Asymmetrical Information

"Hey you kids...". I think that about summed up what happened to the previous topic. Too bad. Please don't you and JaneGalt give up. I bought my first computer about 3 weeks before 9/11. I had never heard of blogs before. Then after 9/11, I was directed (I can't remember how) to this site. I return every morning to this site, and then go to the other blogs that JaneGalt has listed. That is my direction thru the blogosphere. I've seen this happen to other wonderful blogs that I read. There is a lot of people that are nothing but contrarians. You say up, they say down. You say left, they say right. Anybody who questions them, are called names or liars. Perhaps some day the internet will have to be regulated like alcohol and cigaretts. I hope it's only a maturity thing that causes this.

Oh, shame!
You put a mirror to my blushing face.
As an apology, may I only add I probably commented on your blog once or twice in 1.5 yrs - and read it regularly?
Not a sqeek from me anymore, I promise!
*covers her head*

Actually, I'd post comments to fool Google into thinking that people actually cared about my blog ... does that make me a rank troll?

Of course, different people have different attitudes about this kind of thing.

I totally understand, I have the same difficulty with not responding to annoying comments in my blogs. On my more formal blog (Catallarchy) I feel obliged to respond because I don't want criticisms (even bad ones) of my ideas to sit there unaddressed. On my personal blog I feel obliged to respond because many of the commenters are friends.

But often it ends up with me wasting time arguing with people who aren't listening, time I could spend doing something useful like working on my manuscript. The mosquito's whine is like a siren call...

Ok , so this is clearly me. Among, I hope, others - I don't recognize myself in the specific examples you've mentioned, but I could be wrong. And, appropriately, my commenting at all here will be an unintentional confirmation of precisely what you were talking about. And I do feel guilty about upsetting (or irritating or whatever the appropriate word is) Jane in the last post. But still…

Part of it is that this is one of a very few pretty non-partisan blogs (in fact, I can't think of a lib. analog), so there's actually a point to arguing in your comments, even when the point is minor. Thoughts get clarified, information gets passed, etc. Part of it is some of the subject matter here. Politics is, at the moment, fairly charged on both sides, and some (hand raised) occasionally respond with … inappropriate gusto. Part of it is also that you've just created/grown a very nice community here. I, for example, like checking in here - it's generally a smart, interesting group of readers that you have. It's like dropping into a decent conversation at a cafeteria at lunch. So, if, for example, my comments seem commonly to be snarky, it's because that's what I'm like in short conversations. Snark is what I do for cheap, easy wit.

But, I think, part of the tenor of my comments, for example, is usually a reflection of the tone of the post or comment to which I'm responding. Jane's writing is not without the occasional gentle barb of its own. You've posted less often, so I'm not certain, but you seem to be less likely to insert mild mocking than she. As a result, I'd guess that, on average, comments to your posts (mine and other Dems) are milder than comments to hers. More jokey, perhaps, but less snarky. And I'd guess that if you separated her posts into those that were straight and those that included the affectionate chuck of the Dem chin, you'd find the tenor of the comments followed a similar pattern.

In any case, I am sorry about upsetting/irritating Jane, none of it is meant to be cruel or mean-spirited, and, properly chastened, I'll tone it down. I certainly don't want to be (even in part) responsible for you turning comments off. As I said above, you've grown a nice community.

I think the key for me is to remember that I don't have to respond to anything I don't want too, period. I also don't like to leave unanswered criticism out there, so if someone else has answered it and I don't feel like commenting, good enough. If not, then a one time response is sufficient, and a brief one at that, depending on the mood and how serious the criticizer seems to be.

And I agree, this blog has great comment sections. I have taken to reading it every day.

Don't flatter yourself, Tim. You're a tremendous slouch.

I think your comments section is far superior to the norm, from blogs on any part of the political spectrum. That said, I can understand why one would find it bothersome at times. If you find it too bothersome, by all means, remove it. This isn't worth doing if it ain't fun.

So Den Beste is taking an extended break eh? Probably a good idea. Though some of his writing was great, I quit reading his blog awhile back. To me, blogs are only interesting if they are somewhat interactive. Den Beste would spew forth on all subjects with 100+ percent certitude and occasionally get some material facts wrong and then get all upset when (numerous) people would email to tell him about it.

Den Beste complained in the early days about how he didn't get enough exposure and now he complains about the side-effects of getting a level of exposure that most bloggers will only ever dream about. So apparently he wants to be like a guru, sitting on top of the mountain, raining down tidbits of his infinite wisdom on us lesser mortals, without having to put up with the annoyance of feedback.

