Have you ever come across an obviously well-considered and constructed post here on OS, such as, say, this from Mick Arran, a thoughtful analysis of President Obama's possible policy shifts on Social Security, or this one on the DNC last summer from JTDtheGarlic. These two examples, like many posts here, are original, insightful and thought-provoking. And yet they each garnered maybe a 3 rating and a handful of comments at best.
And you think, wow, if efforts as original, insightful and thought-provoking as these can only get a 3, what does it take to get much more than that ... a doctoral dissertation? A Pulitzer candidate?
How about a barking dog or two? Worth at least a 20.
Now I like trolls and cake photos as much as the next guy. But are they 3 times better than this essay on what one should do with one's life by Booknut?
Or maybe all it really takes is a shameless plea for rating, without actually writing anything at all, like this one, which is currently at 88 (!) and counting. Maybe the sparkly font did it.
Perhaps you too have wondered what the logic is here ... is quality really a determinant of a post's ratings?
So I decided to put the quality theory to the test, by posting the highest quality writing possible, to see what ratings they might get. Not talking about anything I personally have written --- I cannot possibly compete with pink trolls. Instead, I turned to poetry.com's list of the World's Greatest Poetry and chose several as posting fodder for a little rating experiment --- namely, how does the world's greatest writing rate on OS?
First, I selected this beautiful poem by Len Roberts on moments with his young son.
Truly a touching piece. Those of us who parent or have ever looked into the trusting eyes of a two year-old will surely understand. And rate. Right?
Wrong. It got a 2. Here it is. And no fair rating it now.
Okay, maybe I'm just a sap for kids. Let's step it up a bit. And why mess around ... let's go for the top this time. Shakespeare. Who's better than Wild Willy hisself.
So I posted William Shakespeare's Love Sonnet #116. Surely even the hardened cannot resist the tender genius of a Shakespearian love sonnet?
They can. Both the hardened and all else can and did. Sadly, Willy could only gain a measly 2 rating.
So what am I to conclude about the relationship between quality of writing and the OS rating scheme? Hence my headline.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
sciencechick
mimi11
Trudge164
Organian
Strong American Schools
Rose Norton
Salon.com
Comments
OS is a lot like high school. There are people who always get noticed.. and a lot going on under the radar. It's really unfortunate.
From what I can tell, quality, generally, is a small part of the equation. This sort of clique grading system in on every blog site there is. There's several writers here whom are constantly thunderously rated and commented on that I just plain don't get all the fuss. But that only means I don't get it. I don't get lots of things.
There's EP's that stay on the front page for days that are barely mediocre. From all the really fine posts available, I don't get that either. But that's the way it is.
But I think the real issue is, that here in OS so many good posts get lost in the churn. They really need to develop a bet system so that t
(rated)
So I'm somewhat in agreement with you.
(rated)
I would much rather have 1 rate from the Dali Lama and 1 from Malcolm X (of course they blog under nom de plumes to protect the idiots) for my grand measly total of 2.
That 2 would far and away beat the 88 rates from the teeming masses of Britney Spears listening skidmarks on the underwear of humanity.
Yeah blog rates are like High School. But if you are the dork sitting in the corner writing poetry on a yellow legal pad, the two kids who do come up to you, look at what's on the page, sink into thought for a minute and say "wow that's cool" have already far surpassed my own ability to empathize with my fellow misunderstood souls.
Just like when I waited tables, pumped gas into airplanes and did competitive comedic improv: It doesn't matter what they say about you ... it's the TIPS that count:)
And Charlie, only a bitter divorcée after an 8AM double shot of cheap gin would tip Sonnet #16.
Having worked in Public Radio for a long time I have stood witness to average citizens whipping out their wallets when they are moved by excellent writing.
There is the same thing happening in blogs. I am sure ( or at least I really really really hope) that there are plenty of writers/bloggers who rake in the tips and get crap for ratings. They may have had the sublime fortune of never having seen a troll cake...and I hope they laugh all the way to the bank making $1000 on a blog rated 2.
People rate according to entertainment value and to what catches their eye. Kerry's picks are not a search for literary value, either. So yes there are many cases of pearls before swine. Do you have a solution?
I love Freaky and don't underestimate the talent behind that shtick. Open means open and that's a good thing. I certainly have had my eyes opened as to what can be done on a posting. But in the end you just have to find some opinions you trust and not worry about what gets rated as "great writing".
I love Freaky.
One night during a live blog of the debate for an hour the whole front page was Freaky. That was funny.
Freaky Troll is awesome, she's like a female Cartman, she's awesome.
I'm hopeful this is an issue OS will resolve in time, but I'm not sure how other than category ratings. Even then, the subjective nature of what one person finds entertaining, insightful, heartwarming, etc., may prove as meaningless as the current implementation. Like others, I think finding a way to keep recent posts on the FP would be more beneficial. Frankly, RSS seems to be the best recourse and it is provided.
So, it isn't a matter of quality...
Rated
Remember back in the days of the early internet where you could put metatags in your webpage? If you put terms that got lots of searches in there, you'd goose traffic.
Lunchroom ratings are bogus
Corndog falls in snow
I don't care one way or another if I get rated or not.
