| | Joseph, Jeff,
Thank you both!
Joe: "We don't run articles on the weekend simply because we don't have that many articles!"
That's a good reason, but too bad. I won't suggest you try to get more articles, because I'm sure you are already doing that.
Joe: We also try not to overdose the audience with a single writer. Which means we try to only do one a week from any particular person.
Since your well is not that deep, that might be a good policy. For me it would depend on the writer. There are some columnists, for example, who for me, once a week is too much; but I could read new Mark Steyn column every day.
Joe: It's different from a blog approach, where you can write stuff constantly that nobody will ever care about in three months. We have some articles like that, but it's not that common. There are advantages and disadvantages to both styles.
Why not do both? I know you are already overloaded with work, so it would have to be a scheme that would not be labor intensive--maybe something that could more-or-less run itself. Maybe you could find some regular contributors who would agree to post "developing history" or something, about Objectivism, Objectivists, and Events of interest to Objectivists. Even if fresh, this material, if important enough, would not necessarily grow stale.
Jeff: I would just like to point out that the Solo email list is moderated, We the Living is moderated, and quite a number of lists are moderated. The ones that aren't get hit with trolls and Spam, and I'm very glad that the new SoloHQ forum is moderated, because certain unstable people were trashing up the place from time to time. I think this will increase the level of conversation.
Moderation is great and it does, " increase the level of conversation." Its the method I was questioning. Moderation, before the fact, may prevent some objectionable conversation, but it sure makes the "conversation," very very slow, which is a quality impediment.
A couple of suggestions: Free Republic http://www.freerepublic.com/ is a moderated forum. They have over 100 thousand signed up members, posts to Free Republic are instant. I'm not suggesting you emulate FR, but since you mentioned other forums, I thought I would point out one of the most successful forums on the Internet. Sure they are, "big," but they didn't start that way, and if you think small, you'll stay small. Why shouldn't an Objectivist forum be at least as successful as a. "conservative," forum? Oh yeah, they moderate after-the-fact; objectionable posts are "pulled" and marked that way. The quality of conversation is both high and quick.
Jeff: As for the Atlas points making someone unmoderated, think of this as a bonus on top of the default moderation. It's just an easy way to automatically accept posts from people who have proven that their posts should be accepted.
Prove? To whom? Their peers? Good grief!
If you have to do this, why not use it to generate some revenue. Let people who don't want to wait for every self-appointed censor/literary-reviewer to see the value of something, pay for the privilege of posting without review (but still moderated after the fact). Make the amount substantial enough that those who pay will not want to loose the privilege they paid for, which they can loose if they misbehave. Trolls will not pay, although some idiots will, no doubt.
Thanks again for your good answers, for listening to my rant, and for running a great forum.
Regi
(Edited by Reginald Firehammer on 3/13, 5:00am)
|
|