Sure, if you don't like criticism, turn off the comments and change your email and don't give it out. But then you're a part-time, isolated, hobby columnist - even more isolated than mainstream media columnists since it's generally possible to contact them and/or write letters to the editor. Blogs like that would quickly lose their appeal to me and, I suspect, many others (but maybe not). If you don't care about getting feedback, why post at all? You can always just write stuff on your computer and keep it to yourself. Lots of people have written books and short stories that they never show anybody because that don't want criticism.

If the effort and annoyance is not worth the benefits, quit. What's the point otherwise? I like this blog (and I don't think I've ever posted a comment here before), but there are thousands of others and in a few years there will be hundreds of thousands of others. There's no way I'm going to hold back criticism in a comments section to avoid offending sensitive bloggers. Sorry.

That's fine, Bret, but just make sure you apply the exact same principle to the rest of your life, OK? Don't be above criticising total strangers in the street, just because you want to be polite, and politeness being the avoidance of unnecessary hurt etc.
What I really wanted to say was, if people are running a more specialised, one-subject blog, not to fear their comments going the way of e.g. here, Harry's Place, etc. For the most part you will receive sparse, but specific comments; don't worry if it doesn't become a 'conversation' in the way some of the bigger blogs achieve. It should be obvious by now that a 'flourishing' comments section is a mixed blessing.

No listed E-mail address? Well, perhaps, Mindles. There's nothing quite as wearying as having to delete a few thousand spams each morning as a precursor to one's constructive activity.

But if it weren't for that, I'd have to say that the E-mailbag is a positive thing. It tells me what my readers are thinking. Most important, it tells me what my adversaries are thinking, and which issues and arguments they consider most dangerous to them. That's intelligence of a kind hard to find elsewhere.

As for me, I hope Mr. Den Beste will continue to post, perhaps anonymously on a new site, with no email and no comments.
I seldom fail to enjoy his posts, and seldom fail to learn from them.

Just a short note to encourage you to keep the format of one of the very best blogs out there. One of the strengths of this blog is the commentary from smart thoughtful people on all sides - a rarity. I imagine that most of your visitors are quite smart enough to see the occasional ad hominem attack for what it is; no need for you to respond to it.

Im fairly new at this, until about a year ago I thought computers were only good for Porno and Gambling. Unless you actually know someone involved with the site, its often difficult to know if your viewed as someone with a valid, thought out, but different view, or a just a pain in the ass. I think for alot of people, things become more intense as the threads grows longer. One of the problems with these blogs, is alot of people arent interested in writing at blogs that are far left or far right, so the blogs that are reasonable and to the center, gets the most 'walk up' traffic.
I dont know you, or the circumstance that started this thread, Ive been away, but I hope you solve your problems with the blog. Im not certain, but I think much of your problem is this campaign is the nastiest Ive ever seen, and people are pissed.

Like the others here, I hope you don't get fatigued. This is a wonderful site, and I've learned alot from it. It's always thought-provoking and enjoyable.

Keep at it, and thanks!

Completely off topic (except for the fact that this post is called "Hey you, get off of my lawn...") What's the difference between Mick Jagger and your average Scotsman?

Somecallmetim -

This may surprise you, but I had no comments of yours in mind when I wrote the above.

The examples above all come from some time ago.

Bret, I'm not sure there is any nobility in 'not withholding criticism' in blog comments. I just think commenters occasionally forget that they are 'in our living room', as it were. Or at least on our lawn...

I'm afraid there is no clear ex ante definition of an over-the-line comment (one reason why I have only deleted about 5 comments in the history of my time here). We can only fall back on the Justice Potter defense - I know it when I see it.

I have the same problem defining acceptable casual dress for my employees. One thing I like about business casual is it forces people to think about the workplace like grown-ups, and many express different identities in attractive and acceptable ways. The bad part is that some fail to consider the impact on colleagues and clients and you end up, for instance, having a conversation with the receptionist about her naval ring.

Rising shirt-lines were one of the three great successes of the Clinton era (behind "peace" and "prosperity"). More than birds, more than flowers, flat bellies in Washington Square Park mean spring has sprung. They are the very woof and warp of happiness.

You don't like anything good, do you?

