty list" and allow us to rate the quality of the commenty crew's comments."
I hope that is sarcasm. If not, it is definitely one of the levels of cyber hell. I shudder at the thought.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at March 27, 2009 1:05 PM
davidinbedstuy,
your "semantic play" is particularly TOOL of you today. of course i have looked at the open thread, BEFORE I knew what it was/is. But now, I scroll right past the m'fer. You and your buddy's dribble is make this site seem like a cliquey TOOL party.
also note:
knowing that you would certainly make today's, if it were instituted, "Top 5 commenty list", i would rate your commenty-ness as "mostly tool"
Posted by: usualsuspectsaretools at March 27, 2009 1:07 PM
usualsuspectsaretools = randolph = yawn.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 1:10 PM
How about making them a little more user-friendly by structuring as threads (see Vault.com message boards to see what I mean). This would make it easier to follow dialogues and plug in where you are most interested.
my 2 cents
Posted by: bpmendoza at March 27, 2009 1:10 PM
Glad to know that, tool. Really, I am.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:10 PM
Well... I apologize for not having read all the reactions to this thread, but even unemployed, I really don't have time for all of it. This is not a put down - it's just that much as I enjoy reading this blog, and sometimes even following a discussion, my level of involvement/ knowledge on most of the topics is just not sufficient to have anything valuable to contribute in the comments. There's really nothing you can do to this blog to change that (unless you change the blog). If you really want participation from someone like me, low-involvement contributions (polls, etc.) are the way to go, but even then - I'm not promising to be very active.
And that gets to to the initial question: what can you do to help someone like me comment more? Really, not much, short of waiting a couple years and seeing if I then feel educated enough to contribute my crystal-ball insights into the economy debate/ have developed aesthetics convictions strong enough that I feel like I should defend them every time/ etc. I'm actually pretty satisfied with the level of comments I find here, and quite horrified by the notion that we need to engage in some sort of real-estate version of an 18th century literary "salon". This is just a blog to me... Keep it light, and let passionate people be passionate. As I see it, interventions should be kept to a minimum (a warning if some posters are forgetting their manners, a ban if they're really being threatening/ racist/ sexist or whatever), but then again that's just an opinion.
Posted by: MrsCWB at March 27, 2009 1:14 PM
I rarely comment because by the time a topic is ten minutes old the SAME people have commented ad nauseum. By then someone has said whatever I want to say and beat the topic into the ground...and went completely off topic to talk about personal stuff since many of these people seem to know each other personally.
I end up looking at the pictures and moving on.
Posted by: Opinionated at March 27, 2009 1:14 PM
I thought that the off-topic banter was supposed to be delegated to the open thread. I often don't bother with the comments because for the 10 or so legit opinions I have to wade through at least five times as many junkers. For the most part, though, I have the sense that the problem arises from a core group of regular commenters who use the blog as their personal chatroom.
If the condition of the comments is that important to you, I think that moderation is the only way to go. A couple of months where off-topic, incendiary, or other no-no types of comments are removed from the blog, and people will start to get the message. I
You might try a moderation technique similar to (what I think) Brooklynian does. There are several volunteer mods who try to enforce a "be nice" commenting policy. Any thoughts to enabling a few of the regular commenters with "guest author" status on the blog?
Posted by: BrooklynButler at March 27, 2009 1:21 PM
MrsCWB, you don't have to know something to post. What if you had a question? Lots of people do it in the "Forum" section (I use the term lightly).
Posted by: the chicken at March 27, 2009 1:23 PM
no, seriously. i am a man and i do not run a clown service.
Posted by: randolph at March 27, 2009 1:28 PM
a "be nice" policy isnt necessary cuz for the most part everyone IS nice. except perhaps the what but since he's been mr. b's butt buddy frenemy forever now, i dont see him going away, nor should he even have to.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 1:30 PM
then why does your profile state "female?" Confused perhaps?
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:30 PM
Name: randolph
In Brooklyn Since: 97
On Brownstoner Since: 2007
Location: Brooklyn
Neighborhood: Fort Greene
Abode: Condo
Profession: none
Sex: Female
Age: 31
Website:
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:33 PM
see, dave. this is what mr b is talking about. stop acting like this is a sewing circle or something. does it really matter if i am male or female? keep it to brownstones and bullshXt somewhere else.
nuff said. randolph R.I.P.
Posted by: randolph at March 27, 2009 1:36 PM
I don't really see a problem here. It's the internet so it's going to get a bit messy. There is need to coddle the whiners.
Posted by: Oleg at March 27, 2009 1:36 PM
randolph...lets use this exchange as a perfect example of one to take to the OT. All others, take note. This is how it works. Enter the OT at your own risk.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:36 PM
with all this talk about Brownstoner loving the controversy because it increases hits which increases ad revenue...
i'll just say it: is absolutely beyond the realm of possibility that Mr. B is the What?
Like some sort of anti-superhero, super ad revenue boosting alter ego?
Posted by: young archi at March 27, 2009 1:42 PM
one last point about rating and filtering systems.
the real difference is that with a moderator you're asking a single person to make a subjective decision about the topic worthiness of the posting.
With rating and filtering systems you're letting the community make the decision about the worthiness of the community. So maybe montrose or DIBS might be pissed that people are rating them but at the same time they can rate others as well.
It's actually the more *democratic* way to help structure the information into usable chunks.
Anything else involving moderation is totalitarian in the sense that one person/system/code/metric decided who to remove.
Lot's of websites do this:
www.youtube.com
www.digg.com
etc...
Posted by: xander at March 27, 2009 1:42 PM
Mr B was pretty vague about what he meant when he said that he wanted to "raise the quality of the comments" so we're all left here to try and figure out what he means.
It couldn't mean the Open Thread, since that was created specifically as the clearing house for off topic bantering among the regulars. ANd I think it's wored terrifically. I usually skip it, because I try to avoid reading things that make me picture rob choking his brooklyn chicken, but every once in a while when I'm having a slow day at work, it's a nice diversion.
It couldn't be a proble with DIBS, BRG, etc on the regular threads. Ever since the creation of the OT all of those cats have pretty much stayed on topic and actually add value to those discussions. Except for the What, of course - but even he has some entertainment value once you stop taking him seriosuly.
SO mr. B - other than randolph's well deserved verbal beat down. What are you really getting at?
Posted by: bkre at March 27, 2009 1:44 PM
randolph...you're the one that enters every thread with "pathetic losers." A little self-reflection might be in order. But please don't leave. We need you when the topic at hand has been completely discussed and the "sewing circle" (yeah, you're a man) needs something trivial and inane.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:44 PM
I really can't see myself wasting any MORE time with a "rating system." Does anyone really care how some Asshat rates their comments? Come on, get real.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:47 PM
xander...speaking for myself, I just posted above. As far as MM is concerned, after having been labeled a PBA by the What I don't think she gives two hoots either how someone actually rates her. This is really the most lame waste of time I can think of.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 1:50 PM
> "beyond the realm of possibility that Mr. B is the What?"
I'll admit that the thought has crossed my mind.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 1:51 PM
I'm back!!! I**** The What tosses out bags of Skittles***. Now some of the dumbasses want people to "moderate" the posters here????!!! LMMFAO!!! Please tell me what criteria that would fall under??? Like Whuh said you are a bunch of intellectual cowards!!!
The Brooklynian Blog post Covert Race and Class crap and as soon someone is against it, Bam they get banned!! I one I don't see here is when Brownstoner post something that is inflammatory no one get upset but when The What takes issue with it all the retards get upset. Hypocrisy at it's best!
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 27, 2009 1:51 PM
If there was an ignore button it would solve most peoples problems. I could immediately ignore Dave, Rob, and Bay Ridge and anyone else I didn't want to read. They could post as much mindless crap as they want, but I wouldn't have to scroll through it and people would have one less reason to complain. It would almost be like they didn't exist!
Then you could see the number of people who also don't want to read their crap, which seems like a lot of people from this thread. In reality, I don't think you are going to doing anything but lets hope after this discussion they get the hint.
Posted by: Underhill at March 27, 2009 1:53 PM
dave, you miss the point.
it's not what a single person thinks, it's what the community decides.
a couple more points:
1. you do not have to rate just like you do not have to read or post
2. it's up to brownstoner and his software to choose what to do with the metric that is created, not us.
3. Ratings happen all the time in the real world. It's similar to word of mouth, but the real point is to allow the community to create a consensus about how *we* want it to behave.
You have no reason to believe me, or even think I know what I'm taking about here, but if you did research on this topic you'd see that this actually increase the structure of a community.
4. it's not about you, or me or anyone else's singular opinion.
Posted by: xander at March 27, 2009 1:59 PM
Underhill...where do any of us spew crap except the OT?? What do you think the mandated purpose of the OT should be???
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 2:01 PM
I'm basically a lurker, I suppose. I've only posted 3 or so times (I think) on this blog -- though I read (and skim) it and the comments fairly regularly (I've never looked at the OT) -- because what really interests me about it is the information I can get from it, not the debate or discussion among people. So I only post when I have what strikes me as relevant information about a topic, as opposed to a point of view (meaning I give what I like to get from others -- though I suppose the line between information and a point of view might be hard to draw precisely). I'm not "not posting" out of fear of a smack-down, for what it's worth.
For many reasons, I tend to find the internet most useful as a means of increasing the information I have on subjects that interest me, information that might eventually inform debates I have with myself or people I know. I'm less interested in it as place where people actually have online debates.
