Alert: self-awareness and meta OS info ahead. No nudity.
I think its VERY healthy for a writer to want thousands of people to read their work. I make art out of clay and I get it out there! I get that. I have sought publicity and exposure. I can do that. But I am not a writer who does it for the writing.
And if I were, private mailing on this site is not going to make that happen. Using reddit and digg and that kind of thing will do that.
But I am not that kind of writer. To me writing is a means to an end of communication. Which is why the editors are not especially interested in my posts. But the rub is this. I am not a writers' writer, I do not find words "delicious" and would rather slit my wrists than read my writing aloud to people. Writing is a means of personal expresssion and I am fairly good at using it as a tool to that end. The blog format lets me include lots of graphics, which I am now religiously attributing or generating on my own (see, editors, I can learn from things you say). I am using my own actual name, so what notoriety I gain is actually significant in my real life. Neither of these facts make me cover material designed to increase traffic, but they make people read my blog, not because of the brilliant writing, but because it is interesting stuff as a conglomerate.
*I * and my perspective on life and issues are why my blog gets read and has a strong rate of comments and ratings. But it is never on the cover except in most read(where it is quite frequent) and hasn't been an EP since I questioned the authority of the people selecting those. (If that is still a factor, you should let it go, it was in beta for god's sake, when questioning the format and choices was requested!)
It doesn't bother me much any more. My stats are more important than the EP or cover.
And as I said, I am into interaction with people, the social network here, not the public venue for writing. Frankly, for that I would look into publishing after generating a body of work, in the same manner that I make art and then put it in appropriate venues. Snowman's recent experience notwithstanding!
But this information, that writing is a means to an end and not the goal, shouldn't keep me off the lists and out of the eye of the editors. I, as a contributing commentor and active postor am just as necessary as the "upscale quality writing" that seems to be the prime cut. Because rubbernecking at the interesting comments is precisely half the fun of reading a good piece of writing here, otherwise we would read books instead. My reaction comments help keep the threads lively.
Surprise surprise, I know the difference and understand my spoke in the cogs of OS.
Frankly, if sensational topics and quality writing were what I was looking for, OS wouldn't do it for me, as this forum mainly only caters to short essay formats. Maybe there was a gap in the short essay format arena and that is the goal of the editors. I have about stopped trying to figure it out. And critically, if the cover was the actual content of the site, I would not still be here, as I can get Dr. Amy and personal sensational posts mentioning sex or nudity on about 10,000 other sites. So I am not sure the editors are working in their best interests either. Unless it is all about traffic and numbers, in which case, bring on the soft porn, pseudo Dr Phils, and vulgar pics. (I wrote about Oprah because it was topical and interested me and was good spring board to other seasonal social commentary.)
One of my most rated and commented posts had nudity, but it was for a specific purpose, I don't just throw it in there for a few more hits on the post.
Anyway, as a non-target contributor, that is my take on how things are going here.
If it was the interest of the powers that decide the cover, I would be long gone, it is the people that keep me here.
JTH, I know you bring traffic, but the subject matter and method of satirization of class in america presented in your blog is not accurate in the details for me. I know lots of people and have known lots of people that are the subject of your satire, and I am not offended, I think it is off-base, missing the mark. And I can definitely see the difference between "you" and the posts. I think "you" are a good writer, but your subject is one note and coarse. So I stopped reading it. Dr. Amy got repetitious after two bloviating, pontificating posts (Just because you are a doctor and well read doesn't make you a good resource for medical information, she is a commenatator in everything except her actual specialization, and gynecology only interest me if I am in the stirrups myself). These remarks are not personal attacks or me writing about other OS'rs. When you raise your voice to the level of public figure, you invite a different type of criticism and remove the personal element. I found the post about "Let's just not write about each other" enlightening in the comments when Amy indicated that she loves negative publicity and criticism because it just increases her readership. That is not a normal response between individuals. That is the reaction of a public personality.
Here is the rub for those who seek thousands of anonymous readers: you depersonalize your writing and allow for criticism that does not account for any social leniency that I would extend to other writers here. When you just cross post or drop in autofeeds from other blogs, it may increase general traffic, but it contributes nothing to the social network, it is filler, white noise. And if the only blogs you comment on are your own, you are not part of the community. It is complicated, but that is the gist of it for me.