I found this blog by way of Instapundit (which I found by way of Lileks, which I found when a computer hobbyist site linked to "Notes from the Olive Garden" in order to shut up a few vocal 'internationalists' polluting the dialog on said computer site), long before the comments-enabled format. I stayed for the delightful prose as much as the content (same reason I subscribe to Car & Driver magazine, actually); the comments-enabled format has arguably enriched the site, although there have been a few nasties.

Bottom line? A hobby or a recreational activity should never feel like a job. If it does, it's time to take a break. I don't even run a blog, yet periodically I have to simply give up on my usual forae foraging (blogs and elsewhere) because the process brings on a feeling of mental dread, rather than entertainment. A week of extra outdoors time or pursuing some other hobby can really do things for perspective.

I neither like nor dislike Den Beste. Sometimes I like what he writes, sometimes I don't. But I wonder maybe he just doesn't get blogging.

Bret: apparently he wants to be like a guru, sitting on top of the mountain, raining down tidbits of his infinite wisdom on us lesser mortals, without having to put up with the annoyance of feedback.

Well, he does have his e-mail address available, so I don't really believe this. I've always thought he could save himself a lot of grief by turning on in-line comments or trackback pings (and he surely has the technical know-how to do so). He's said in the past he doesn't mind criticism, and that what he hates is receiving a bazillion e-mails all nitpicking on the same thing. Since a portion of those people would presumably read the comments or trackbacks (especially if presented in-line) and see that someone else has already said what they were going to say, that would mitigate this problem quite a bit. Indeed, he wouldn't even have to ever read the comments, since most people merely want to log their disagreement somewhere (especially where other readers can see it).

So I've always figured he does want the feedback; he just doesn't like his readers to see any of it -- except for those samples handpicked by him where he can make the other guy (or gal) look like an idiot.

James Hamilton: That's fine, Bret, but just make sure you apply the exact same principle to the rest of your life, OK? Don't be above criticising total strangers in the street, just because you want to be polite

That's not really a good analogy. A better one would be to criticize a stranger who is loudly proclaiming their opinions to everybody, or is holding a big sign over their head. If you are overly sensitive and don't want criticisms of your opinions, you probably shouldn't be blogging. There are better uses of your time and effort. Either publish in media where feedback is harder (like print media), or limit the distribution of your opinions to those who you know will never challenge you (using e-mail or a newsletter or whatnot), or write only safe things that won't provoke anybody, or don't publish at all. There are a host of available choices that allow you to avoid criticism. Den Beste also has the obvious option of dumping all his bothersome traffic by starting a new blog under a new name and changing his writing style to make it tough to figure out that it's him.

Personally, I think it's a lot more productive to use criticism to further your own growth, and one of the main value-adds of blogging is that it's very easy for readers to submit feedback (and, more importantly, to see feedback from other readers). You can have an excellent blog without that (like Volokh), but it'd be wasting a lot of the blog's potential.

That's not really a good analogy. A better one would be to criticize a stranger who is loudly proclaiming their opinions to everybody, or is holding a big sign over their head.

That's not a good analogy, either. The person in your example is evidently making noises or waving signs where other people can't help but encounter them. If we must have a physical analogy to a blog, try the hanging of a modest plaque in one's front yard -- people who want to see it can do so by walking in the front gate, but nobody forces them to enter the yard.

A certain amount of civil dignity should be associated with that activity. Of course, this is the Internet, so that expectation is sure to be trampled in practice.

anony-mouse: That's not a good analogy, either. The person in your example is evidently making noises or waving signs where other people can't help but encounter them.

But you can always walk away. Presumably the stranger isn't following you around. The yard analogy isn't that good either. Probably aren't any perfect analogies, but a website is, first and foremost, a method of publication with the primary intent of reaching as wide audience as possible (more akin to a freeway sign than a yard sign -- especially when you're talking about a blog like Den Beste's). And it's an interactive and easily updated medium, unlike signs. This is the Internet's major advantage over books and magazines and newspapers, where the reader is stuck reading the publisher's point of view, often without being made aware of dissenting opinions.

As I said, there are other better ways of reaching a limited audience (like a yard sign reaches people in your neighborhood), like e-mail, or a Yahoo! group where you limit who can become a member, or even a LiveJournal with protected entries visible to just your friends. You wouldn't choose to post your opinions in a public and widely-viewed place unless you wanted them to also be seen by people who disagree with them.

I still maintain that a weblog is fundamentally like a 'front yard' of sorts (or perhaps a storefront?) which the proprietor voluntarily opens and the accessor voluntarily enters, unlike a billboard or a streetcorner doomsday prophet or any other such device where people with legitimate business may encounter it without seeking it out. (Unless, of course, the weblog proprietor is engaging in aggressive advertising on other sites in which case the billboard/prophet analogy holds, since people with other business might encounter it unasked.)

