5 ms·

I don't want to read someone having a conversation with their community, I want to read what they themselves think without the lurking context of the subset of

by mwfunk 12y ago

I don't want to read someone having a conversation with their community, I want to read what they themselves think without the lurking context of the subset of their audience that demands to speak up and be heard right then and there. I also frequently don't like the results of community feedback shaping a blog; a lot of times it just puts the writer on the defensive all the time, and can easily become toxic and contribute to burnout. If you can read even the best comments on the best blogs and not want to just give up on humanity forever, you're a better man than I (either that, or you were one of the people writing those comments and thought they were awesome). There's already plenty of places on the Internet for people to discuss things written elsewhere on the Internet, like right here for example. Or Reddit or Facebook or Twitter or any number of other places where you have persistent communities of commenters. If it's just comments at the bottom of an article, you end up with a lot of drive-by comments that are even more dumb or pointlessly cruel or boring or strangely insistent about your potential to make $2500/day at home on your computer, just like I did! Because you totally can.

ddingus 12y ago
He's broadcasting, not blogging. And I like writers on the defensive. When they write crap, and they take comments, the crap comes up awful quick. Notice how a lot of sites don't take comments? Notice how many of them are very seriously moderated? One could argue trolls, and that's a fair case. However, not actually being out there enough to take feedback on one's words tends to make nice, magic, bubbles, filled with unicorns and rainbows. Sullivan occupies one of those bubbles. And it's not just comments. It's dialogs, even among peers. Sullivan largely just broadcasted. Either way, his departure means pretty much nothing.
- geofft 12y ago
  You make the assumption that a lack of on-site comments is a lack of feedback, which I think isn't substantiated. I don't use an RSS reader or similar, so when I read a blog post, it's generally because it reaches me through some form of social media -- friends or coworkers sending links around via IM or email, Twitter, Hacker News, Reddit, or so forth. All of these mechanisms come with a built-in avenue for comment. All of these mechanisms also ensure that, unless I know the author directly, someone other than the author thought the post merited reading. This works as a natural feedback cycle if the author cares about impact at all. (And if they don't, comments wouldn't help.) And as the internet democratizes, perhaps the best feedback mechanism is for commenters to have their own blogs. Nothing requires giving the world a chance to speak at your own pulpit.
- jfarmer 12y ago
  Have you actually read his blog? Readers email him all the time. He typically posts 2-3 of those emails every day and responds to them publicly. Often, he'll go back and forth with multiple readers in this way. Here's a post from _today_ that contains emails from 9 people: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2015/01/31/busted-with-an-eggcorn-ctd-10/ http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2015/01/31/busted-with-an-egg... He has a regular "Dissent of the Day" post where he goes out of his way to post critical emails from readers. For your perusal: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aandrewsullivan.com%20dissent%20of%20the%20day https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aandrewsullivan.com%20... Your comments in this thread are nothing but incuriosity dressed up as intelligence.
  - remarkEon 12y ago
    Moreover, the fact that a reader had to email him served as sort of as a pre-screen, wherein someone had to take those extra 2 or 3 steps to put something together instead of just dropping whatever thoughtless or halfbaked idea came to the forefront of their mind in the comment box and hitting enter because you're logged in with facebook. I don't think having comments allowed on a blog are indicative of quality discourse at all.
    - jfarmer 12y ago
      Yeah. Andrew probably write something once every few months about why he prefers to interact with readers this way vs. comment threads. He's even polled his audience in the past and the _audience_ overwhelmingly favors interacting in this way, often echoing your exact sentiment. Ironically, the parent serves as an example for the kind of thoughtless, knee-jerk commentary that comment threads can (and do) breed.
EdwardDiego 12y ago
> I also frequently don't like the results of community feedback shaping a blog; a lot of times it just puts the writer on the defensive all the time, and can easily become toxic and contribute to burnout. Or, the blogger panders to the worst of his commenters and it forms a cesspool of mutually reinforcing bigotry.

by mwfunk 12y ago

ddingus 12y ago

He's broadcasting, not blogging. And I like writers on the defensive. When they write crap, and they take comments, the crap comes up awful quick. Notice how a lot of sites don't take comments? Notice how many of them are very seriously moderated? One could argue trolls, and that's a fair case. However, not actually being out there enough to take feedback on one's words tends to make nice, magic, bubbles, filled with unicorns and rainbows. Sullivan occupies one of those bubbles. And it's not just comments. It's dialogs, even among peers. Sullivan largely just broadcasted. Either way, his departure means pretty much nothing.

geofft 12y ago
You make the assumption that a lack of on-site comments is a lack of feedback, which I think isn't substantiated. I don't use an RSS reader or similar, so when I read a blog post, it's generally because it reaches me through some form of social media -- friends or coworkers sending links around via IM or email, Twitter, Hacker News, Reddit, or so forth. All of these mechanisms come with a built-in avenue for comment. All of these mechanisms also ensure that, unless I know the author directly, someone other than the author thought the post merited reading. This works as a natural feedback cycle if the author cares about impact at all. (And if they don't, comments wouldn't help.) And as the internet democratizes, perhaps the best feedback mechanism is for commenters to have their own blogs. Nothing requires giving the world a chance to speak at your own pulpit.
jfarmer 12y ago
Have you actually read his blog? Readers email him all the time. He typically posts 2-3 of those emails every day and responds to them publicly. Often, he'll go back and forth with multiple readers in this way. Here's a post from _today_ that contains emails from 9 people: http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2015/01/31/busted-with-an-eggcorn-ctd-10/ http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2015/01/31/busted-with-an-egg... He has a regular "Dissent of the Day" post where he goes out of his way to post critical emails from readers. For your perusal: https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aandrewsullivan.com%20dissent%20of%20the%20day https://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Aandrewsullivan.com%20... Your comments in this thread are nothing but incuriosity dressed up as intelligence.
- remarkEon 12y ago
  Moreover, the fact that a reader had to email him served as sort of as a pre-screen, wherein someone had to take those extra 2 or 3 steps to put something together instead of just dropping whatever thoughtless or halfbaked idea came to the forefront of their mind in the comment box and hitting enter because you're logged in with facebook. I don't think having comments allowed on a blog are indicative of quality discourse at all.
  - jfarmer 12y ago
    Yeah. Andrew probably write something once every few months about why he prefers to interact with readers this way vs. comment threads. He's even polled his audience in the past and the _audience_ overwhelmingly favors interacting in this way, often echoing your exact sentiment. Ironically, the parent serves as an example for the kind of thoughtless, knee-jerk commentary that comment threads can (and do) breed.

EdwardDiego 12y ago

> I also frequently don't like the results of community feedback shaping a blog; a lot of times it just puts the writer on the defensive all the time, and can easily become toxic and contribute to burnout. Or, the blogger panders to the worst of his commenters and it forms a cesspool of mutually reinforcing bigotry.