Maybe "social network" and "friend" are words that the site controllers should reconsider. When you friend someone, there is degree of friendship available, but I have not seen it in action in any way. If it were a meaningful distinction, maybe that would help make it a more useful feature.
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
fingerlakeswanderer
zanelle
Are You Talking French?
Greer McVay
bluestocking babe
Brent Troth
Salon.com
Comments
"Babe, do you want it one great time per month or weekly quickies that only satisfy me?'
I'm still waiting her reply.
I tend to believe that TPTB are trying to balance a few competing interests:
1. maintaining high quality writing
2. generating numbers & traffic (in order to sustain OS economically)
3. providing the social network & functions that allow OS to expand & grow
The challenge is to make these complementary. I think providing additional navigation and blog management tools will help, but I do not think it is enough.
rij - not your wife, of course, but why can't I have weekly mind-blowing sex? that isn't too much to ask for, it it?
My texas chainsaw revenge is my stats. I get read. I don't need the cover or EP to get it done.
Anyway, I am EP every day since I got married.
The remark is to a comment in the Frienemies post in this blog.
The botherED me at first because in beta, I had eps and covers all the time. With the influx of a couple of thousand other posters, having a non-"writer" make the cover would be odd. So no it doesn't bother me anymore, but I still would like to understand it.
As would a lot of other people. Yet, itis never discussed or made clear by the editors.
If you look through my posts, my comments section is usually in the late teens to 60's and my rating are consistently over 20-30. That is success by OS statmath. SO I am doing fine without them.
My curiosity is this: if ratings, readings, and comments are the metric of success here, then why are none of the posts that generate this type of activity picks for the cover or editors?
Having curiosity of how a system works and being bothered by it are two different things.
And yes, as I said, when we went wide open, my locus in the local strata changed and I was confused and slightly bothered, maybe even jealous of the new hotshots. It lasted about two weeks or so and then I started looking at Tarheel's stats and realized the pond just got a lot bigger and the cover stayed the same size. That combined with me not being a "writer" explains it well enough. And pretty much, once I get a reasonable explanation for some phenomena, it doesn't bother me any more.
Maybe I am just a local fan favorite. That's cool.
Your work is generally thought-provoking, providing an original take on things, and your art is beautiful. Plus, you don't like Jimmy Buffet's music and Dr.Amy's "writing" -- big pluses in my book :). As to the immense amount of trivia and worse posted, read and yes, EP'd and elevated to cover status here, if the Friends' Posts list were longer or worked better, I think this would be a much happier site with people content to live and play in parallel virtual universes.
If the editors published a formula for success, creativity would be stifled.
Because these sorts of topics are so common here on OS, I can't help but think there are some basic structural problems with the site that contribute.
The biggest one I see, as a new user, the reality is - if you want to get you stuff read by the users of OS, by far the best way is to engage in a serious blog whoring campaign. At least in the beginning. An EP isn't even a guarantee that many comments will come your way.
The reason for this is that posts are not organized in a way they are easily referenced. Where is the quick list of all the Blogged Posts for the day? Or the week?
I've seen that there are about 500 or so new blogs a day here; that isn't really a very big number to scroll through glancing quickly for titles or avatars. Especially if it was broken down into 4 or 5 very basic catagories.
So folks have to get an EP just to get read by anyone if they're not blogwhoring.
I'm also unsure about "writers" here. Is there some perception that blogging in a place like this will somehow be a stepping stone to being noticed as a "writer"? Maybe as a blogger, but hardly a writer. We do have some professional writers here, but it would be a rare circumstance if they got their start blogging. Especially for fiction writers.
Thanks again for your post.
regards,
RH
"Bloviating"...love that word it even sounds disgusting, I remember when I first discovered it I couldn't stop saying it but it never seemed to float off the tongue just right.
I'm no english major but let me try....
She was a bloviating fool out there, wickedly righteous in her pursuit of the sugary adulation of those slightly inferior (but not too stupid), floating slightly above her soap box pontificating about the inherent nature of men-dickdumb.