So I guess the question back to you, browstoner, is what precisely you hope to have in a comments section: is your concern with what's substantively going on in the comments(do you want less debate and more simple exchange of information) or is your concern with amount of participation (you just want more people participating in the debates), or is your concern with the tone of the debates, regardless of how many people participate? Your concern could be any of these things, based on your post -- I think. And the best response might be different, depending on what precisely you're hoping to see in the comments . . .
Now, having offered what's clearly a point of view (and not iformation), back to relative silence.
Posted by: slyone at March 27, 2009 2:02 PM
OK...xander...I can understand that. I don't bother with any other blogs so I haven't seen it in actual operation.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 2:04 PM
"i'll just say it: is absolutely beyond the realm of possibility that Mr. B is the What?"
I've always assumed that daveinbedstuy is the What and SnarkSlope is Mr. B.
Posted by: northsloperenter at March 27, 2009 2:05 PM
I haven't read through the comments, but I just read in this month's Wired Mag about this topic. One solution I liked was that readers rate the commenters, and the readers can adjust a setting to show only commenters with a rating about "x". This way if you don't like reading the negative ones, they get filtered. Here's a link
http://www.wired.com/techbiz/people/magazine/17-04/st_thompson
Posted by: Julie Larson at March 27, 2009 2:07 PM
Seems like a rating system would turn it into more of a closed circle of commenters. Isn't Mr brownstoner's aim idea to encourage more comments from people who may post less frequently, and so may not have chance to build up much of a 'rating'?
Posted by: etson at March 27, 2009 2:10 PM
"What can we do to improve the overall the quality of comments on the blog"
What a silly question - hire a re-write man! I'm available, and reasonable. Let me know.
Posted by: East New York at March 27, 2009 2:10 PM
Julie, this is exactly what I was talking about earlier.
Thanks for the wired article btw...
Posted by: xander at March 27, 2009 2:12 PM
nothsloperenter...as much as you find this hard to believe, I definitely don't have the time, patience or manual dexterity to login and out and be both myself and the What.
I am however, Bold Type Guest but rarely use that except when called. Bold Type Guest is actually the anthropomorhism of my 1905 brownstone. If I get way out of hand he changes the locks on me at night and I can't get in.
The What... I could not make that stuff up.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 2:14 PM
Yes, etson. If there were a rating sytem, the only person anyone would ever read would be Montrose Morris.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 2:18 PM
As someone who contributes nothing but nonsense, I'd like to say I agree with posters #1 to #200 above.
Posted by: dittoburg at March 27, 2009 2:19 PM
rating is stupid. plain and simple. it's lame on every single site (except maybe youtube where it's justifiable cuz youre rating someones creative video or whatever) sorry but rating a poster is just going to turn into one giant popularity contest and a bunch of senseless dog piling. if we're going to all rate each other why not take a step further and have weekly superlatives for all kinds of categories. it's a ridiculous concept that would have absolutely no bearing on this kind of internet community.
what is your rationale behind wanting a rating system anyway? oh wow okay great so now i dont have to read anyones posts who are under a score.. jeez sheep mentality much? on that note i think im totally done with this topic today. it's a gorgeous day outside and im stuck inside at work so that's why i post here on my downtime!!!
a lot of you complaining are just coming across as snobs plain and simple. if you dont want to join in on the conversation then don't! if you do, fine! but don't think youre some kind of martyr and claim you cant join on converserations because of what other people are saying.
it's weird people keep saying oh it's the same 8 or 9 usual suspects constantly chatting and shooting the breeze and no one else is included. odd considering that last thursday it was about 40 people doing just that. in person no less!
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 2:19 PM
To Dave and friends-
I have nothing personal against any of you. I just don't understand why I have to see one of your names as the first commenter to the majority of posts. I almost immediately skip it once I see one of your names involved. I have stopped reading most of the comments for this reason.
Maybe once in awhile you should keep some things to yourself. You have abused the open nature of this website and the principal has had to step in. He even created a separate section for your mindless dribble and it really didn't fix anything.
Look at all the people who have come out of the woodwork today. Take a hint.
Posted by: Underhill at March 27, 2009 2:19 PM
If *rob* was to suffer a sudden blunt force head trauma, there is a good chance he might forget his user name and password> What do you guys think?
THAT SAID, OUR GAY CAT POOPED IN MY RECESSED LIGHTING FIXTURES AGAIN.
Posted by: IMBY at March 27, 2009 2:21 PM
Anyone remember the rating system in Ender's Game that his brother and sister game as part of their political maneuvering?
I actually don't think a rating system should be used to hide/reveal comments, but it could be used as a way for lurkers to give an anonymous thumbs up/thumbs down on different specific comments (rather than commenters).
I do think an Ignore function would be the best single addition. I have registered for sites specifically so I could use the Ignore function. I think there was one site where I had over 40 people on ignore (mostly trolls of the BHO type -- I'm actually fairly tolerant about this stuff, but insistent trolling gets boring).
I'm partial to the ones that let you manually override the "ignore" on individual posts (in case it is a topic that you really do want all opinions on).
Posted by: northsloperenter at March 27, 2009 2:25 PM
IMBY...I think rob has much more relevant things to say about this than you do. Se his post above yours, which i think is spot on and the first post of this thread. He seems to be one of the few that actually "gets it."
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 2:26 PM
rob,
ratings dont' affect comments unless brownstoner chooses to let them. Further, i'm not talking about rating a USER necessarily, but rather rating a COMMENT (by a user :) ).
And even then there's many ways to deal with the ratings.
#1. do nothing just make it visible what the community has rated this post. This adds a negative or positive reward to actions.
2. filter it but possibly provide options for users to unfilter the poorly rated comments.
3. Promote it to a highly rated section (like to comment of the day) but still gives users the options to view all comments unfiltered or promoted.
4. delete it. This, in my opinion, is mean and big brotherish.
ok, that's it for me. I feel like I should be billing for this.
:)
Posted by: xander at March 27, 2009 2:29 PM
I can see the value in an "ignore button". If it would function as a personalized filter or kill file for everyone who uses the site, that might be interesting and constructive. It'd be like having your very own Brownstoner, which you can moderate to suit your own taste. Definitely worth thinking about and kudos to whomever suggested it (alas, I don't have time to track you down...).
Come to think of it, if Mr. B implemented this suggestion, why couldn't he then reinstate guest commenting? Those who didn't want to read guest comments could simply 'ignore' them.
An ignore button that only let's you give someone a consequence-free thumbs up or down seems less sensible to me, simply because I don't think anyone cares about consequence-free ratings of this kind, least of all the person being rated.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 2:42 PM
First, I love *rob*. Pardon my emoticonlessness.
I was just throwing out an example of how uncontrollable this cyberspace reality is. Conversation is organic. Cat ownership and the aesthetics of recessed lighting fixtures within the context of a blog about historic brownstone renovations is relevant to somebody out there... that's the magic!
Posted by: IMBY at March 27, 2009 2:43 PM
So...when this thread ends are we having a group hug?
Posted by: bridges at March 27, 2009 2:44 PM
I think the point is Mr. B is does not want his website to be a chat room circa 1997. It seriously sometimes reminds me of when chat rooms first came out and they would have a designated topic or theme and the same people would be in these chat rooms everyday but almost never talked about whatever the theme was. Not saying that the regs don't contribute valuable information on a variety of topics, but sometimes it's just kind of ridiculous. Part of the problem is that the same topics are discussed to no end. I think brownstoner should introduce some more topics for people to comment on that may include a broader range of people.
I agree with Heather that I would love to see some of the interiors of brownstones that are being renovated or have been already. A house tour section similar to Apartment Therapy but more focused on architectural detail and less on kitschy furniture would be of great interest to a lot of people. People who have great stories to share about the history of their homes would be nice. Maybe some of these regulars would like to open their homes and share a little about where they live...
I would love to see the What commenting on pocket doors and dumbwaiters every once in awhile instead of just the mutant asset bubble or whatever it is. My 2 cents.
Posted by: boofer at March 27, 2009 2:48 PM
> "I can see the value in an "ignore button"."
I think this is the best and simplest idea.
Posted by: SnarkSlope at March 27, 2009 2:49 PM
there's a party going on in the open thread. but if you have less than 100 posts please wait your turn behind the red velvet ropes.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 27, 2009 2:50 PM
Hey guys,
davidinbedstuy is right....he, like I (as we are both the usually commenty suspects) IS a tool.
Posted by: FARTslope at March 27, 2009 2:52 PM
Maybe a fun "new topic" would be to delve a little deeper when a new store or restaurant opens and it's highlighted here. Wait till it actually opens (so we don't have misinformation like in the Flatbush Avenue place a few days ago) go speak with the owner, photograph some of the merchandise and give us some feedback.
Not only would some people probably find it enjoyable, but it might actually do a great service to some of these small businesses and entice some of the readers to go check them out.
An example is the new "Odd Twin" Vintage store you highlighted yesterday. Not one comment because the store isn't even open yet. What's to comment on...? Wait, and go back when it does, get a couple lines from the new owners and show us what they have!!
Posted by: 11217 at March 27, 2009 2:56 PM
Some of the people posting here and no where else on this site and those that are posting for the first time on Brownstoner in this thread (and you know who you are), PLEASE go contribute to another thread. I'm sure you have some valuable insight on some of the topics.
And if you don't post anywhere else then you are truly hypocrites.
Oh, and then stop your bitching and moaning.
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 2:56 PM
if a user is being persistently aggressive or combative and contributes nothing to the debate, then the admin should send a warning note, asking him to refrain from such behaviour on the board. Three warnings, block his IP address. Not his user name, his IP address, thats how newspapers do it.
simple
Some people complain about this websie interminably yet seem to spend every waking minute reading it.