The proprietor obviously intends for people to see the weblog, yes, and perhaps even criticize, but I have much more tolerance for someone sneering at the streetcorner prophet than someone who enters another's front yard or place of business and starts acting like a boor.

But a blog gets linked and quoted by other blogs with ease and with frequency (this very post being an example). I see little sign that Den Beste doesn't want the attention, or else he'd start all over again with a new name and URL or form a Yahoo! group for his followers. I think we could go back and forth on this for a while, since there is no good analogy for a blog. But I'll always maintain that it's a form of mass media or communication, and a lot closer to two-way communication than any other media (let alone a store).

There's certainly no excuse for acting like a boor anywhere, be it on private or public property, but I think Den Beste's own behavior occasionally invites boorish behavior. I just don't see nearly the same respect for dissenting opinions that you see here or at Drezner or Tacitus. But then again, that was already evident by his not supporting trackback pings. And there's no excuse for that either. The Internet is all about showcasing as many different points of view as possible. If you want just a subset instead, form a private Yahoo! group or something. That's a lot more like private property than a web page.

I'm not sure some of you have a clear idea of Den Beste's traffic and correspondence relative to us or even Drezner or Tacitus. He 'crosses over' audiences well outside of the political blogger crowd.

Trackback isn't supported by his software (Citydesk). If he were using MT or Wordpress you could say he just didn't turn it on, but in his case it would have been an investment of time to satisfy someone else.

Everyone knows about technorati,right? Trackback isn't necessary.

Mindless H. Dreck: I'm not sure some of you have a clear idea of Den Beste's traffic and correspondence relative to us or even Drezner or Tacitus. He 'crosses over' audiences well outside of the political blogger crowd.

I don't get your point. Does more traffic mean it's okay to disrespect other people's opinions? Does it make supporting comments or trackback pings impossible? I somehow doubt he gets as much traffic or links as Slashdot.

Everyone knows about technorati,right? Trackback isn't necessary.

So he could easily add a link to automatically search Technorati for a post (like Volokh did for a while), rather than force readers to copy the link, go to Technorati, and then paste a link into a form. And of course, everybody knows Technorati's response time is ridiculous (not knocking them -- I know they don't have that many resources to go around).

Trackback isn't supported by his software (Citydesk). If he were using MT or Wordpress you could say he just didn't turn it on, but in his case it would have been an investment of time to satisfy someone else.

Someone else being his readers, who would be the ones served by having this information readily available. And besides, unlike a lot of us, he's retired and unmarried, and obviously has a lot of free time. Not to mention technically savvy enough to roll his own if so inclined.

Of course, some blogs are about serving their readers, and some blogs are intended to make the blogger "feel a little better about him/herself."

But a blog gets linked and quoted by other blogs with ease and with frequency (this very post being an example). I see little sign that Den Beste doesn't want the attention, or else he'd start all over again with a new name and URL or form a Yahoo! group for his followers. I think we could go back and forth on this for a while, since there is no good analogy for a blog. But I'll always maintain that it's a form of mass media or communication, and a lot closer to two-way communication than any other media (let alone a store).

You can feel that way if you wish, and your opinions on Den Beste are and remain yours; I never commented on him one way or the other. But I daresay you won't get far trying to argue that a blog is "like" a stranger loudly proclaiming their opinions (the original analogy which I targeted).

I don't know about you, but I have actually encountered some of those strangers; they were simply there, shouting a screed or trying to add my name to some voter petition drive, and I had to actively ignore them while going about whatever unrelated business took me down that sidewalk. Conversely, I have to actively SEEK janegalt.net in order to discover what Jane or Mindles are thinking; so far, they have not hacked into my computer and spammed my desktop with opinions. Nor has Den Beste, nor has Glenn Reynolds, nor has Eugene Volokh, nor has Ted Barlow, nor has Kevin Drum, nor has anyone else whose opinions I at some point have actively SOUGHT to obtain.

That's the difference. Draw your own conclusions on the significance or lack thereof, but it's certainly not the same thing.

Yeah, I went to Berkeley, so I've had my share of encounters.

Recall, I was merely improving James Hamilton's analogy of the stranger minding their own business not saying anything. I think that's a terrible analogy for a blog, which is a method of communication.

anony-mouse: they have not hacked into my computer and spammed my desktop with opinions.

