Wow, after reading this (My Dear KOS Community …) I started to suffer an attack of post traumatic stress.
Like an idiot I spent every free moment in a 14 month period of my life as a volunteer moderator on an out of the way campaign/PAC forum which was overshadowed (but more sophisticated – in execution and content) by its related and considerably more famous blog. After several versions and a subsequent incarnation the former settled into a culture of content, exchange of ideas, right wingnut abuse, and maximum snark which allowed for diversity, but also dealt quickly with those intent on disruption. The latter site to this day still has self-described problems with dissent, the cult of the victim, trolls, and dwindling membership.
The boss directed the denizens of the blog over to the forum to try and help them address some of their problems. Big mistake. Big. Huge. Evidently those remaining subsequent to its heyday had become humorless and more psychotic. My mistake was pointing out that they were spilling beer on the carpet. Much high dudgeon ensued. That tends to happen with true believers. Suffice it to say, there was a clash of cultures – some of it was snort coffee up your nose and spew it all over the keyboard funny.
When I could no longer be productive I walked away.
If we can’t learn to do that (among other things) then blogtopia (yes, skippy coined the phrase!) will never reach its full potential for progressives.
Navel gazing and self-reflection in moderation can be a good thing, but it musn’t interfere with the business at hand.
There are some things we all need to accept:
- The owner/organization/sponsor of the blog calls the shots. If you’re going to complain about the infringement of your right to free speech please go ahead and start your own blog – if your content is good maybe others will show up to read it. Or maybe not.
- Longevity does not confer gravitas, quality of content does.
- Being a newbie doesn’t quite confer a lower status, just the same, don’t be an [xxxxxxx] – and don’t be defensive about being new.
- Wailing about being victimized doesn’t wear well on anyone. It’s laughable when it comes from supposedly self-reliant right wingnuts.
- The opposition is organized – they come to the progressive blogosphere in mind boggling numbers to disrupt, sow dissension, and lower morale. Not everyone who posts on progressive blogs is who they want to appear to be. Trust me on this one.
- Trolls and those intent on disruption should be crushed and mocked without mercy – and the management should remove them as soon as possible, leaving their wasted carcasses as an example for others. While recipe posting is a brilliant tactic, too much attention to battling trolls distracts the members of the site from other much more important business.
- The media reads the blogs. They are lazy. They look for stuff which smells like dissension. You are irredeemably stupid if you uncritically and breathlessly repeat right wingnut talking points, stories, and memes. The media will use such because they are lazy, superficial, and stupid. Did I mention that they were lazy?
- The odds are against any of us being the next great professional political strategist or pundit. Okay, considering the Faux News Channel and the rest of the cable news network talking heads this isn’t my strongest point. Don’t take it personally. Learn to throw an elbow and to take a head butt.
- If the progressive blogosphere is to reach its true potential it will take all of us turning the philosophical and theoretical into the practical. If you haven’t already signed on to volunteer for a 2006 local or statewide campaign you’re just occupying space and wasting bandwidth.
So, the management called the shots. I walked away.
Once things came apart I politely notified the boss “it’s apparent to me that my presence…is no longer productive”. The response was great – along the lines of don’t let the door hit you in the [xxx] on the way out.
What, no gold watch?
The really great part about walking away? I now have my life back – and my health and sanity have returned to normal (well, relatively). And yes, I’ve already started volunteer work for a 2006 campaign.
Feel free to offer any tips. I do the best I can, and so far there have only been a few problems.
but it’s tough when you really have no control over the issue… the issue with Oui didn’t occur here so it’s not as if you had any power to change things.
You were able to offer your perspective and share a tiny snippet from Page and try to calm the Frank situation down as well, as best you could all things considered.
I appreciated your efforts and recognized the situation you were in.
Don’t know if you saw my response to your update, but I tried to propose a diplomatic solution to the problem that would allow everyone to save face and move on… tensions get raised with the written word and sometimes you just have to agree to disagree, compromise and move on. I like that you didn’t try to stifle anyones free speech though, that really showed me what your vision for this blog is and it’s a good one 🙂
you poured oil on troubled waters.
Your list was very fair. Doesn’t seem
like you need any advice at all,
at least not from me. 🙂
Whining is unattractive.
Straightforward and to the point…
Thanks Limelite
.
Excellent diary and tough experience but wisdom gained.