I shall return to hear your voice again.
you hit on the head.
And here's a perfect example an odd problem: Where's the link that I hit to respond to you personally? Where my reply slides in underneath yours, but for all to see, instead off posting chronologically at the end of the page where you may or may not see it? Instead, I'd have to email you, which is silly.
I don't hate the doc and hardballs, I just don't like their writings as they provide nothing of quality to my life and they do not amuse me, either. Without satisfying one of those itches, why would I read them?
I also don't read many "human interest" stories unless the writer is super outstanding and makes it funny to boot. I like political and social commentary and funny stuff. If the editors manage to lure in more of that, I might read it. But I don't search the web for that either. I read Salon and a little news. The rest of my life is "off-line". I like cable news shows for news and commentary.
If I hated them, I would have included them in the "men I hate" post, where I was quite robust in my list.
If the editors offered a template or even an idea of what they are after, they might get more of what they want!
And wouldn't that be extra special?
But in the mean time, muddling through is the best we have.
To BBE; I want to say, putting aside my feelings that you are often too rough on others, I think your above well-put statement is dead-on right and VERY insightful.
So write for yourself first, regardless of recognition, because if you don't there's no possibility of success.
rated
You know a lot of violent, selfish, demented, sex-crazed, hateful, drug addicted, child-neglecting outlaws? I sure don't.
But I'm happy that you're happy with your blog!
rated
OS is just fun, period.
One person that fits this descroption to a T, and nothing like the character you write. They probably should be in jail, but they are not. And she is a carbon of her mother. So people like you write about exist.
A couple of others that have less than all but a lot of those lovely traits, and still no on the money hits for your character.
The problem is that you write about this behavior but you don't seem to understand any possible motivation for being like that.
Either that, or you don't know how to write it into the piece. But it shows. Maybe you need to do some research with real hardcore rednecks and give it another go.
As I said, reading about awful people just doesn't work for me. Maybe it is BECAUSE I know people that have been called on by social services and others look at it like its "Married with Children" in short written form.
I get it. I just don't like it. Defending it is not necessary and criticising me for disliking it is extremely odd.
I will give this to ou, though. I don't know "a lot" of people like this, thank god. Just enough to know that the shoe doesn't fit. People are more complicated than you suggest in your extreme caricature.
And I am happy for you and your success with your blog as well!
I do like your writing. I just don't want to go into what I think about the EP lists. 'nough said already.
I do like the social networking of this site. I did not use it for a long time. Now I check it first before I start in reading.
I agree with you about the comment line. I find the comment line as interesting as the blog. sometimes more so.
I am cleaning house for the holidays. I exspect everyone is having a buzy time.
peace my friend
Suzy
Rated
I like it here because i enjoy it. I enjoy it for many, many reasons. When the fun is gone I'll be gone. I work hard on my posts as I suppose most do. I have a few who read me and claim they like my musings. If I am worth my weight, word will spread. I could care less If I get a cover or not. It would be far more satisfying for me to slowly gather more readers, than to ever be on the cover with half a dozen comments. ( something I see from time to time)
I'm curious, I haven't been here that long. Did I make your "men I hate" post?!!
Best to you for the Holidays, M
But one thing that struck me in this post was the comment about the “friend” function.
My impression is that you are promoting a more personalized aspect that is possible here on OS, that perhaps is not utilized enough, at least by some of us. Maybe I’m misreading you, but this is one thought that seems to hit ME more than other points in this post.
You may not want her to be a redneck, but she is. I could go through and cull quotes that verify it, but that would be a stupid waste of time. Redneck may be in the eye of the beholder, but having lived among them while growing up, I know one when I read about one. I have read more of your blog than I let on, as it was like a train wreck and I couldn't stop looking. Se unless she has evolved into something completely different in the last two weeks, redneck about covers it.
Redneck may mean something spectacularly different for me in my part of the country than it does for you.
That is the rub of a wide net, you can't control the catch. But good luck with it. Lots of people seem to love it!
But I do not think that the majority care all that much about the aspect of community, family, neighborhood of friends that some of us here on OS want to grow.
