Good-bye Abu Muqawama?

[jmm99]

Some thoughts generated by Wilf's last post.

SWC has its "rules" of conformity, which primarily deal with the behavior of the messenger, and presentation of the message; as Wilf correctly notes:

SWC is exceptionally well policed and monitored and the level of behaviour is excellent, so nothing to fear there.

But, as to the message (and the concomitant rule: attack the message, not the messenger), SWC places a premium on a type of non-conformity. The term "argument" seems generally too strong a word; although arguments do occur. Generally, the norm seems to be a "discussion" or "discourse" with intent to arrive at the "right" solution or solutions (since we are an unruly bunch of cats, not quite as laid back as the French cat Henri ).

That runs together with a premium on independent thinking, which because of the wide spectrum of topics requires attention not only to what you want to say, but to what others have said already. So, a certain amount of "disputation" constitutes SWC conformity, as Wilf points out:

We are also blessed with a whole raft of basically world-class but lesser known thinkers, too numerous to mention and I think they keep this place very honest indeed, and they are usually are not very deferential to folks here unless they can hold their own.

Why don't major think-tankers post here ? I dunno. Perhaps, it is because think-tanks tend to be somewhat bureaucratic institutions (each with its own culture), where "disputation" may be considered non-conformity or even counter-formity.

Since Andrew Exum is a native of East Tennessee, he should fit right in here.

As of writing this, SWC has Threads: 7,358, Posts: 85,462, Members: 3,852. Most members are readers and occasional posters (or simply fall away; sometimes after their pet theory has been shelled or ignored). Some posting stats (compiled just before I started this post):

No of posts and posters (26 Nov 2009):

50 or more - 164
100 or more - 101
250 or more - 60
500 or more - 38
1000 or more - 22
2000 or more - 9

So, to Wilf a virtual Turkey Schwarma platter; and to all a Happy Thanksgiving and ensuing holiday and holydays season - especially to those we have sent to foreign lands or who are enroute.

Best to all (and we have snow on the ground - just a little bit)

Mike

[Fuchs]

Let me drop a smart ass line on top of all that was mentioned before:

The golden rule about blog post quantity is one blog text per worthy idea/insight/story.

Blog posts should not be related to the calendar in any way.

[Steve Blair]

Mike,

I think you might be close as to why some bloggers don't necessarily hang with us here at the Council, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there may be another reason as well: control. On their blogs they have total control, and there really isn't any discussion in the sense that we have here. They can turn off (or ignore) comments, which don't even necessarily show up on the main post unless you click on a link. Here they can't do that.

We have had one or two blogging types show up here, and they seemed rather uncomfortable (at least to me) that their ideas were questioned or even discussed in a non-agreeing way. It's hard to get your canned message out when you can't control the message past the initial post.

My take on blogs (and I have to admit in the interest of full disclosure that I don't really care for them) is that they are vehicles for canned messages, opinions, or information and often not vehicles for discussion. There are of course some notable exceptions (just like there are a raft of crappy message boards out there), but it seems to me that some of the more interesting blogs take on the "question and answer" or "discussion" mode of message boards.

Just my $.01. It would be $.02 but I'm not footnoteable.....

[Fuchs]

We have had one or two blogging types show up here, and they seemed rather uncomfortable (at least to me) that their ideas were questioned or even discussed in a non-agreeing way.

Much more!

[tequila]

I think you might be close as to why some bloggers don't necessarily hang with us here at the Council, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there may be another reason as well: control. On their blogs they have total control, and there really isn't any discussion in the sense that we have here. They can turn off (or ignore) comments, which don't even necessarily show up on the main post unless you click on a link. Here they can't do that.

Actually one of the reasons AM cited is that the blog comments over there got quite out of control. I used to go to AM for the excellent commentary and discussion, same as why I come here, and lately the place has been overrun by a rather strange bunch, often from varied political sites, who I think drove off a lot of the better commenters.

[Steve Blair]

Actually one of the reasons AM cited is that the blog comments over there got quite out of control. I used to go to AM for the excellent commentary and discussion, same as why I come here, and lately the place has been overrun by a rather strange bunch, often from varied political sites, who I think drove off a lot of the better commenters.

I wasn't referring to AM...I was speaking more of those who may not read comments or have the comment function turned off or locked down in some way.

[Fuchs]

For my part, some little time ago I decided to step back from the day-to-day reporting and look at the history of the benighted land that...

http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/


Maybe the COIN-interested blogosphere is at a saturation point.

[jmm99]

based on your Moral Foundations results.

This is one good point, and much better than what I said:

from Steve
I think you might be close as to why some bloggers don't necessarily hang with us here at the Council, but I have a sneaking suspicion that there may be another reason as well: control. On their blogs they have total control, and there really isn't any discussion in the sense that we have here. They can turn off (or ignore) comments, which don't even necessarily show up on the main post unless you click on a link. Here they can't do that.

The valid point raised by tequila is handled by a Code of Conduct (informal) which is enforced by tradition and the moderators here. Also SWC has in effect, several hundred people who are running their own blogs here (we call them threads) - as to which, there are different cultures.

A good blog can be a "no-comments at all" blog - e.g., SCOTUSblog. But there, Lyle and the rest do pretty much straight up reporting - here is the case summary and here are the original case records. Quite different from SWC, which is mostly an opinion forum.

Interesting herd of cats here.

Mike

[Fuchs]

Come on, why this artificial distancing of SWC from bloggers?

Several SWC people are bloggers, an incomplete list is here:
http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/showthread.php?t=47