You mention mainly influences from outside, and how a blog community reacts and performs. What views from experience, do you see as important for a new site as it develops and tries to define itself.
A site seems very identical to kids growing up.
I was surprised by lots of wisdom and experience in comments added to my diary. First and original comments were often right on, and analysis by members was outstanding. Once again, enjoyed a civil discussion at BooTrib on a topic where emotions can run deep. Need participants to insert humor in a timely manner, which takes the edge off too much navel staring in the discussion.
Many different persons, voicing their thoughts and suggestions, evolved closely to a final conclusion. The comments led to a nice summary written by spiderleaf, in reply to the Update added by BooMan.
Oui – Liberté – Egalité – Fraternité
There’s a big difference between an open blog and one associated with a campaign or specific institutional entity.
For all sites the management needs to clearly state its goals and its rules – and stick to them.
And, while my populist beliefs were sorely tested by the experiences I had encountered as a moderator, they remain somewhat intact. Let’s just say that they quality of contributed thought in the blogosphere can be uneven.
Trolls and individuals intent on disrupting would squeal and scream about censorship. My standard retort was “When the Wall Street Journal gives me control of its editorial pages for a week I’ll let you run loose here.”
I watched in amazement as the national media distorted content on the site to fit their prevailing meme of “doubts” from the campaign’s supporters. And I watched those same supporters spend an inordinate amount of time and energy trying to correct the record to no avail. It would have been easier and better for them to think before they wrote – with a clear understanding of the objective realities of the opposition and media environment. The management can help in this regard – with proactive policies and reminders.
In my situation I was the sole arbiter of troll status. I was given that clear authority because of my experience and record. In my opinion I didn’t abuse it (those few on the receiving end differ) – I chose to leave because of issues with my use of snark – my line, “This ain’t AOL” really set some off.
Scoop relieves some of the burden of troll rating from the management – for a campaign site I would set the treshhold on the low end.
Free speech does allow people to say and write stupid things. It doesn’t protect them from the well deserved derision of others.
Free speech is a wonderful thing, but no one is entitled to it on someone else’s blog. We only exist here because of the generosity of the management.
Blogs frequently start because an individual, or a group of them, does not feel that the big blogs offer an environment where their views are welcome, or they don’t like the signal to noise ratio – as a dialup peasant I can state from personal experience that some threads on big blogs simply get too big and unwieldy to bother with! If the thread is on a subject in which I have both an interest and an opinion, that can be frustrating.
If the small blog gets big, that means more people, with a wider variety of views.
The blog’s main activity will of necessity move more from the “information sharing” side of the scale to the “debate” side.
There is nothing wrong with debate. It can be informative and enlightening, and all kinds of good things, but a debate among 6 people who agree on a few basic premises is going to be easier to follow, and more likely to be informative and enlightening, than a debate among 60 people who agree on very little!
Big blogs are also more subject to the realities of modern politics. An interest group is less likely to spend the resources to send viral operatives to a small blog, and a small blog is less likely to attract interest from a hostile entity. Oh, and trolls 🙂
A blog with a US focus that becomes big will invariably assume the tone of US mainstream opinion, even though its founders and earlier members may hold views far outside the mainstream. They can end up feeling like strangers in their own land, and the blog can develop a culture of less friendliness to newcomers.
If the growth continues, cliques develop. Not because the bloggers like cliques, but just out of practicality. The number of posts and threads simply becomes too large, and one is forced to pick and choose the posters one will follow, and in the process lose out on a lot of very good material from those outside one’s circle, which also seems to keep growing.
Yet what are the choices? Limit blog growth? That’s kind counter-productive!
Better to spin off yet another small blog, and let the cycle begin again.
That appears to be the nature of the beast!
We did have resident pet right wingnuts. They couldn’t stay away – they were allowed to stay as long as they were polite and followed the rules. They served a useful purpose in that they demonstrated the mind set of the wingnuts (and their abysmal critical thinking skills) and they allowed everyone else to practice and refine their communication skills. Our pets were allowed to stay as long as they served that purpose.
Eh, what a maroon. One memorable right wingnut newbie came blazing in with trademark poor thinking, foul language, and heapings of personal abuse. He lasted for a few minutes before he was rhetorically drawn, quartered, and put up for display as a warning to others.
When and with whom one will engage in dialogue and/or debate is a question of personal preference, and no 2 people will have identical answers.