I try to write well but if I had to choose, and thankfully, I don't, between the writing and the friendships I am developing here then the writing loses.
I have already had in my bizarre life all the opportunities and kudos to last a life time. I have written and edited books, written dozens of articles,both for professional audiences and for more popular audiences, speeches and testimony before Congress. I have been interviewed on TV many times, have produced hundreds of reports, and written hundreds of sermons and newsletter articles. Well the list goes on. The point is not to say I am wonderful, because I am not. The point is that I don't NEED the OS recognition. God knows that I appreciate it and am grateful when it comes. But I do not lust for it.
I bring this up simply because many others on OS are on here precisely for the recognition of their talents. Most of all they want to be noticed, be read, and become "somebody" in the process. So for those blogwh****g means something, a way to get some, any, recognition. Ditto with trying to make the EP and/or the cover, or even bumping for the feed, anything for recognition.
I know that there are those out here who want and need that. So there is a pretty basic split in OS about this issue. I noticed that when you wrote your first post here, then I followed with mine, and you have come back with another, we have pretty much the same people commenting. Some don't get what we are saying and comment here, sometimes with too much sarcasm. But mostly the comments come from people who either share your point of view or do not think it is that far off base.
In other words, while comments are important to getting a feeling of what some think, it is not a representative sample of OS members. It might be nice if TPTB were to do a survey. But that is about as likely as George Will becoming a liberal and starting to post here.
Good, thoughtful post and ditto on your following replies to the comments here.
Monte
(rated)
doesn't matter, tho', you are an occasional interesting read, and if i clipped off every poser, flouncer, aym, sick puppy, self promoter, boring jerk, and monomaniac, i'd be left wondering where everyone went.
this is the agora of unsatisfied tongues, the forum of minds chained to the wheel of daily drudgery, if the editors have aims beyond pumping up numbers, i haven't seen them yet, and don't care. let's just get out there and dance. no elbows, and 'oops, sorry' mandatory. clean fingernails, too.
I'll tell you this much, I would much rather see your work on the cover than that of many others. I would be much happier to see you on the cover than someone for whom OS is just one more medium to feature their stuff. I do not read any of the work of several frequent cover posters because if I want to read them, there are other places I can do so. I read posts on OS that I cannot read elsewhere. Yours included.
I began to blog on OS as some friends kept saying I should find a place to publish the political commentary I had been writing to them over the last several years. I also did a short 2-3 minute commentary on a local radio station for a year, that got old as I felt it was becoming redundant.
Funny thing happened though, I posted two comments regarding politics and then with the overwhelming volume of political posts I lost interest and felt I wanted to write of other things.
So I write things that perhaps some would like to read. I don’t write about my personal demons as I exorcised those years ago. I write something I hope adds just a little to a person’s life.
I have some who I like to follow and read what they post as they are consistently worth reading, some others I gave up on. Other, well they post just a little to often and I can’t keep up with them. For some high quality stuff in my book Monte’s motorcycle chronicles are well worth reading beginning to end. John Pitcher stuff is good. There are others that are truly delightful.
But politics, you had better post a good one. I became redundant after a few years and now don’t want to read someone who is going down the road I already left.
Re Stephanie's questions, which cover most any confusion that might remain:
This is a purely objective response, as well.
'upscale quality writing' is a sarcastic (mine) way to refer to an article that I have lost that describes the content of OS in a press release that was put out by the OS publicists. They described it that way, not me. And I read it right after some particularly lowscale crapfest writing had just made the cover. Hence the sarcasm.
"Are the current cover picks upscale or sensationalist or both?"
actually a very strange combination of both. I find the combination chaotic and inconsistent, like a painting painted by 4 different people on the same canvas with no consistent theme.
"Do you read posts on the cover? "
I do not look for articles there, I look in the feed or in the most read. The quality of the cover work seems to be very specific to the tastes of the editors and my tastes do not overlap theirs as much. I run across editor's picks as I read and sometimes agree and sometimes not. The more frequently I find a blog where severy post is editors pick from one minute after it is posted, the less I trust the mechanism as being an actual cull of everything available. But there is a lot posted daily, so I can cut them some slack on that.