The stranger standing in a public place is presumably not breaking into your house to yell their opinions at you.

I know the analogy still not the same thing as a blog. I've already said there's no perfect analogy (and yours haven't been any better). The analogy isn't the point; it just illustrates the point. The point is that if you don't want any criticisms of your opinions, keep them to yourself, or use a media that's more private than a blog. There are plenty of alternate avenues you can use.

The stranger standing in a public place is presumably not breaking into your house to yell their opinions at you.

But I thought you had already rejected that analogy.

(and yours haven't been any better)

Really? Crap...hmm. Maybe if I do a little softshoe and bring in some backup singers?

The point is that if you don't want any criticisms of your opinions, keep them to yourself, or use a media that's more private than a blog.

Well, yes, I don't think we've ever been arguing THAT. Re-read what I wrote; it's extremely specific, and consequently, much simpler than what you're apparently reading it out to be.

fling93 (and Bret),

I went over to Den Beste's site to read about all kinds of different things, from the opinion of one person, Stephen Den Beste. It was his blog--I figured I'd be getting his POV. I didn't go there to read your opinions.

It was his blog. I mean, duh. You sound like people in controlled communities--"They can't paint their door red! I have to look at that door! Oh, you mean the door's inside their house? Well, I still don't approve! I want their door to look like everyone else's door."

I mean, guys, DUH.

joe shropshire wrote: What's the difference between Mick Jagger and your average Scotsman?

Perhaps it's something like...
Jagger says, "Hey, you, get off of my cloud!" While a Scotsman says, "Hey, McCloud, get off of my ewe!"

anony-mouse: Well, yes, I don't think we've ever been arguing THAT. Re-read what I wrote; it's extremely specific

Yes, I realize you've been taking issue just with the analogy that I only put forward for the sole purpose of making a point you aren't arguing.

ushie: I went over to Den Beste's site to read about all kinds of different things, from the opinion of one person, Stephen Den Beste. It was his blog--I figured I'd be getting his POV.

I'm not telling Steven Den Beste how to run his blog. I'm just observing that if he really wanted to cut down on bazillions of e-mail all nitpicking the same little thing, adding comments and/or trackback pings would be an obvious way to do it while providing added value for his readers. That he chooses not to indicates where his priorities lie.

And of course you're going to get criticism when you get tons of traffic and blog on controversial subjects. Duh. I've pointed out plenty of other options that would avoid criticism. Of course, they involve less exposure. Sounds like Den Beste wants to have his cake and eat it, too. He likes all the traffic, but he wants all of it to not ever find any fault with him. Exactly why does this warrant any sympathy?

By now, my estimation of Den Beste migh be obvious.

I'll say this, however: the single most sensible thing about his blog is that there are no comments.

When I first observed people setting up comments on their blogs, for god's sake, I was completely astounded. I am never ever going to understand why anyone would even consider that.

Aside from the irony, I think the full answer to that would take too long for a comment here (the short answer is to look at it from the blog reader's perspective). But it's an interesting topic that I'll probably blog about sometime soon.

Mindles writes, "I offer the following in the full knowledge that our comment threads are among the best in the blogosphere and include an unusually large proportion of polite argument. Thanks for that."

Hmm, given the 4 paragraphs these 2 lines are followed by, one wonders how to take this! But is there reason to believe that the failings mentioned afflict only commentators? ;-) Blog-publishers DO have a vested interest in keeping their own tone civil, lest they soon find themselves without readers, whereas commentators lack this natural deterrent. Nonetheless, for me the comments threads are what make blogs interesting; without them they are mere pontification, a bit more varied and fresh than online newspaper and magazine columns perhaps, but nothing innovative in themselves.

I don't mean to take away from the publishers -- I respect the skill it takes to write provocative initial postings that get threads going and doubt I'd be good at it myself. But a world of blogs without comment threads would lack the vibrant dialog that sometimes (often?) occurs now. Sure, you can have your inter-blog links and your backtracks, but clicking all over the place brings you back to this new-fangled nonlinear hypertext thing that we humans just don't have the long-evolved mental machinery to support (comment threads are throwbacks to preweb media such as newsgroups, BBS's, or even ... conversations). It also limits the population that can participate to an unusual cross-section of technically-aware (or technically-connected) people with enough time on their hands to maintain a living blog. (I'd fail on this measure as well, though your co-blogging approach here is a nice way of reducing that difficulty.)

Comments are Closed.