Money, however, is all too frequently the trojan horse of Blogs that Get Big.
Be gentle with me on the technical stuff here, I am not a nerd.
As more people begin to use a blog, either posting on it or just visiting, the bandwidth the blog uses grows. So does the physical space required to archive all those posts.
Before you know it, the cost of keeping the site online has passed the point at which the generous blog host can afford to absorb all the costs.
So he has a choice. Sell ads, ask for donations, or both. Either comes with a potential price tag that can significantly affect the blog’s content as the host/founder had envisioned it.
One of the best-known cautionary tales of this type involves a blog that went from being a scruffy little outrage venting salon for Americans upset over the transition to court-appointed figurehead in 2000 to a sloppy sprawling for profit entity with such an elaborate labyrinth of rules that posting anything substantial on there bears more resemblance to a text-based role playing game than an outlet for free flow of information. The founder discovered a taste for mainstream politics, and between his aspirations in that direction, to turn his user base into a deliverable, and his various fund-amassing activities, the site now operates under constraints that would have been unthinkable when it started.
Like corporate media, a commercial blog is a business. And a business has to take things into consideration that a private individual ranting away on his own little blogspot doesn’t. Like keeping advertisers happy.
A US-based blog with US advertisers is not going to keep those sponsors happy if he allows too much “freedom of speech.” There may be little or no objection to an occasional posting of a news story that casts US policies in an unflattering light, but too much of this, and especially too many people who seem to agree with it, can be a legitimate concern for a business. No US company can afford to be thought of as “anti-American,” and while executive and blog host may agree that criticizing US policies is not of itself what they consider un-American, the fact is that it is more than likely that most of the folks who keep that executive in his leather chair do.
The blog host is in between a rock and a hard place. He may have started his blog precisely because he was not happy with the mainstreaming of his previous haunt, and may be immensely enjoying his (and his users’) new freedom to post from any source, express any opinion without trying to cloak their views in acceptable memes, but just as things started to get good, he hits the wall. He can’t pay for any more growth, and Mr Moneybags just loves the blog but has a couple of really minor concerns…
He can take up donations from his users, but this is not nearly as reliable as the arrival of monthly bills, and he can find himself in the same situation with Prolific Poster Money Angel who comes through with the full amount when it’s needed most, but acknowledges that some of the things he sees on the blog do make him a bit uncomfortable. Almost sounds as if some users don’t support the troops…
Add to that the phenomenon mentioned in the firt post: as users increase, so does the percentage of users with mainstream views. And little by little, the blog host’s initial group of rabble rousers find themselves increasingly marginalized, and may have to be asked to tone it down a bit by the blog host himself.
Then before you know it, there he is being interviewed on CNN, about his marvelous grass roots citizen journalist army, while he sits there and secretly wishes he still had one.
That’s certainly a problem (that not too many yet face, to their chagrin), but what are the solutions? Are there any? I imagine the continuous branching off into smaller blogs/ponds is still the best one, as the larger ones become more mainstream and commercialized.
Not that I think they shouldn’t though… because, as you say, the costs of the bandwidth and all that, but also for visibility. If they are on CNN or CSPAN talking about their grassroots army of citizen journalists, that at least lets people know that there is such a thing, even if the ones referred to are not the same as what they were. But they often lead to the ones who are… so people move through and beyond, finding a smaller forum, with fewer restraints and so on, until that one too gets too big, and people branch off yet again and start over. (Did you say something like this upthread? I think so.)
Anyway, it sounds kinda like evolution! Or something.
The problem, as you note, is that while getting on CNN is great, what gets to CNN is going to be essentially people gently questioning whether the US is really doing a good job of “crushing the insurgency” and suggesting that their favorite politician would do a much better job of running the crusade.
You are not going to see blogs featured on CNN that have views that diverge too far from the status quo. And that is not giving a false impression.
The fact is that most people in the US support US policies. If they did not, you would see crowds in the streets, you would see an organized tax revolt, you would see a lot of things.
The American people are not sheeple. They know what they want, they are willing to pay for it, and it would be the height of anti-Americanism to suggest that they have not weighed the consequences and judged the price they – and their children and grandchildren, if born, will pay to be a fair one.
Is actually happening on at least a small scale, for progressive/left leaning sites, and hopefully it’ll catch on and happen on a bigger one. I’m not sure that would solve the problem though.