"Do you or do you not care about EP's and covers and reaching 1000's of readers?"
not a lot, but when I do actually do some wordcraft, it would be nice if I thought it had a chance instead of being out of the running before I even post it, which is how I regard it now.
"Do you think that writers who do care or who want to increase their readership and maybe even become successful writers, do not fit into the social stratosphere here?"
I think that if using OS to achieve that goal is part of their business plan, they will fail. Everyone who is social is very welcomed by me. But people who only participate in their own blog are masturbating and I decline to watch.
"Do you think writing can only be enjoyed if it's on a personal level? "
yes. I don't like to get read to and do not enjoy analysis of writing, so for me it is only personal enjoyment.
"If it's depersonalized should it not be OS posted? If not, why not? "
I thought OS was for the people who participated, but I was here in beta and it is different now.
"If you got an editor's pick on Monday, according to you, it's because you posted something sensationalistic or you succumbed to producing "quality upscale writing." "
More probably that Thomas lost his mind. I still have hope that they might see a quality piece and point it out.
"I really was confounded by this, and might have responded more immediately or testily, but...I've thought about it and I am extending a social leniency to you...even if we are not OS 'friends.' I extend a certain leniency to you because you are a writer and last I checked all of us writers/bloggers/whatevers--no matter what our stats or readerhship #'s are, were in the same big boat--expressing our point of view, in order to be read by others, and hopefully to receive feedback from."
Thanks, but I am not a writer. I am an artist and I use writing sometimes. But writers write because they must or they suffer and I would not suffer if I did not write. A subtle distinction. We all here have blogging in common and some of us bloggers are writers. The stats that I mentioned are a reflection of my being an interesting person, not that I am an interesting writer. If I were a "writer" I would have replaced my keyboard which is missing the "Y" keycap a very long time ago.
" No one's immune to it, not JTH, not Dr. Amy, not me and not you. We are all very similar in that way, don't you think? "
No one is immune to criticism, but JTH and DAmy and I share little in our intent, our content, or our motivation as participants on OS. What they are doing is qualitatively different from what I am doing, and I do not mean that one is better quality than the other, I mean that they are essentially not the same type of thing. JTH is writing in a persona to a very specific audience and DAmy is editorializing about medical issues. I am just blogging about my view of life. Their intent seems to be different from mine.
When I run a critique in an advanced art class, we are careful to remember the assignment, the purpose of the piece of art produced. I am sensitive to this. Here it is usually unclear. So critique of the writing itself is not appropriate in ths venue. But I can certainly comment on blogs that I enjoy or don't. Otherwise, don't post to a public forum, eh?
conned
shark
hate
earthquake
spider bite
shotgun
bleep bleep bleep
Shamu
dine and dash
hell
drug induced amnesia
gay cruise
This is what I mean by sensationalist,
just in case you were wondering.
And this is one cover picked at random today.
I don't know. I do find myself rooting around more to find things that *I* like, but I am not professing to be a target market. I am well aware I am older and more conservative than the target market.
The quality of the writing is what I like, be it comedy, an economic treatise, or simply some random observation about every day life. All those things interest me, so delving into them in well written pieces is fun, but it adding knowledge, or just adding a few laugh lines around my eyes. Either way, I win.
I'm new here, so forgive me if I step on any toes. I think as soon as you try to define any art form, whether it be writing, music, or visual art, you've placed a limitation on that creation. The magical thing about creating something isn't that YOU control or define it, it's that the person on the other end gets to experience it in their own way. We each identify with certain writers, and we can argue all day about why that is and what the numbers represent. I'm not sure that's useful.
Personally, I'm here because I've always written. Before computers I would write on little scraps of paper which now number in the hundreds and live in a giant binder. I use the word "live" quite deliberately here- because those thoughts from the past are truly alive to me. I can re-read them in completely different ways now that I'm older.
I never set out to write deliberately, I just did it because it was a way to get jumbled thoughts out of my head and journal my life. I've also never actually set out to write something someone else may enjoy, and it's only recently that I even thought someone else may relate to the random thoughts in my head.
So with that I say... the more the merrier!