Thats pretty F**ked up. Talk about no life?
Posted by: jamesdoran at March 27, 2009 2:58 PM
So, Brownstoner, after all these ideas, what are you thinking?
Posted by: alsawo at March 27, 2009 2:59 PM
Mr. B - bad blogging is bound to happen. take group think combined with misunderstandings throw in snarkiness and BAM you've got a lot of nonsense. if we were all face to face in a room, our words would be different as would the responses.
back years ago, many of my writer friends were extremely active in the WELL (a site with many many threads) out of San Fran / Berkley. Eventually, the "Ignore" button was used so often there that anyone outside the conventional going wisdom was essentially "banned" and many threads simply stopped having a dialog.
Re Brownstoner: i began to wonder a while back if the psychology of folks drawn to the comfort of old homes creates by default a community that's fairly conservative emotionally and intellectually. when all the same "home details" are touted here as a shared value for instance, then that gives you a clue into people's psyche. it's rarely questioned why everyone agrees that the moldings, floors, building materials of a previous century should be somehow held up as a gold standard.
of course, if Brownstoner stuck to simply talking about brownstones, old homes and old home renovations, then this would be more like a club of people with a shared interest. However, you've turned it into more of a blog about gentrifying Brooklyn neighborhoods and review new developments, restaurants, and crime even.
in NYC, we hear how "liberal" people are politically, but really they tend to not be liberal thinkers at all. there is a total movement to shut down people with different perspectives on this blog, all the time. note that the Brownstone neighborhoods most in demand ie: brooklyn hts, CG, CH, PS are all demographically very white, middle or upper class, and look just like the demographics of many suburbs you'd find anywhere in America.
Posted by: wine lover at March 27, 2009 3:02 PM
Whew, turns out there are a lot of people reading I guess. I'm an infrequent commenter -- maybe once or twice a week. I try not to say anything unless I have a strong opinion of something useful to add, though occasionally I can't resist taking a little bait. I don't have anything to add to what's already been said on this thread by many. But since B asked, I'll add my voice to the chorus. I find the comments reasonably useful and civil considering the nature of the internet. It's an open forum and a pretty popular one, and you're obviously going to get people who feel they have to respond to everything. I'm a good skimmer and when I stop getting stuff that interests me, I simply move on. I'm not sure ratings and ignoring features makes sense -- I tend not to use it on other sites because it's clunkier than simply scrolling and it makes the threads harder to follow.
Posted by: zgori at March 27, 2009 3:02 PM
Everyone on this site is free to post as much or as little as they want as long as they are civil while doing so. What's so hard about that?
Posted by: mopar at March 27, 2009 3:04 PM
Yes, Mr. B...what's your assessment of all of this? maybe post it tomorrow after all the comments are available today and you've had time to think about it.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 3:04 PM
"And if you don't post anywhere else then you are truly hypocrites."
Disagree.
Brownstoner specifically invited commentary in this thread from people who -- for whatever reason -- do not regularly comment. If that invitation was sufficient for them to overcome their normal reticence and post here with advice for site improvements, then they basically did want the site owner asked of them, which is a small price to pay for whatever value they get from the site.
I fail to see how their participation in this discussion puts a moral obligation on them to suddenly become active elsewhere on the site.
You're snipe at them seems both pointless and mean spirited.
Posted by: northsloperenter at March 27, 2009 3:06 PM
Oh My God people---shut up for once!!! Do you even stop to pee before typing again??
Posted by: tiptoe at March 27, 2009 3:13 PM
I like the Top 5 Commenty List, with "Tool Levels" to rate the comments....
e.g.
-No tool about him/her
-Sometimes tool
-Started out not very tool, but then got to be tool
-From first post - a TOOL
Posted by: usualsuspectsaretools at March 27, 2009 3:14 PM
wine lover,
I find that when a post focuses on house details or design features, there is actually some pretty robust disagreement. There are definitely some homeowners on this site whose politics and taste runs a bit more conservative than one expects in Brownstone Brooklyn, but I find that makes it fun. I enjoy intelligetn discussion and debate.
In general, I think the OT ahs done its job of pulling the excessive side banter out of the substantive threads, but the substantive threads will never be free of jokes, asides, and heated disagreement.
Where I think this site has put off substantive commenters is that every home and its price, every thread on a new restaurant or doings in a neighborhood, becomes an opportunity for more bloodshed in a long-running argument about the economy. Every HOTD, and certainly the 6-month revisits of the open house picks, has the potential to set off a team bear v. team bull war, which is waged with more vitriol than we ever work up over recessed lighting.
My modest proposal was to have an economic smackdown thread so we don't have to keep five threads going every day with economic debate largely between the same handful of commenters. I am not sure whether I was serious or sarcastic when I suggested it, but I do think the tone has shifted.
BTW, Mr. B, if you are counting, I vote no on ignore. The threads will make even less sense than they do now if everyone is reading a different edited version.
I agree with DIBS, what, Rob et al., that the free for all here needs only modest tweaking and nothing heavy handed.
Posted by: slopefarm at March 27, 2009 3:19 PM
We're going to have to digest this over the weekend! Thanks to everyone who's taken the time to chime in so far. Hopefully more people will continue to do so.
Posted by: brownstoner at March 27, 2009 3:19 PM
So what say you Mr. B?
Posted by: Brownterds at March 27, 2009 3:21 PM
BRG - I didn't know you are a long-beaked wading bird commonly found in littoral areas. Learn something new every day here.
Posted by: dittoburg at March 27, 2009 3:23 PM
Grammar snarks are so cute.
Posted by: northsloperenter at March 27, 2009 3:29 PM
How about this Mr. B:
Next week you institute a policy that requires all posters take an IQ test, a literacy exam and submit a long format essay on the virtues of Brooklyn and it's architectural significance. You then have a review board (comprised mostly of New Yorker contributors) review and approves the submissions in order to have people earn the right to post.
These "regulars" are commoners and disgust me as well!
Posted by: Brownterds at March 27, 2009 3:34 PM
Brownstoner,
Let me officially cast my vote for:
A) Comment Limitation. Maybe 15 per day? No one really needs to be commenting more than 15 times a day.
B) Flagging. Let users flag off-topic or offensive comments. Either comments can automatically be deleted after a certain number of flags, or sent to you for you to consider deleting.
Posted by: alsawo at March 27, 2009 3:38 PM
229
Posted by: tybur6 at March 27, 2009 3:54 PM
I think the openthread would be improved if people used more big words
Posted by: dittoburg at March 27, 2009 4:03 PM
"I think the openthread would be improved if people used more big words"
and new how to spell them.
Posted by: bayridgegirl at March 27, 2009 4:07 PM
It's clear from the comments here that something needs to be done. I hate the idea of moderation, but even I can see that it is needed here. An ignore button may be the way to go. Could it have negative effects on the site's 'dialogue'? Perhaps, but we're here today because the site's dialogue is already in trouble. So, I say it's worth a shot.
Limiting the number of posts a person makes might also be a good idea. If you're posting more than 20 times a day to this site, you're making a personal, psychological use of this site that is probably not healthy for you and that is certainly not promoting dialogue and clear thinking on the site.
I also agree with some earlier posters that, if some of these measures were combined with the reinstatement of guest commenting, that could be the best possible outcome for the site overall.
Posted by: White and Proud in Crown Heights at March 27, 2009 4:10 PM
2 thoughts:
1 - I like etson's ideas about posting more threads in the evenings, maybe on weekends, so those of us that can't post during the day (unlike me, here at work) don't feel left out.
2 - I think there should be an overall effort to keep the comments related to the thread and not go after people in a nasty or personal way (which I've seen quite often on the site). This could be done by a public chastizing from you when you see this, or by having some way of filing a complaint or notifying you when one feels like the posts are either crossing the line or just steering the discussion towards their personal life and away from the topic at hand.... that way you can start to track "problem posters" and if they continue to harass people inappropriately, ban them from the OT.
Posted by: Gravy at March 27, 2009 4:17 PM
Take a look who has commented SEVERAL times already on this thread. The same old people over and over and really it always boils down to the same thing, which neighborhood is better, race, crime. After a while, it gets boring. Do any of these people have day jobs?
My suggestion is have topics which don't always ask the same questions, think of new ones. Talk about architecture in Italy and how it was transported here, anything and maybe the same olds will move on to another site. The NYTs blog won't permit certain conversations and actually, I like that and find it and the comments to be more mature.
Posted by: witchdoctor at March 27, 2009 4:18 PM
I can't decide what I like most about neo-classical revivial period columns, neo-Ionic or neo-Doric. Forget about the acanthus.
Posted by: dittoburg at March 27, 2009 4:24 PM
Comment limits and flagging creep me out - there's a whiff of Orwell about them. Granted there's no 1st amendment in this situation, but if reader can't handle either a) disagreeable comments or b) be bothered to scroll past conversations they don't wish to participate in, then why do they wish to participate at all? I don't think this "issue" is about civility--this board remarkably civil considering the range of opinions and personaliies involved--it's about controlling people's communication and hanging a red letter on those some people don't like.
I prefer an ignore button.
Posted by: bridges at March 27, 2009 4:25 PM
Gee B, you must be dizzy reading all these.
Posted by: Iknow at March 27, 2009 4:35 PM
brg, I'm not posting on other thread's today because I don't have anything significant to add to any of those topics. Did I just blow your mind?