The people you see on CNN and so on are not (it seems to me) so much there because they have big sites with lots of activist people on them (ala DU), but because they’ve taken the sites and themselves into the mainstream, and inserted themselves as part of the ‘establishment’, and so on.
So, you’re right, it’s unlikely that you would see the other views presented, regardless.
And, you are also probably right about the majority support of US policies, sadly, whether through fear, a belief in American exceptionalism (no matter how it’s couched), or ignorance, it all amounts to the same thing, pretty much. And has the same result.
Were they able to take them mainstream because they got big, or did they get big because they were discovered and settled by more mainstream people?
Either way, the most likely place to find dissenting views will probably continue to be smaller sites, at least for the forseeable future.
The positive note is that people who have been hiding under rocks and don’t know about blogs can learn about the big ones from CNN, and if they are curious and enough out of the mainstream to explore and extrapolate, they can find some of those smaller ones, and meet people who can tell them when black helicopters are scheduled to perform routine pre-emptive roundup operations in their area, information which will become increasingly useful. 😉
You can’t ever get something for nothing. Nor can you mourn inevitable change.
In discussion at the old site I offered my view of some subscriber’s promotion of a major institutional change:
The organization will (and should) constantly judge how those resources are serving those purposes.
I choose to participate – first, because I subscribe to those purposes, and second, because the organization operates in a fashion compatible with my belief system. For example, I have publicly stated that the day [the organization] supports a third party candidate in a general election over a Democrat is the day I leave. It is my view that such an action would be incompatible with the stated purposes of the organization and my belief system…
Ultimately you can’t stop people from joining and thereby influencing an open site. Think of it this way: if just ten million progressives joined the NRA Wayne LaPierre would have to have his desk emptied and be out of his office in less than 30 minutes.
The solution for an individual who mourns the change imposed by others is to create their own blog.
The solution for an individual who mourns the change imposed by others is to create their own blog.
Exactly, which is what some have done. The branching out into smaller sites and so on.
hink of it this way: if just ten million progressives joined the NRA Wayne LaPierre would have to have his desk emptied and be out of his office in less than 30 minutes.
Now that’s an idea… in fact, I believe that is what the right wing has been attempting to do with the Sierra Club (and probably others). I know at least with that one, they are either close, or at, a majority voice/vote in that organization. We should hold NRA membership drives (of course, unlike the Sierra Club, the NRA leadership will probably just shoot us).
It is, as the philandering John Perry Barlow once said, all about the Ecology of the Internet.
The split off process, or seeding, is in fact totally organic and natural.
This is how new ad agencies have spawned themselves over the decades – only to get eaten up later by one of the Big 3 global players.
The main factor in media health is biodiversity, just as in nature. Monocultures almost always collapse dramatically – The Irish Potato Famine, Microsoft Windows (soon).
Mongrels always regenerate the bloodline 😉
woof
Just the comments I needed. I had that situation just now. Last time I agonised for two days and involved every moderator on New European Times before acting. Today I just shut the door on the problem – fast.
Blogging isn’t worth the hassle. I spent half of yesterday trying to appease, cajole and flatter an idiot who was having a hissy fit on DKos into calming down. What a waste of time. It turned out he had a record on other blogs.
As you say. Walk away – but quickly and don’t look back.
Nope, blogging is for fun, information and sharing. If it stops being any of that, flick the switch, slam the door, and start lecturing the dog (Poor Sally the Psychodog, she desperately looks at me at times as if she is pleading for a moderator to appear).
I am so convinced of this, it means I shall never have the joy of allowing myself to write a Farewell Cruel World diary on DKos. Hell to read, but the writers obviously get enormous kick out of doing them. Maybe Booman will let me do one on here and then allow me to come back the next day. He seems a pretty decent sort of chap ..considering he comes from Pittsburgh.
Now what have I said?…really…how am I to know that a green frog has sensitivities…
I love those diaries – the comments are virtuoso displays of wit, sarcasm, and snark – practice for the kind of rhetorical tools we need to turn on the Mighty Wurlitzer.
After having been gone for the weekend…blissful 2 days of no blogs…I come back and wasn’t sure where I was!
There were white caps on the frog pond waters…but this diary and the comments remind me of why I came to Booman Trib – calmer waters prevail.
Management writes the rules…thanks for writing this Paradocs and thanks Booman for letting us play in the Frog Pond.