Interesting in that it appeals to those who wish to add their voice to what is going on in the world. The reason of course is marketing Salons product.
Of course for us it allows us to be as good or bad as we went to be in our writing. Completely democratic. Of course you don't have to read bad posts, you are the censor.
As more join OS that also means more poorly written posts and more that are not interesting. It also means there will be some jewels that come along as well.
As for the Editors Choice or even the Cover, I have no idea of how that is selected. I have had one Editors choice and Cover but I don't think it was the best thing I wrote, far from it.
I suppose if I put a highly entertaining header it might make the cover. If I unleash my wild sometimes off the wall sense of humor that could happen.
Mean while back to thinking for my next post on the continuing saga of Common Music for Uncommon people.
I posted two comments to a post from someone who sent me nine emails with each becoming more of a rant regarding a question I put to him as an email.
This individual posted a new rant on his page and thus I responded as the rant was directed at me.
I just checked to see if he replied and found my comments pulled and now no comments accepted.
I guess when you question a persons knowledge and find it lacking it is easier to call the questioner an an idiot, snob or what ever epitaph comes to mind than truly step back and consider just what is being asked and why your response is less than knowledgeable and perhaps you should reconsider. This in particular when the questioner is far more knowledgeable that he who has been questioned.
So now, no comments allowed, what was posted stands without being questioned.
Welcome to OS and yes we do have some with their heads buried firmly in sand.
I make exceptions, of course; and if an appeal is of a personal nature, indicating that they have some reason to know that I, me and just me ought to read the blog post in question -- sure, that'll make me read.
Other than that, I prefer to click somewhat randomly through the site's navigation, drawn here and there by posts, comments and names. The best way to get me to your blog is to make a comment on some front-page article that makes me laugh.
Or to write about sex or relationships or both. There, I've said it.
The "no nudity" on this post, up top, somehow sucked me in, since I was sure that someone here would take the stricture as a personal challenge.
My criticism was mainly directed to posts that were placed here through feeds/bots. Those posts add nothing to the organic community, as they are published elsewhere and redundancy does not increase the quality of a piece of writing. If the piece is interesting enough, it will get found without its clones dispersed here and yon. Also, many of the new RSS feed posts were placed with a link back to their "real" blog, and the blogger never participated in the community other than to do this advertising for another writing space. I think that type of posting is an abuse of the intent of OS, as it is meant to be a community of bloggers, not just a bus stop on the way to somewhere else.
The editors have encouraged this activity, as it raises site activity, which will help them with revenue streams, I suppose. Whether I like it or not hardly matters, but I felt a desire to speak up about it. I am building my blog and community here, just as you will, but "my" group will not be drive-by posters. What OS is, overall, is of course, evolving.
OS is an organicly emerging microcosm of individuals with similar interests but mainly an interest in each other, as many posts and subthemes here have shown. If I wanted just a pottery site, I would post more at my pottery site, which I have been active in since 1995. I don't post about politics or even general culture there, as there are 3000 of us and we are moderated to keep other topical clutter out.
OS is for everything else that I think and create and would like to write about, some of it even pottery related.
That was my point. My criticism was simply that, my spin on this issue. I do not try to ride herd on anyone, I have never read KOS, or Politico, or Huffpo. I do not know who Markos is. I went and looked at those sites and thought, "Oh, a lot of people I have never heard of and don't care about, chattering into the void about subjects that barely warrent a news article." For editorial fare, I do read main Salon, but the Well and comments there did not suit me and so I did not participate even though I was a paying member. Something about the antagonistic atmosphere of arguing about everything that came up didn't interest me. (Although I love a good argument)
But OS is made up of people that share more of themselves in their blogs, personal stories that make me interested in them as people first. And then if they are interesting people, I am interested in their thoughts about whatever they come up with. I have been told that that is why people read my blog, because I am interesting in how I look at the world. That is a serious compliment to me, much moreso than a number of reddit or dug hits would bring me. That also was in the post you mentioned, although you did not mention that here.
Nothing in your post here actually needed any quotes from me to make your point, so I am assuming that you only threw me in there to get your post read by more people who know and either like or dislike me.
Thanks for the compliment.