Posted by: Ringo at March 27, 2009 4:35 PM
I'm currently somewhat of a "semi-regular" contributor to the forum side of this site but hardly ever contribute to the main pages unless the topic is about my home nabe, PLG. But that level of contributing hasn't always been the case. I've been with Brownstoner since the site first began and, in the early years, with use of a different handle, I even used to be a "regular" on all the topics. But, eventually, I switched off the "send" button to choose the blog life of a Brownstoner lurker.
Why? Because of timidity? Hell no! If anything, I can get down and dirty with the best of the snarks on this site and have spent more than a little bit of time doing so. But, at a certain point, I grew tired of all the sniping, ignorant, sometimes intentionally flaming, and basically uncivil, juvenile discourse that anonymous internet blogging generally invites. I also had to ask myself why I was willing to drive up my blood pressure by engaging in so many heated discussions on a blog site that started out as one thing but had morphed into another. While the initial Brownstoner attraction for me was that it was an online community of Brooklynites who loved brownstone style housing and neighborhoods, I found that the site, over time, became increasingly more focused on Brooklyn as the most balkanized of boroughs. The insistence on neighborhood bashing (from Park Slope to Bed Stuy) and with endless chatter about "prime", "gentrified", "fringe" and "ghetto" nabes -- all so loaded with code, outright racism, classism and a variety of other isms, made me question whether jumping into the fray to argue my opinions with a community of anons was a good use of my time. I concluded it was not!
Nevertheless, there are regular posters on here, like Montrose Morris, Bxgirl, Wasder, who don't seem to give a damn about marching into what I consider to be senseless discussion fray in order to drive home a seriously valid point of social justice or of balance or fairness and ethics. That kind of commitment to principal makes me admire them greatly. At the same time, I find great pleasure in reading the incredibly nostalgic, wise and typically upbeat posts of folk like Nostalgia on Park Avenue or Bob Marvin and the resource-rich comments of posters like Vinca, Master Plumber, Smokey Chimp, Adamdahill and many others.
So, despite my choice to bypass most opportunities to comment on the more "political" discussions on this site, I nevertheless remain mildly addicted to being "here" and staying "here" for the forseeable future. Having seen where you have brought this site from since it's earliest days, Jon, and having seen the cast of "regulars" change and morph over the years, I have no doubt you will keep it going, and actually build a better mousetrap in the process.
Posted by: Brooklynista at March 27, 2009 4:37 PM
I've been involved in online communities way before Al Gore invented the Internet... Genie, Compuserve, etc. I also moderate a couple of international literature mailing lists.
Ratings are plain stupid, imho, as is comment limiting.
Moderation ditto, except in egregious circumstances such as direct threats of violence, etc.
Equally silly, as pointed out by several above, is to think that new posters or 'lurkers' should be too intimidated to post. Some people will always just lurk, and that's fine too. After all, they too contribute page views.
I don't know what to say about day vs. evening, but it's something I've found interesting to think about. Myself, I'm in the field daily until 2PM or so. I'm not going to follow Stoner on a bberry while I am working. So I often get in near the end of the day, but not usually at the beginning of a day, unless I am working from office or home.
But what I _have_ often thought about is this day vs. evening, and if I were Mr. B, it would bother me. It seems posters during the day log on from work, where they are getting paid by someone else. When it comes to the evening or weekends, when posters are paying for their own time, things are quiet, except a bit in the Forum. What does that say for the true value of the site?
The Forum has the potential to be the most interesting part of Brownstoner, and imo it's getting overwhelmed. I would add at very least, a 'for sale' tab to get half the stuff off the Forum.
Last but not least, Typepad is limited. Run it on real forum software like PhpBB or WebWiz, then you can split things into multiple threads like Real Estate Values, Race and Class Warfare, Open Houses, Interior Design, etc etc. Some of the automotive enthusiast forums can point you in this direction, such as
http://forums.bimmerforums.com/forum/index.php
Or you can just leave well enough alone. It really isn't all that bad here, ya know.
denton
Posted by: denton at March 27, 2009 5:19 PM
I agree with denton about the "For Sale" tab....it'll clean up the Forum which, I believe, is mainly for advice and it may generate a whole new, much larger outlet. You could limit it in its scope if it becomes unwieldy.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 27, 2009 5:26 PM
"Back in the site's "golden age", when it was freewheeling and guest commenting was permitted, it was much harder for a small clique of followers to dominate it."
I doubt it. Could have been ten people commenting then and you would never know.
Posted by: mopar at March 27, 2009 5:39 PM
Hi folks,
I've been a lurker for a while and just joined recently so that I could put in my 2 cents now and then. I met many of you at the gathering at Floyd's recently (My name tag said "Senator Street Part II")and we both had the feeling that some of you will become good friends over time.
As to the topic at hand - I think the idea of putting the idle chatter over to OT keeping the other forums cleaner and leaner to allow a more focused discussion on a particular topic was a good one. I don't have the time during the day to log on at all - and in the evening I'm interested in following threads that interest me.
If there were some focused threads on a particular topic, perhaps at a pre-arranged time - that could be interesting if they took place at a time that was convenient. These could even be 'hosted' by a volunteer particularly knowledgable on that topic.
I disagree with the idea of censoring or limiting postings. The frequent posters have a lot of interesting and sometimes amusing comments. Yes, they could self-police to keep their comments from being repetitive, but I can easily scroll past yet another comment from a person whose particular ax to grind I already know.
Meanwhile, this blog has provided us with a lot of useful information, and we have been able to provide others with a lot of information that we have amassed over the years.
The idea of moving the OT to a separate tab is probably a good one - this way - if you're interested in participating in the open chat you can and you can just as easily ignore it.
Keep it going Mr. B -
Eric
Posted by: rickintheridge at March 27, 2009 5:46 PM
If you can't swim with the sharks you shouldn't be in the ocean.
Posted by: Xander Crews at March 27, 2009 6:21 PM
Just for clarification, while I do think that limiting the number of posts people make per day could be a good thing, I imagine the "limit" to be such that few people would ever have to think twice about it. The idea would not be to keep people from saying what they have to say. Rather, the idea would be to keep a very small number of people from inundating the site with white noise. Period. Such a "limit" would go undiscovered by almost everyone, and it's not too different from some measures Mr. B has already taken in the past. I know that at times Mr. B has put limits on the number of posts people could make over a short span of time ...what was it...10, 15 minutes...I can't recall). At the time I thought those measures were helpful and I think they could be again.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 6:28 PM
Just for clarification while I think limiting posts people could make per day would be a ridiculous idea. I imagine the "limit" wouldn't present an obstacle for that very small number of people wanting to inundate the site with additional noise.
Those wanting to gain additional posts would simply come up with ridiculous log in names to thwart the "limit" and go on undiscovered. The idea would not be to keep people from saying what they have to say. Rather, the idea would create more chaos and less ownership of one's comments.
Just for clarification that is.
Posted by: Brownterds at March 27, 2009 6:46 PM
am saying this here (as well as in open thread) because S
Snappy said I was right and I think it's an important point.
"I think it might be worth noting that no other similar blogs, even the popular ones, have any commentator community whatsoever... and that the community, good and bad, is what sets b-stoner apart."
So join hands and kum bye ya or what have you. This place is pretty unique as is.
Posted by: Heather at March 27, 2009 7:16 PM
"Those wanting to gain additional posts would simply come up with ridiculous log in names to thwart the "limit" and go on undiscovered. The idea would [be to]...create more chaos and less ownership of one's comments."
But I don't think that the problem at present is a group of people who are trying to create choas and undermine comment ownership. Is it? I know that was a problem some time ago, but to the best of my knowledge it hasn't been a (serious) problem since the registation requirement was put in place. Not that I like the registration requirement, but my understanding is that it did, at least, solve identity theft problem.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 27, 2009 7:25 PM
Well said, Heather, and very true. This site is pretty cool. And I think most everyone here agrees with you about that. They just want to make sure the best features of the site are preserved.
Posted by: White and Proud in Crown Heights at March 27, 2009 7:38 PM
I saw this thread and just had to break my usual silence and leave a comment.
I've been coming to this site on and off for a while. I never posted before because I just never felt a need to. I will occasionally read some of the catty debates that go on in the comments when I'm bored at work, and sometimes I'll want to throw in my 2 cents, but its frankly not worth the effort. Its always the same handful of commenters who hog the conversation, and everything always turns into a race/class debate going around in circles ....something about skittles...blah blah blah.
At first it was entertaining to read, now I rarely even check the comments because they've become so predictable. Blogs sound like a great idea to help 'community interaction' but in reality, its a crappy way of debating issues with your neighbors. I feel it actually creates animosity instead of an understanding for each other. There is nothing you can really do to 'tame' the comments on a blog...its just the nature of the beast...
I guess if you really want to debate issues and improve your community...go out into the real world and do it instead of sitting inside on a computer, living b*tchy comments on a blog.
Posted by: The_Invisible_Man at March 27, 2009 8:14 PM
comments schmomments, hire a new reporter.
Posted by: brokeland at March 27, 2009 9:46 PM
I rarely comment for the precise reasons outlined by brownstoner. The regulars remind me of the bitchy cliques in high school who sat in the cafeteria and ridiculed any and everyone. But in the end, it was they who were the most pathetic group in the school.
This site used to be more interesting before registration was required. I say bring back the open commenting format.
Posted by: Big Jugs at March 27, 2009 10:53 PM
Late Night Lurker here. I don't post because by the time I get through the comments I am exhausted (because it is late) and the thread has ended hours before I get to it.