I read blogs and comment. Sometimes I forget to rate. It is at the top and sometimes I forget to scroll back up and rate it.
There is a lot of great work here. Many good writers. Often some gets by.
I think Freaky is in a class by herself.
I read all her posts and laugh.
How was it possible to get such reaction right out of the box? It helps to write reasonably well, have a modicum of wit, and offer a little entertainment value. And certainly, a salacious title helps-- just ask Dr. Amy. It also helps to "work" your audience, as any successful entertainer will tell you -- though Dr. Amy seems a little slow to pick up on that.
My posts were intended as a satire on Dr. Amy's pomposity and to provide a few days entertainment. I think they succeeded on both counts -- as did they many who read and commented.
However, my purpose on Open Salon is not ratings or a front page, but simply to be able to reach an audience of intelligent, thoughtful people, and that Open Salon has provided. Do I wish that more people read more of my other offerings? Certainly. And let me quickly add that I'm not admitting I have another identity since that would be a violation of TOS.
But this is at least as much a social network as it is a forum for writers and other artists, and as such, it is and will remain to some extent a popularity contest. So if you want to win election, work the crowd. Otherwise, do good work, and if it really is good, eventually a few good people will find you.
Totally tongue in cheek. I have no clue what Salon is doing as far as staffing goes.
The political stuff is a little dicey--even the pretty good stuff. Whether people comment or rate those might depend on their political leanings. Some that I read I don't rate or comment on. I don't come here to get into political debate--but that's just me.
The most important thing though, is that I have read some very good writing here and have also been entertained by some really creative people. Freaky--who I, like other new people, didn't quite get at first--is truly creative.
Which is why posting a Shakespeare sonnet wouldn't get me to rate or comment. I've already read those; they are on my bookshelf with many, many other previously published works. I don't come here for those.
If there is a writer you believe is worthy of attention, recommend this writer to your friends. You can also send these posts to the attention of the Daily Scrawl or Monte Canfield, who publish weekly lists of such suggestions in their blogs.
• Was secretly rooting for Shakespeare to get low ratings, suspecting that might be the case.
• Have no particular ax to grind against Freaky, or for her, for that matter; was just grabbing posts that seemed somewhat content-free and one of hers seemed to fit
• Love that people got the high school analogy right away, even though I buried it in tags
Peters, D.P., and Ceci, S.J. ( l982 ). A naturalistic study of psychology journals: The fate of published articles resubmitted. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, June, 219-228.
And then, in literature, there's Jerzy Kosinski's Steps. From Wikipedia:
Steps (1968), a novel comprising scores of loosely connected vignettes, won the National Book Award in 1969. In 1975, Chuck Ross, a Los Angeles freelance writer, conducted an experiment with Steps by sending 21 pages of the book to four publishers under the pseudonym Erik Demos. The book was turned down by all of them, including Random House (which originally published Steps) and Houghton Mifflin (which published three of Kosinski’s other novels). Ross revealed his findings in New West magazine four years later. His article includes Kosinski's advice that next time he should offer the entire text. Ross repeated his experiment by submitting the entire text of Steps to literary agents in 1981, with equally dismal results.
On the other hand, it's not entirely a fair test. OS definitely has community aspects, which probably generate some ratings. And as Greg observes, OS may not be the best venue for poetry. Just for the sake of experimentation, I typed "Len Roberts poetry" into the Amazon search box and found that the two hits that come back each have just one (five star) customer ranking. Are Amazon rankings are a crock? Maybe; I don't know.
For a different sort of experiment, we might look at the very top-rated posts in OS. I think I see a lot of high-quality writing.
Re OS being non poetry-friendly, so maybe I should do another test, this time with prose?
It is probably true in a lot of places, it is helpful to know and to be known, irrespective of whether we have any content of wider interest in the world. (of course thats not intended to be a backhanded criticism of yourself, merely a general statement that could be applied anywhere).
If one has had the time to become known it creates a greater chance for people to take a quick look at what the person has written. It is part of human nature that many of us are personality motivated. I am a very new member of OS. Therefore, why should I expect a lot of interest from others when there are so many others to choose from, others who you have got to know.
I do understand the frustration with the rating system, and how posts get on the Cover in general. I sometimes write posts that I'm proud of, but that get no love from my fellow OS'ers or the Editors. On the other hand, I write posts that feel like sort of throw off posts (i.e. my recent "What to Remember While Watching Dollhouse" post) only to see them show up on the cover and get lots of attention. So, while I welcome the hits, it's still amusing to me that my own sub-par work often overshadows my more quality stuff.
The reason some people get rated highly is because they're popular. I was an early poster, so I was able to have my posts noticed by more people (the feed moved much slower in those days, increasing the chance that my post would be seen by someone who would then subscribe to my blog via the Friends feature). Other posters do a good job coming up with provocative titles that a reader can't help but want to click.
I have certain writing styles and topics that attract me, so when I see those people pop up, I friend them and make an effort to rate their posts, in order to push material I personally support. I like the posters here who make an effort to publicize the work of others, so I always make sure to keep an eye out for those posts as well.