That said, I find the usual suspects highly amusing and they have grown to be real people to me. I don't not want to read anything and everything DIBS, Cobblehiller, Biff, MM, Snarkslope, Mopar, Miss Chiff, Townhouse Lady, Snappy, Wasder and of course the What have to say. Mr. B, I don't know if this helps you. I also read the other sections and am interested in interior design as I think Heather suggested.
Posted by: gab at March 27, 2009 11:14 PM
Well Covert Race/Class warfare means alot to me and I will continue to point out that crap. I was born and raised in Brooklyn. You want to live here and I think you have to take the bitter with the sweet. The Retards cannot have it both ways! Sometimes the comments are very disgusting to me and to think that some of you are walking past me in the street! (Not Lodi NJ)! I wonder what your neighbors would think if they knew what garbage that comes from your keyboards!
Whuh was right! 80% of you are iintellectual cowards!!!! Oh The What said this and that well like Dave said "Don't read the post" or better yet don't log on to Brownstoner! Go over to that P***ied site Brooklynian and have you little Asshat circle jerk.
Oh last thing to the hatters- it has something to do with my Ball sack....
The What
Someday this whining is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 27, 2009 11:40 PM
I have been with you from day one and I for one am amazed at your success. I have posted under other names for which I have forgotten the passwords but it was easy enough to just create a new identity. I, like many others stated above, view almost daily but can only post in spurts because I work in the field and my workload can be heavy at times when I do return to my office. I often view at night around 6:00 or if I work late around midnight. For most of the threads that I view, everything that needed to be said has been said by the time I view so there is no real need for me to repeat it.
Shortly before you instituted the OT, I didn't view or post because far too many of those posts were just assinine and I got tired of trying to filter through the BS. Some of those regular posters were like kids hanging on a corner harassing passers-by. The OT is one of the best things that you could have done. I don't see the need for ratings or too many other changes at this point except maybe keeping the BS in the OT. It would also be nice to include the Brooklyn Historian Ron Schw? and maybe have a new thread in the evening for us night owls. Surely I can't be the only one! Maybe by that time the lunatic but funny fringe have gone to bed. You might get a whole new community of late nighters.
I am not intimidated by the regulars and if I have something to offer from my unique perspective, I will. As far as those who are too intimidated to post - they need to join Dorothy and the crew in that trek on the yellow brick road to Oz to find either the heart, the nerve or the brain to do so. They are posting in anonymity, that is unless they are involved in some type of criminal activity in which case the NYPD's TARU (Technical Assistance and Response) and/or MIS (Management Information Systems) Unit will find them out.
Posted by: Chosen at March 28, 2009 12:28 AM
Hey, Mr. B, et. al. - Haven't read the rest of the thread, so forgive me if i'm redundant. I've participated in a few forums - some gaming (sheer savagery), slate.com (better). People make the online community they want, and it helps if there is some guidance from the organizer (you) that indicates you want that community. Saying so helps, some sort of policing/enforcement also helps. You gotta get out the banhammer sometimes, or delete comments (or move them), or close threads - there are a few ways to do it. It doesn't have to be consistent or totally fair (your party) - just get the point across that certain types of play are not allowed here. We'll take care of the rest.
It's tough at first, but if you have a critical mass of people who want the kind of dialogue that you're trying to encourage, then all you have to do is a little weeding around the edges.
Posted by: ari at March 28, 2009 1:17 AM
I think what I'm hearing as the biggest complaint is that a lot of people don't want to deal with the cliqish community that tends to comment all day and beocme chldish. As far as i can see this pretty much is confined to the OT. Once in awhile there's the usul; dustup in one of the other threads but if it becomes too off topic Mr. B. usually reminds the kids to take it to the OT. That has happened once in the last few months as far as I can remmember.
If you don't want to be subject to this in the OT, it's pretty simple...DON"T OPEN THE OT. It doesn't need a separate tab. Maybe there should be a new warning added "Enter At Your Own Risk!"
Yes, a numberof the threads, by the nature of their subject, will devolve into race/class issues, rightly or wrongly and racist or not. Hopefully they will remain civil but realisticaly they probably will not. Tha is the nature of anonymous blogging.
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 28, 2009 9:43 AM
Two important points have been made:
We have a good thing going.
A fresh topic or two at night or on weekends would be fabulous.
Posted by: mopar at March 28, 2009 10:24 AM
Maybe the government could step in. That seems to be popular these days. I'll be watching for the President's press conference.
Posted by: superstooper at March 28, 2009 10:26 AM
I think part of the issue is anonymity of the poster allows them to
sometimes go off the deep end and engage in something other than fair comment and to act out in a manner that some would find to be rude . I understand even the reasoning behind allowing comments to be made anonymously its a balancing act. I also believe that when some one puts forth comments under their own name they might refrain from some conduct that they would not be to proud to have attributed to them.
I think maybe there should two separate areas for comment those that are out in the open posted by people who put forth comments under their own name and separate area for those who comment anonymously.
I personally in generally would tend to put a bit more interest and faith into people who actually disclose who they are. Not say I wouldnt read comments of those who post anonymously.. At times I get kind turned off but the sniping aspect and smallness of some of comments. Its Brooklyn and I guess you got to have some thick skin but I do believe that brownstoner could do more to improve its blog by putting some light on those that tend to hijack the discussion and turn it into a bitchfest. Maybe even some way of rating these commenters on credibility, rudeness, fairness so at least their comments come with a crowd sourced warning label. I know that a times I think I can provide valuable information or insight to a discussion and I dont I just back off because im turned off by the tone. Many times I just dont think the discussion is legitimate. It seems like a propaganda campaign rather than a fair discussion.
Posted by: MRivera at March 28, 2009 10:43 AM
90% of the measures suggested thus far in this thread have been designed to limit the damage caused by the registration requirement.
Please bring back guest commenting.
Posted by: 998798668 at March 28, 2009 10:53 AM
What "damage" caused by the registration requirement? We are all guest commenters, all completely anonymous, with the exception of those who registered under their own names. My real name is not Montrose Morris. I hope brownterds isn't his or her real name either, for their sake.
Trolling aside, the worst part of guest comments was keeping the continuity in a conversation. People would have to state, "I'm guest at 9:45, not guest at 11:16". Log in names give us distinct personalities, an easier way to keep track of who said what, and a degree of responsibility. Just like real life, and after all, many of the topics discussed here affect our real lives. Finance, quality of life, neighborhoods and the houses themselves are about as real as you can get.
Like Dave, I also don't understand the animosity towards the Open Thread. When there are topics I'm not interested in, I don't open them. You don't like chitchat, then pass it by. I don't see why those who do should be apologetic or sorry that they are taking their time to banter and chat with friends. If they/we are wasting time, if any of us are wasting time by being here AT ALL, we all possess the power to turn the computer off and walk away from it. Other than that, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Posted by: Montrose Morris at March 28, 2009 11:40 AM
The fact that you can't get punched through your computer screen is natural fuel for wildfires of snark.
Posted by: Seltzer Junior at March 28, 2009 11:55 AM
Those that aren't willing to participate or share their views really don't hold much water with me. If you have a opinion that differs from the "group" voice it. If you don't like the direction the thread is taking, say so. To sit by the sidelines and complain that it's not to your liking isn't a very good way to change the tone. I sat by the sidelines for years before jumping in. Once I did I found most everyone to be quite welcoming. Even those who disagreed with what I'd said.
The OT is exactly what it is designed to be. A place for everyone to gather and chit chat. Isn't that what makes us a community after all? If that offends you or you think it's a silly waste of time I'd say then you shouldn't participate in it. Why complain about it? Just think if it's removed then that chatter activity will no doubt filter back into the main threads. There needs to be an outlet for that.
I agree with others that have voiced a need to expand on some of the topics that are posted. Design, Historical content, More Reno stories, How about a guest spot like a Q&A session with Charles Lockwood, a mortgage specialist or Ask a Plumber. What about asking those restaurants you feature give discounts to Brownstoner readers (15% Mon - Wed when you mention you saw us on Brownstoner)? What about a section where people talk about how they're coping with the recession (I even noticed the other day that your OT'ers were trading "recession dinner" recipes!)?
Real Estate is static right now. You need to give people something different. That could be what's missing from the formula.
Bitter renters? HA! Bitter lurkers is more like it. Why the need for anonymous posts? Is a screen name not anonymous enough? It's also ridiculous to even talk about putting limits on posts or rating systems in place! Do any of you think that Mr. B wants to lose out on all those coveted page clicks? Way to draw the advertising dollars in! It's a business, and over all a pretty well run one at that.
Posted by: Brownterds at March 28, 2009 12:33 PM
Hello all;
WOW, I missed the party yesterday.
Frankly, I am scratching my head as to the point of Mr. B's original question/comments. I believe that there has been a huge improvement in the threads in Brownstoner, due to two changes: the registration requirement, and the open thread. The former has lead to more civility, but not at the expense of stifling opinion. The latter has succeeded in keeping the mainline threads on topic. I really do not see any hostility towards necomers on either the mainline threads or the OT. Indeed, I can think of a handful of new folks who have recently joined in the OT discussions.
I believe the ball is actually in Mr. B.s court on continuing the quality of this site, and I think FSRQ hit the nail right on the head in this regard with his example about the Horror Show Friday's. How many times are we going to be subjected to the Horror Show Friday's? What is the point of this column now? How many times is Mr. B. going to invite a thread of derision, snark and class contempt with this column? I can almost predict the comments to follow when this post appears. Moreover, Montrose and I had suggested to Mr.B. ideas for advancing this column, such as: inviting the builders of these homes to blog about what drivers they face;inviting people who have purchased these homes to blog about how they feel living in them; exploring what aspects of economics or the building code produces these homes; etc.
My main point, Mr. B., is that you have a tough challenge ahead. With a stagnant economy and real estate in the doldrums, you have to come up with new ideas to keep this site vivid and fresh. Blaming the regular posters is a cop-out.
Posted by: benson at March 28, 2009 1:41 PM
I know Mr. B said that some people claimed to feel "intimidated" by the regulars, but I can't get my head around it. No one knows who anyone is on here. It's a freaking website with at most "virtual" confrontations. How the heck can anyone be "intimidated" in that scenario? If Brownstoner intimidates them, I can only imagine their horror when confronted by GTA IV.
My theory is that they aren't intimidated so much as aggravated and worn down by the repetition and perpetual flow of venom. That's probably all there is to it. And for some reason this has gotten much worse since guest commenting was dropped. I think a lot of the folks who used to keep the discussions focused on this site commented exclusively as guests, and have since gone elsewhere.
Posted by: 998798668 at March 28, 2009 2:02 PM
I really don't understand the issue with registering. It's not as though you're revealing yourself. He's not asking you to give out any personal information. So why not just come up with a log in name such as I_am_a_guest?
Registration has helped, not hurt, the level of commenting IMO.
I lurked for a while before jumping in and if memory serves the second(?) day that I posted under this log in name (not as a guest) I was personally invited to a get together that Biff, Dave and others were having. So to say that the regulars are intimidating just isn't fair.
Like others have said, it's hypocritical to sit on the sidelines complaining. If you think the regulars are repetitive add something to the conversation to elevate it. If there are things going on you disagree with jump in and say so.
I agree with Benson (gulp) blaming the regular posters is a cop-out.
Posted by: TownhouseLady at March 28, 2009 2:21 PM
"How many times are we going to be subjected to the Horror Show Friday's? What is the point of this column now? How many times is Mr. B. going to invite a thread of derision, snark and class contempt with this column? I can almost predict the comments to follow when this post appears. "
I couldn't agree more with benson and FSRQ on the 'Horror Show Friday' point. "How many times is Mr. B. going to invite a thread of derision, snark and class contempt" — specifically addresses my aversion to that thread. And the point that it is up to you Mr. B to raise the level of conversation on this blog. You need to 'feed' the positive. Take the positive suggestions and move in that direction.
There must be a more productive way to try to encourage more aesthetically pleasing architecture/construction. It may invite 'clicks' and 'posts' but it certainly does nothing to raise the tone of discussion on this blog. I feel reflects badly on this blog and our community.
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 28, 2009 2:21 PM
I agree with you, lots of numbers, that the issue for most lurkers isn't intimidation so much as it's aggravation over the quality of the discourse. As I suggested earlier, I actually used to be one of the regular posters here, under a different handle. Now, not so much. For me, personally, when it comes to matters of race and class, the issues are just way too serious for me to play word games with snarky racists in cyberspace. As Seltzer Junior has noted, since I can't punch out the lights of those folk through my computer screen(as I might otherwise do so in real life), I just save myself the aggravation and stick with the topics I find "safe." That's a level of participation that is totally my choice and one that is probably in the best interest of all us -- including that of the so-called "sharks" that XC exalts.
If the registration requirement has had a major impact on the numbers of those who regularly visit this site --whether they care to post or not -- I suspect it has helped to increase page clicks. IMO, when we were in "guest" freefall here, that's when incivility and ignorance in posting was at its height.
Seems to me that what bugs the anti-registration advocates most is that they have a problem with the "regulars" who now become identifiable through their postings. If I'm reading that objection accurately, I still vote to keep the reg requirement. One thing I've learned about blog communities is that it takes a concerted investment as an active poster to become a "regular." That is true on any blog site, not just Brownstoner. If that is how certain posters wish to invest their time here, and others do not, so what? For me, I could care much less about the handle of the poster than the trigger they wish to pull. In that sense, an undercover "guest" with a loaded gun is much harder to deal with than a proudly announced civility assassin in the public square.
Posted by: Brooklynista at March 28, 2009 2:58 PM
I agree with those who say that the registration requirement has hurt the site, but there's no point dwelling on that now. Lifting the registration requirement is NOT ON THE TABLE according to Mr. B. So why flog a dead horse?
Posted by: White and Proud in Crown Heights at March 28, 2009 3:53 PM
I wonder if Mr. B could resurrect the old Brooklyn Record site and have it essentially mirror the Brownstoner site, with one important difference: it would *include* guest commenting.
How long would it take before it would overtake Brownstoner in both popularity and quality of discourse?
Not long, I imagine.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 28, 2009 4:14 PM
What exactly about having to register do you take issue with? I don't understand why it's so important to not have a log in name. Is there something you want to say that is so repugnant that even having to do so under a made up name would prevents you from saying it?
Maybe it's not worth saying then?
Posted by: TownhouseLady at March 28, 2009 4:33 PM
Frankly, the old Brownstoner with "guest" commentary was less focused and civil than it is now. Just look at Curbed, overrun with redundant, nasty cuts about people, places, and policies. Brownstoner, as I remember from the old days, was only slightly better. (And with Open Thread, free-for-all conversations, happily, have found their home.)
As for concerns for privacy among people who won't register, how much privacy is there in cyber-space? We all have our cookies and profiles traded without our permission or knowledge through third parties (and not by the sites we may be visiting, like this one).
Worried about who knows you and your opinions and preferences? Stay away from the Web.
Some new features may make the site more substantial. A particularly good idea proposed above is having regular interview threads with people involved in Brooklyn, from preservationists to politicians, tradespeople to developers.
Real estate junkies like me always log onto the Observer's weekly profile pieces. Brownstoner can do them one better with an interactive Q+A among registered posters that can then be archived for casual reading.
Posted by: NOP at March 28, 2009 5:05 PM
I would suggest one other possibility to make long conversations/threads such as this one easier to follow. If commenters could respond to each other, and the responses were indented below the original comment, it would be much easier to follow a particular conversation. Lots of blogs do this, and it might require some sort of programming wisdom that I don't have, but it might be worth looking into. See, for example, http://hnn.us/blogs/comments/71153.html#comment
Other than that minor suggestion, I think we're doing pretty well here, and I learn an awful lot about my adopted home city reading this blog.
Posted by: sixyearsandcounting at March 28, 2009 5:11 PM
i love the comments. They are useful and sometimes pure entertaining. what a blog should be.
banning the what would be the wrong thing to do.
technical enhancements are appreciated. like working with threads as mentioned above.
I dont think BS would read this post unless he is unemployed and can live with 3 hours sleep a day
how about putting last comment on top ?
so people can read this.
Posted by: dutchman at March 28, 2009 5:33 PM
i cant believe i wasted so much bean bag time to log onto my nintendo wii to see this thread. i think people should stop complaining all the time and just give a hug. cheeze itz if u dont like something u ignore it. this is one of the nicest websites on the interwebs!!!
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 28, 2009 5:43 PM
"What exactly about having to register do you take issue with?"
It's hurt this site. Next question?
"I don't understand why it's so important to not have a log in name."
In the grand scheme of things, it's not important. Few things are. In the not-so-grand scheme of things, it'd be nice to save a few keystrokes here and there. They do add up. It's simple ergonomics.
"Is there something you want to say that is so repugnant that even having to do so under a made up name would prevents you from saying it?"
Nope.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 28, 2009 5:51 PM
on that note, heather i'd love to have brunch or linner with u!
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 28, 2009 5:51 PM
As for the Open Thread, it has, it seems to me, backfired to some extent. It certainly has not made other threads more civil or focused. On the contrary, the Open Thread generates more bile and ill-will than it can contain. Consequently other threads on the site are taking nastier, more personal turns as well.
Whatever else you decide to do (or not to do), I vote for ditching the Open Threads.
Posted by: 998798668 at March 28, 2009 6:47 PM
Tesla Coil;
You respond to THL's well-thought-out questions as if the answers are self-evident, but I can assure you that they are not.
I take particular exception to your dismissive response to her question about the issue with regsitrations: "It hurts this site. Next question?". You don't make any attempt to support this assertion with a reasoned argument.
It seems to me that the tone of your responses and your other posts suggest exactly why you want registrations to disappear. You want the ability to engage in some type of invective, without even taking on the minimal responsibility that an anonymous handle entails.
Are you not satisfied with Curbed, or some other such site that offers such a Web environment? Why do you insist that Brownstoner should mimic these other sites? Please identify the qualities on Curbed that Brownstoner is lacking.
Posted by: benson at March 28, 2009 6:57 PM
I think registration has hurt the site. I base this on pretty much the only thing I can base it on, a frank comparison of the Brownstoner of yore with the Brownstoner of today. I didn't see the need to repeat what others (including myself) have already said in this thread, though. You can rehash some of it if you wish, but if guest commenting really isn't an option Mr. B is willing to consider, then it's all academic. If you and some others don't agree with my assessments...well, I'm sorry and you are certainly in a position to voice your disagreement. I don't know what more you can ask for.
I wonder what sort of "minimal responsibility" you think is carried by an anonymous handle that I could make up in less than a single second. What is it, exactly, that you think I want to do? Let's assume, just for the sake of argument, that you think I secretly want to post four-letter words and then giggle about it. Why would I be deterred from doing this by the requirement that I act under a contrived name like Bob, Jane, Farmer Jim, the Blind Watchmaker? I don't see what you're getting at here.
As for Curbed, I'm not sure why you're so interested in it. It doesn't seem to me to have much in common with any incarnation of Brownstoner. So, apples and oranges. What works on Brownstoner isn't necessarily going to worked on Curbed, and vice versa.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 28, 2009 7:15 PM
I feel the need to add a second comment to this thread. First of all, guest commenting is pointless. I'll tell you right now that if this site goes back to guest commenting, me and likely other regulars will simply post something that looks like this:
"So what is a fair price for such and such house?
- Snappy"
You can't stop people from doing that. Allow me to drag other regulars into this for a second (sorry guys!). If we all did that and signed with names we recognize (DIBS, THL, MM, BXgirl, Rob, etc.) that is no different than how we comment now. You can still attribute a particular comment to us.
Second, Mr. B., I want to follow up on my 12:02 post from yesterday. It was my understanding, as well as that of many others, that you created the OT to provide a place for the inane chatter that previously pervaded the other substantive threads. And guess what? That is exactly what goes on in there. So, for you to turn around and start this thread by saying that the level of discussion in the OT isn't where you wanted it to be is at best disingenuous and at worst out and out hypocritical. Your words above were nothing short of the baiting that the What accuses you of on a daily basis. I was sad to see you live up to his suspicions and accusations. You claim to have concern about the quality of comments and sniping etc., then you turn right around and put up another Horror Show Friday. Be honest, Mr. B. The point to the HSF thread is to invite folks to sh*t on home designs that you have chosen as particularly hideous and offensive to your sensibilities. What high-brow comments are you expecting to get in such a thread? Seriously? People complained about this very thing to you before and for a short while you did away with that thread. The fact that you brought it back says a lot more about what you want/expect on this site than your request above on how to improve comments here.
If you no longer wish for the open thread to be what it is, then when you put up the thread, post a list of topics that you want to see discussed in there. If you don't like the open thread at all, it's your site - feel free to delete it all together. But please don't talk out of the side of your mouth, try to find a scapegoat amongst a handful of posters and expect that no one will call you out on it. The very way each of us posters are called out on our bullsh*t, you will get called out on yours.
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at March 28, 2009 7:16 PM
Tesla Coil;
You are still avoiding the hard questions. Perhaps my comparison to Curbed was inappropriate, but my point still remains: what exactly made the pre-registration Brownstoner more compelling? As I remember it, the threads were full of trolls and stalkers who went after some of the regulars like Montrose and Bxgrl, sometimes in a vicious and vile manner. There were alot more racist comments too. Perhaps my memory is wrong, which is why I once again ask you to be more specific about the superior qualities of the old Brownstoner. Please pull up one of these wonderful old threads from the archives, if you would.
I remain in my stand that indentifying yourself with a handle brings a sense of responsibility. You become a personality on this thread, and you take responsibility for what you write, good or bad. As Snappy just wrote, most regulars on this site identified themselves by a handle, even prior to the registration requirement. I have seen many cases here where folks have apologized to others for things that they wrote (including myself), and they did so because of this sense of responsibility for their Brownstoner "persona".
If your main argument boils down to the inconvenience of typing in your handle and PW in order to post, so be it. I believe that this is a small price to pay for the increase in civility that registration has brought.
Posted by: benson at March 28, 2009 7:42 PM
u go girl (snappy) i totally agree.. okay i needs to go shopping at keyfood hardcore! cu monday.
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 28, 2009 7:46 PM
i didnt leave to shop yet but there is nothing more stupid than seeing a "guest" comment. over and over and over and over. it is much more fulfilling to see a comment attached to a real name, good or bad. guest comments do nothing but invite hardcore trolls who will post nothing but racist, sexist, worth nuthin-posts just because they can, and that's that's the truth. if you really want to say something about an issue it takes 3 seconds and a random yahoo email to say anyway. what's the big deal? okay im audi. i hope keyfood is still open hahah :)
*rob*
Posted by: PitbullNYC at March 28, 2009 7:55 PM
I'm not avoiding anything. I'm simply disagreeing with you. As I remember it, the old Brownstoner was (somewhat) more civil and focused, with guest commenters playing an invaluable role keeping things on track and keeping some regulars in check. Yes, the site had its problems even then, and I agree with you that the trolls were a nuisance (though one can of course troll by simply creating a new handle for oneself...that's not a problem). So, my recollections differ from yours, I guess. Fortunately, the archives are there for all to see.
As for handles, I suppose one can "become a personality" on the thread with one handle and thus acquire some sense of responsibility. However, the fact is no one is limited to just one handle. You can have 5 or 20 or 100 handles if you want them, which should give you all the latitude you need for mischief making. I think it's also important to point out that one can have a sense of responsibility without any handle at all, but simply in virtue of being a person, here, conversing with others!
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 28, 2009 7:57 PM
"Your words above were nothing short of the baiting that the What accuses you of on a daily basis. I was sad to see you live up to his suspicions and accusations. You claim to have concern about the quality of comments and sniping etc., then you turn right around and put up another Horror Show Friday. Be honest, Mr. B. The point to the HSF thread is to invite folks to sh*t on home designs that you have chosen as particularly hideous and offensive to your sensibilities. What high-brow comments are you expecting to get in such a thread? Seriously? People complained about this very thing to you before and for a short while you did away with that thread. The fact that you brought it back says a lot more about what you want/expect on this site than your request above on how to improve comments here."
What?? You mean if you stand on a soap box with the sandwich board someone will listen???!!!!! I thought it was me, LMMFAO!
"But please don't talk out of the side of your mouth, try to find a scapegoat amongst a handful of posters and expect that no one will call you out on it. The very way each of us posters are called out on our bullsh*t, you will get called out on yours."
Wow it's a great day Brownstoner! People get tried of that crap and I think you better come with a new approach.
To the whiners if you don't like it, the door is that way---->
The What (Family size box of Skittles for everyone!)
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 28, 2009 8:01 PM
"What?? You mean if you stand on a soap box with the sandwich board someone will listen???!!!!! I thought it was me, LMMFAO!"
I know I know. It's Saturday and I'm drunk ; ^ P..
The What
Someday this war is gonna end...
Posted by: Return of The What at March 28, 2009 8:04 PM
I've been reading this site since the beginning. Commented as a guest at first, and when the registration requirement started i basically became a lurker for a while. I'll admit I was intimidated by seeing the same names all over the place and feeling like I was crashing a private party. Eventually I realized there was nothing to be intimidated by and jumped in. Recently, I've pulled back - mostly because I've started to ask myself why I should bother getting myself worked up getting into arguments with people I don't even know. SO I created a second name, and only wade in every now and then with one-off comments, but make sure to never get dragged into ongoing arguments or discussions.
That being said, I've been thinking about b'stoner now vs bstoner then. Fisrt of all, I remember thinking in the beginning that alot of the commenting was very harsh and just outright mean. In the end, I think registration was a good idea and definitely raised the level of discourse. THis is definitely one of the more polite forums on the web. The OP has also definitely helped in the regard.
Reading through all 200-something comments here it strikes me that my favorite commenter back in the day was babs. SHe was great and always had something useful to say. Nowadays she rarely pops up and thats a shame. She's the kind of commenter you want to attract more of.
My favorite more recent commenter is 11217. I can't think of another commenter who I agree with more than him (or her). I was kind of sad to read that he/she has also taken a commenting holiday. If you wanted to start a blog and only allow babs and 11217 to comment, I would be your biggest fan.
Posted by: Make My Heights the P Heights at March 28, 2009 9:16 PM
"I think it's also important to point out that one can have a sense of responsibility without any handle at all, but simply in virtue of being a person, here, conversing with others!"
This remark redeemed the entire thread for me. Thanks.
Posted by: 998798668 at March 28, 2009 10:18 PM
"You become a personality on this thread"
EXACTLY. And that's what I (and many other people) don't like about this site. I don't care about all these different personalities. Commenters' "personalities" overwhelm almost every single thread. The site has become tedious to read--no matter what the topic.
I agree 100% with those who feel that discussions in general were more interesting and substantive in the pre-registration days. And so much more enjoyable. I say bring back anonymous/guest commenting for those who want to use it. This site never was and never will be like Curbed, so there's no need to worry about that. Just my .02.
Posted by: bk14 at March 28, 2009 11:18 PM
Benson, NOP - great points, as usual, and Brooklynista, you need to post more often, like in the old days. Your point of view is missed, plus you have a lot of info on renovation. Envy, envy!
Snappy, I agree with you except for one thing. If we go back to non registration, signing your name at the bottom of your post is meaningless. There is nothing to prevent someone, who shows up as "guest" in the log in space, like everyone else, to write any sort of trash that they want, and then sign your name to it. Who's to know, the truth, except Mr. B, who will then spend his entire day deleting false posts, after getting irate emails from people who have had their identity "stolen". Been there, done that, more often than I'd like to remember. I remember spending stupid time telling the rest of the blog, "MM at 4:15 was not me.". Sometimes the troll would post things that everyone knew I wouldn't say, but sometimes they would also post things I might say, and people wouldn't know what to believe, and got really tired of me wasting blog space denying and defending myself, and then have the troll post and say my denial wasn't me, which I'd deny, and it was absolutely absurd. The return of registration was a blessing. Even Mr. B's identity was being co-opted, and posts he didn't make were showing up before he could delete them.
I have no reason to think that it won't just start up again, if registration is abolished. Some people live to cause trouble. I don't understand it, but it exists. I see nothing wrong with registration. How can one not have 20 seconds extra time to log in?
Posted by: Montrose Morris at March 29, 2009 12:28 AM
Just want everyone to know that "Tesla Coil" is not my real name. It's a moniker that I plucked out of thin air, as this site doesn't permit guest commenting. If anyone else would like to borrow the name "Tesla Coil", drive it around the block a few times, post comments (absurd or profound) under it, have at it. This is a website after all, not real life. My sense of "identity" will not be threatened.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 29, 2009 1:45 AM
1. Take down the OT and certain "personalities" will all begin to congregate on other threads. So that idea is just palin stupid.
2. If you're annoyed that there are "personalities" on this site then try and grow one yourself.
3.Yes, Horror Show Friday is racist, classist and baiting. Change the name to "Is This In Context Friday?" But please don't stop posting these POS houses for all to see what is becoming of development.
One thing that I don't see anyone mention except within the "Last Weeks Biggest Sales" is that there should probably be a "Last Weeks Smallest Sales" as well.
For those of you upset with the "personalities" since some of them are now using our Sunday morning coffee time to post here, please refer to them in the future as "Losers."
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 29, 2009 10:19 AM
"1. Take down the OT and certain "personalities" will all begin to congregate on other threads. So that idea is just palin stupid."
I meant to type "plain stupid" but perhaps I've invented a new phrase for the urban dictionary: "palin stupid."
Posted by: daveinbedstuy at March 29, 2009 10:29 AM
xander is absolutely right with the rating suggestion.
dkos.com and slashdot.org do it very successfully and those blogs attract some of the most opinionated loudmouths around. it definitely helps keeping threads somewhat civil.
it also helps a lot to actually show threads as threads - that way i can just ignore the endless banter that often goes on here, because i can skip the entire side-thread.
and yes, some of the regulars really are incredibly annoying losers - brownstoner can't change that, but you could help other folks filtering out that noise.
Posted by: spinetrak at March 29, 2009 11:43 AM
Tesla Coil: It's obvious that's not your name, and equally obvious that you're not making an attempt to engage in constructive dialogue. I rarely use these pages to call people asses, but I'm breaking my policy for you. There's no reason to get rid of the OT; anyone who doesn't like it, doesn't have to read it. I don't need a greek chorus (or any other ethnicity) rating whether my comments were useful or approved, or whether I'm an "innie" or an "outie." I'll continue to contribute where I can. That might be worth trying for anyone who's opted out or ceased posting because of others. "Others" don't rule your life or your decisions—you do. Doing the right thing is an available choice 100% of the time.
Posted by: vinca at March 29, 2009 2:45 PM
Hi Vinca. I've described why I think the Open Thread is bad for the site and that's the most constructive contribution I can make to our dialogue about it. As it happens I don't share your opinion of the Open Thread, and I'm sorry this is a source of distress to you.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 29, 2009 3:13 PM
My third and final post on this issue. This time I'd like to address those who support a 'posting cap' per user. Specifically I want to utilize Tesla Coil as an example - and please know I'm not trying to pick you, Tesla Coil, but you are a perfect example here.
As someone who is such a strong proponent of post limits and saying that it only takes a couple of posts to make one's point, I find it interesting that, as of my typing this, you have posted *15 times* on this thread.
At 12:25, you said:
"A cap of this kind would force people to THINK about what they're saying. "
Someone else responded that sometimes the threads turn into a conversation with questions asked, etc. and several posts per person per thread becomes inevitable. You later re-emphasized your point at 6:28 by saying:
"I imagine the "limit" to be such that few people would ever have to think twice about it. The idea would not be to keep people from saying what they have to say. Rather, the idea would be to keep a very small number of people from inundating the site with white noise. Period."
I think now maybe you and other proponents of posting limits can see the 'sticky wicket' of this idea. Again, I do not mean to jump on you and I hope you do not see this post as such. But, now I must ask your for post #16 :) Do you propose a posting limit on us 'regulars' only as the probable "small number of people inundating the site with white noise"? Or is your limit proposal for everyone? (Still not trying to pick a fight here, I really want to know exactly what it is you are proposing via limits given your numerous posts here.)
Posted by: InsertSnappyNameHere at March 29, 2009 3:58 PM
Hi Snappy. No problem, as those are all excellent questions. I think a cap on the number of posts people can make is an interesting idea that probably deserves a "trial run". At the same time, I think you're right that there are 'sticky wickets' and plenty of variables that deserve close scrutiny. I also don't know what this sort of measure would require in the way of software and programming, though others here probably do.
To be honest, I didn't have a precise cap in mind. I guess I should clarify one thing, though. You don't want the cap to be so low that it is blocking expression or so high that it's useless. Most people (those who don't post excessively or pointlessly) should not have to be mindful of the cap; others (who post excessively and/or pointlessly), should have to be mindful of it.
So where should the cap be? I think some trial and error would be required to answer this question...armchair speculation won't cut it. Furthermore, you might discover that you do not want the cap to be precise at all. Perhaps it could be variable limit, with Mr. B raising it or lowering it at his discretion, depending on what he sees happening on the site. Also, should the cap be specific to particular threads or to the entire site? Should posters be able to start with a clean slate each *day*? I didn't have anything too specific in mind in these respects.
As I imagined the posting cap, it would apply equally, across the board and to everyone. Someone might argue that this also ought to be up to Mr. B's discretion, so that he could affix a cap to particular people's handles or something. However, this could result in Mr. B's having to keep track of how much various individuals are posting. That would be a lot of work and...well, life is short.
Long story short, there are a lot of variations on this idea that one could try out. I think one or two of them probably deserve a shot. Am I convinced beyond the shadow of a doubt that they'd work? Certainly not, and other people have floated ideas here that I'm equally, if not more, intrigued by (e.g., the "ignore button").
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 29, 2009 4:35 PM
Can someone please explain or point me to a site that uses the 'ignore button' feature?
I'm not clear as to how that functions. Thx.
Posted by: cobblehiller at March 29, 2009 5:09 PM
Tesla: Your reply to me features a common and highly defective strategy for hijacking a thread. Why was it not enough to state your opinion, and acknowledge that mine is different? Why throw in a “zinger,” and assign a concocted quality to my comments? If it’s YOU who’s feeling “distressed,” I’m sure plenty of Brownstoner site users would be happy to offer their opinions and remedies. If that's the case, I encourage you to post your own thread describing it. I’m entirely puzzled by the amount of time and energy you’ve put into diminishing or abolishing a thread which you don’t use. Maybe you can describe what about the OT inspires that level of antagonistic attention from you? Do you devote the same level of energy into having your neighbor’s green grass torn out? When I read the OT,
I read it for diversion. (I did try THL's brisket recipe, and though it was easy and
I enjoyed it, I like my own much better. Hmm...maybe I should apply myself to getting THL banned from the kitchen.) Generally speaking, I don’t read the front pages of this site very much. But it would be just plain bizarre for me to establish my own NON-participation as the basis for eliminating that thread, or any other, from the site. The world’s a big place, and it’s way out of your control OR mine. Active participation, rather than active opposition, can work wonders. If you can come to terms and peace with your own limitations, rather than the limitations you want to impose on others, I'm confident you’ll really start to relish the diversity, hilarity and challenges, rather than aim to shut them down.
Posted by: vinca at March 29, 2009 5:54 PM
Vinca, I don't know what you mean by a "zinger". You called me an "ass". I took this, very reasonably it seems to me, to indicate that you were upset by my earlier posts. If you weren't upset by them, fine...so noted.
Posted by: Tesla Coil at March 29, 2009 6:43 PM
Well since you're keeping tabs... You can count me in as a long time reader now lurker due to "Usual Suspects" and the nerve wrecking chatter that just wont stop. Also I think you lost focus when you created the OT platform for them.
Moving forward..I believe an OT about different or greener interior designs that may also last for generations is
Change we can believe.
Posted by: jack slade at March 29, 2009 10:47 PM
I think the comments were SO much better and smarter and the discussions much more fun when everyone was anonymous.
Posted by: gkw at March 30, 2009 11:09 AM
I must admit I am so happy Mr. B started this post. I am relatively new to Brownstoner and joined because I am on the verge of buying and moving to Brooklyn. I'd be classified as a "lurker" - I commented on a property once and was pretty shocked that almost right away I was accused of being the property's broker and mocked. I think this is a great and useful site but at times it feels like it is highjacked by a handful of folk. For instance, there was a thread several weeks ago about Fort Greene: I was super-excited because it is one of the neighborhoods I am interested in. Almost half of the comments were a childish back and forth between the usual suspects about an unrelated topic. Others desperately tried to keep it on topic. I would like to see more intervention from the moderator when comments go completely off topic; there should be a way to flag racist and other offensive comments which pop up from time to time and are NOT okay; and one might consider a cap on the number of comments per day.
Posted by: brooklyncurious at April 3, 2009 11:22 PM
Latest Restaurant Additions
-
Le Barricou
added November 20, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Der Schwarze Kölner
added November 19, 2009 12:00 PM in Fort Greene -
Oak Wine Bar & Café
added November 18, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Mr. Wonton
added November 17, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Casa Rosa
added November 16, 2009 12:00 PM in Carroll Gardens -
Cousin John's Café & Bakery
added November 13, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Elote
added November 12, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Miracle Grill
added November 11, 2009 12:00 PM in Park Slope -
Phoebe's Cafe
added November 10, 2009 12:00 PM in Williamsburg -
Ruthie's
added November 9, 2009 12:00 PM in Clinton Hill, Downtown Brooklyn
Post a comment
Please be patient while your comment is published. It may take a moment.